E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn an interview with NBC's Andrea Mitchell, part of which aired on "Nightly News" last night, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stressed that he and the Obama administration agree on more issues that not when it comes to Middle East peace.
"We can have some disagreements, but we agree on a lot more than meets the eye," he said
On Netanyahu's disagreement with President Obama that the 1967 borders, with land swaps, should serve as the basis for negotiations, the prime minister told Mitchell: "I was talking about something that he actually spelled out in the subsequent speech that he gave, that Israel cannot go back to the '67 lines, because those lines are indefensible. Israel would be nine miles wide. That's half the width of the Washington Beltway. We couldn't defend ourselves there... [I]f you listened to his statement the next day, he said that the line would be different from the 1967 line. And I think that was an important emphasis on the president's part."
The Israeli Prime Minister tells NBC's Andrea Mitchell that in order for the Middle East peace process to move forward, Palestinian President Abbas must say six words: "I will accept the Jewish state."
Below is the transcript of the entire interview, which will air on MSNBC's "Andrea Mitchell Reports" beginning at 1:00 pm ET.
ANDREA MITCHELL, HOST: Welcome, Prime Minister. Thank you very much for joining us.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: It's good to be with you.
MITCHELL: Welcome, Prime Minister. Thank you very much for joining us. You...
NETANYAHU: Thank you, Andrea. It's good to be with you again.
MITCHELL: You gave a very powerful speech to a joint meeting of Congress and had a very excited, warm reception. But at the same time, President Obama has said to you that they -- you cannot afford any more delay, that with all of the upheavals, the changes in the Arab world, that Israel is at risk of being isolated, of being left behind.
What do you say to the president?
NETANYAHU: Well, I think the president shares with me, and I share with him, the desire to move the peace process forward. And I said in Congress that there's one way to move this thing forward. President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority has to do what I did two years ago. Two years ago, I spoke to my people and I said I will accept a Palestinian state.
I think the president -- President Abbas has to say these same six words to his people, I will accept the Jewish state. You know what, I'll give him a break, five words -- I accept the Jewish state. Because I think if he says that, then that will move the process forward. People will say, OK, we have a real peace partner, and for real peace, we're willing to move and move quickly.
MITCHELL: Prime Minister, the Palestinians have already said that what you said today in Congress, they have said that your speech was a declaration of war...
NETANYAHU: (INAUDIBLE).
MITCHELL: -- because, from their perspective, you ruled out any division of Jerusalem, you are keeping the West Bank, you're not negotiating on refugees. They call that a declaration of war.
Does that leave you and the Palestinians completely at odds, stalemated?
NETANYAHU: I think that's unfortunate, because I -- and I think you could see from the reaction of both houses of -- both sides of the -- of the aisle and both houses of Congress, people were excited.
You know why?
Because I said the truth. Because deep down, I mean the reason we don't have peace is the Palestinians have refused to accept a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian state.
I agreed to do that. I said to my people, I'm willing to do it. The Palestinian leaders should be asked to say these simple words -- I will accept a Jewish state. Believe me, he says that, all the walls, all the fences, all the problems will be swept aside and we can negotiate a real peace. I want to have a real peace with somebody who will make peace with me. I don't want to give him a state for him to continue the battle against Israel.
MITCHELL: But the Congress (ph)...
NETANYAHU: I want this conflict to be ended.
MITCHELL: With all due respect, you, in effect, had home court advantage with the United States Congress. You have a long record. You are a great politician. You know every button to push with Americans, Democrats and Republicans.
But that's not the world. The wider world is in upheaval.
Isn't Israel at risk of being isolated, of the U.N. taking action in September to declare a Palestinian state?
That's what President Obama and his aides said that they were trying to avert.
NETANYAHU: Well, the president, indeed, said some important things. First, he said it's not going to be achieved -- peace will be achieved not by an imposition by the U.N., it has to be negotiated by the two parties who are willing to accept each other's statehood. And that's what I said today in Congress and that's why I think I got his very strong reception.
The world is changing. We want to make sure that when we make peace, we not only have somebody who will recognize us, but that we know that we have a secure border to defend ourselves, not only to defend the peace, but to defend ourselves if peace unravels.
