GWBush may not be a genius, but he tricked the Dumbocrats with his speech to the Knesset. He spoke about those who would appease and the Dumbells ran to the mikes to include themselves in the appeasement camp. He never said any name, but I guess Obama and the gang decided amongst themselves that the shoe fit, huh? (And no dopey Dem has yet to say that the egomaniac that Bush quoted was a Republican. They probably don't know and just assumed anyone that foolish and self-aggrandizing had to be a Democrat.)

Then, of course, they said they were horrified that Bush would disrespect them on foreign soil. They aren't smart enough to realize that he didn't mention them-THEY DID. This after Nasty Nancy went to Syria, to what, talk tough? I doubt it. And Mr. Peanut again got suckered by the terrorists. (Yes, again!)

GWBush may not be a genius?  Oh, you noticed?

Do you see nothing at all iffy/qustionable/distasteful/marginal about the POTUS, any POTUS, delivering a blazingly partisan speech to the legislative body of a foreign country?    i see nothing wrong per se with Bush making this speech,  in spite of the massive BS that it really is, but in the lair of that conspiracy of criminals known as the KneSSett, with that creature Olmert looking on and nodding in approval? There was nothing in this fabulist near strem of unconsciousness that couldn't wait untilDubya was back in the USA? [Allah only knows, EO probably had his hand up Dubya's back, practicing political vantriloquism of the highest order.  Anyone check out Bush's suit jacket, I wonder?]  Maybe channeling Jane Fonda, GWB can pose for photos while sitting on some US weapons that israel has slated for sale to the PRC?

Wait, wait, wait; Compassionate Conservative Dubya was trying to make nice and take EO's mind off his own domestic toubles.

Well, it could have been worse.  Dubya could have given into to the endless importuning of AIPAC and the Xtian fundies and "pardoned" JJPollard as a "birthday gift" to israel on the 60th anniversary of it's, ahem, "founding."  Well, thank Allah for small favors.

Hey, what's Israel's gift to the US going to be this July 4th. ?  They'll refrain from dragging us into yet another one of their selfish, interminable conflicts, which they'll claim is yet another important front in The War On Terror?  Wait, I'm hallucinating...

Wonder how much birthday cake the Pallys got? and did they enjoy it?

Partisan? When did he say Dem or Rep?

If somebody heard partisanship in it then that's what they're thinking.

Last I knew Israel was recognized as an ally despite your feelings on it.

The real issue is that Bush called the pussies out, and when he said "pussies", a lot of people heard "Democrats." I wonder why?

PS-GWB is a guy who has taken shit from every liberal, even those who were spear shakers(Kerry, Gore, Albright, et al.) when Bubba was in the WH. He never called them on it, showing remarkable restraint. In his place, I would have played the film clips of those bastards calling for an invasion of Iraq in 98, and then forgetting all about it in 02/03.

bullshit posturing and phony promises are better than nukes!!

Who needs grunts when you can have an AWOL for president?

As long as you talk tough, you'll never have to put up.  You can just pretend.

See how easy it is to put it to music?  You just fucking pretend.

That should fix all our problems.

Hope and change is coming via inspiration.

How did we get here?

When you look at Obambi's track record and inexperience, it is scary to think he may just be the next PoTus. Scary.

"Do you see nothing at all iffy/qustionable/distasteful/marginal about the POTUS, any POTUS, delivering a blazingly partisan speech to the legislative body of a foreign country?"

Yeah, that's really horrible: Churchill's (not POTUS, but a foreign leader) "Iron Curtain" speech in Fulton, Missouri; Reagan at the Bradenburg Gate, saying "Tear down this wall!"

Aside from the fact that it was not "blazingly partisan," but instead challenged a bad idea.

Sigh. let me point out that, AFAIK, NEITHER Churchill's nor Reagan's   speech dealt, however indirectly, with some point of contention in a US presidential election.  Churchill's speech was not before the US Congress, and Ronnie's speech was not before the West German legislature [Bundestag?].

So, it'll be A-OK with you when, someday soon i hope, some US presidential hopeful visits Israel and says "Prime Minister ______, tear down this security wall/barrier/fence?"  Man, maybe Obama will be that guy?  I'm not counting on it.

Olmert certainly loved the speech. [It might even get him a few extra days in office before his gov't falls due to his massive corruption.   Shades of the PA!]. That sadly, was the entire point of the exercise.

and let me repeat - as totally BS as Bush's speech  was and still is, it's the choice venue i most question.

even apart from X's point that he's talking to a legislature.

Never mind, we know that righties don't read.  Not so much that they CAN'T, more that they don't want anything upsetting their fragile world-view like facts might.