Setting the Obama record straight

Many have commented on the myriad factual errors Obama made his Cairo speech.  These mistakes must have been deliberate, because they are the only way that he could justify his conclusions.  That is, the facts do not support Obama’s conclusions.  One sees this most clearly when contrasting Obama’s speech to Netanyahu’s.  As I noted yesterday, Bibi’s speech is a model of actual facts leading to sensible conclusions — and these logical conclusions are diametrically opposed to the wish list Obama was able to achieve only by distorting history.  Bibi was neither offensive nor even minatory.  He simply set out the facts and brought them to their inevitable conclusions.

Martin Peretz, a journalist unconstrained by any political role, is not as tactful as Bibi was.  He is willing to attack Obama directly for the latter’s multiple historical offenses.  I suspect Peretz is yet another one who is beginning to harbor some very powerful regrets about his vote last November.

As you read the two speeches, and with an eye to Peretz’s many corrections, keep in mind the profound difference between Leftists and conservatives:  Conservatives dwell in the realm of actual facts, coupled with strong beliefs about man’s nature, justice and morality, and from these strands try to draw humane and functional conclusions.  Liberals come up with conclusions drawn solely from ideology, and try to convince people that these conclusions are facts.  That’s why you really can’t argue with a liberal.