And I think that we are seeing what is happening in Syria, we're seeing what is happening in other places, in Egypt. We don't even know whether our peace partners will be there tomorrow. I mean, really tomorrow, not in a -- an abstract notion.
So when we say we want mutual recognition and defensible borders for Israel, there's really the meat and potatoes of peace. That's what I said today in Congress. I was absolutely gratified by the really universal positive response there, because I think these are the right elements for peace, and especially in a changing world. In a changing world, in an uncertain world, we have to have anchors of security and recognition to fortify the peace.
MITCHELL: Prime Minister, there was a moment in the Oval Office on Friday. You and the president of the United States and so many of your early (ph) supporters, friends of Israel, said that you were lecturing him, that it went too far. You disagree about borders, you did not like what he did, but, in fact, what he said was implicit in what previous presidents have said, they just haven't said it as explicitly and that you shouldn't be lecturing, taking such a hard line with the president of the United States.
In retrospect, do you think you went too far?
NETANYAHU: Well, I'm sorry it was interpreted that way, because that wasn't my intention. I wasn't lecturing anyone. I was speaking about the basic things that Israel requires to have peace and security and survival. I'm the leader of an old nation. The president said a great nation. I said he is the leader of a great nation, the American people.
And I have the greatest respect for America and for the office of the presidency.Believe me, I spent my high school years in Philadelphia. I visited the Liberty Bell many times. America is a great nation. And I have complete respect for it and for its president.
I was speaking about those things that the Palestinians have to accept -- a Jewish state, the fact that the refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel. We're not going to accept the great grandchildren of Palestinian refugees. It's crazy.
Some -- everybody knows it. And I think it's time to say it. And I think wouldn't want Hamas. And the president said as much...
MITCHELL: Well, he agrees with you about Hamas.
NETANYAHU: I think it was very important...
MITCHELL: But why do you think...
NETANYAHU: -- the things that he said.
MITCHELL: Why do you think he disagrees with you about the borders? He believes that with land swaps that Israel can be well defended, going back to the 1967 borders.
What is it that divides you and Barack Obama?
Why do you think that he has a different vision of what is required for Israel's security?
You don't think that he wants Israel to not be able to defend itself.
NETANYAHU: Absolutely not. I think he's committed to the -- Israel's security. He's said as much and we are cooperating in security areas in ways that the public doesn't know, in many ways.
And I also appreciated the fact that he spoke about the ironclad commitment to Israel's security, not only before the Israel-America lobby, but before the -- the Arab world twice. And I think that's important.
I was talking about something that he actually spelled out in the subsequent speech that he gave, that Israel cannot go back to the '67 lines, because those lines are indefensible. Israel would be nine miles wide. That's half the width of the Washington Beltway. We couldn't defend ourselves there.
And -- and I was glad that the president emphasized this point, that we're not going back...
MITCHELL: But he hasn't backed down.
NETANYAHU: -- to the June 4, 1967 (INAUDIBLE)...
MITCHELL: He still thinks that those borders can be defended with appropriate land swaps.
NETANYAHU: Well, if you listened to his statement the next day, he said that the line would be different from the 1967 line. And I think that was an important emphasis on the president's part.
MITCHELL: Why were you so angry when you first heard about what he said?
NETANYAHU: Well...
MITCHELL: Issuing a statement before you even got on your plane?
NETANYAHU: Well, I issued the statement. It gives our positions. I haven't changed my positions. It's not a question of anger. Usually, you don't make decisions in -- in an emotional state. I don't do it. I didn't do it this time.
I reiterated our positions. I have to make sure that Israel can defend itself. You know, we don't have, we have this tiny country. I said yesterday or today in the Congress to Vice President Biden, an old friend, I said -- I said it's bigger than Delaware, but that's about it.
So we have to have solid security arrangements. Israel has to be able to defend itself to defend the peace. And to defend its life. And I think the president agrees with that.
MITCHELL: And what about your conversation with Hillary Clinton, finally?
There are reports that it was as a very contentious, argumentative conversation, when you called her the day before the president's speech, trying to get him to change his -- his speech and not make that reference to the borders.
NETANYAHU: You know, I've been in diplomacy a long time. I've been around for some 30 years. You can't deal with reports of conversations. You have to deal with the substance. I had a -- a very good conversation with the president a couple of hours. This is the seventh time we were meeting. We have a lot of time together.
MITCHELL: And Hillary?
NETANYAHU: And with Hillary Clinton just as much, I think even more. So what we say privately is something we keep private. But the important thing, I thought, was that the president made some important statements. And I appreciated it, that the Palestinians will have to recognize a Jewish state, that Hamas, a terrorist organization bent on dest -- on our destruction, is not a partner, that Israel must maintain its defensible borders and that peace will not be imposed. It will have to be negotiated between the parties.
I think there's a lot of room for agreement. We can have some disagreements, but we agree on a lot more than meets the eye.
MITCHELL: With that, we'll have to leave it there.
Prime Minister, thank you so much. Safe travels.
NETANYAHU: Thank you, Andrea.
It's good to be with you.
MITCHELL: You, too.
NETANYAHU: Thank you.
Leave a Comment:
Of course you do, Bibi; but it doesn't do well for your bombastic image to be caught agreeing with a peacemaker. We get it. PS. Have you seen the polls from your country about where you SHOULD be agreeing with President Obama?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Just read that Mark Haines died unexpectedly last night. He was just on Morning Joe last week. My thoughts are with his family and friends.
Sometimes Bibi reminds me of Newt: Loud and conservative and perhaps a bit smarter. Bibi really should be listening to Obama as President Obama does have Israel's best interests at heart.
Bibi just want to prove unnecessarily tough and ignore the call of 57% of Israelis who believe Obama's peace suggestions right for them. Let him keep dancing to the tune of republicans/teabaggers they'll surely lead him aright.
Clara, hope your screen is clean.
Hey 1st read, How about this story:
President Barrack Hussein Obama:
The Only President in America's History to address the British Parliment in Westminister Hall.
Hot daum, not even the Great Ronnie Raygun was given that HONOR!
That ought to really set the right wingers hair on fire! lol
I believe there have only been (3) other people who spoke there.
They were: The Pope - The Queen & Nelson Mandella!
I suppose the only reason he was asked, is because he 'screwed' up the Queen's toast last night!'
YOU BETCHA!
Oh, God- here come the 'Messiah' wonks again.....
Yeah, there's a line from Haendel's Messiah that would be perfect here:
In other words, if and when President Obama's leadership, which has now moved Israel's Prime Minister to pledge new efforts to pursue peace, helps move toward a resolution of a 60-year-old festering wound, then indeed, we'll all be singing "Hallelujah!"
And by the way - the President is now raising American prestige and influence among the nation's leading allies. How pathetic some of the right-wing hate mongers are, attacking in such petty ways because their own eyes show the falsehoods they spout at every opportunity.
The United States of America is fortunate to have such a calm, firm, intelligent leader in President Barack Obama, and the world knows it!
I see. So, in light of all this, remind me, conservatives ....
... who was it again, that was going to be taking what statements back?
Benjamin Netanyahu has realized that his "pissing in President Obama's shoes" the other day could come back and smack him in the ass. Israel is desperate to see that there is no agreement on Virtual Statehood Recognition for a Palestinian State in the UN this September. President Obama has signaled that the US does not support such a move. But there is a big difference between making a speech and declaration against something and diligently working the back diplomatic channels to make sure that things does not happen. I think Netanyahu has some big time sucking up to do to this administration.
Clara KCMO
Of course you do, Bibi; but it doesn't do well for your bombastic image to be caught agreeing with a peacemaker. We get it. PS. Have you seen the polls from your country about where you SHOULD be agreeing with President Obama?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From time to time I'll read this newspaper
Netanyahu will return to Israel a victor after address to U.S. Congress
Netanyahu will say: "I am not to blame. I put forth a framework. I expressed willingness. I was ready to give up, to pass over, to dismantle. I spoke before Congress, before the world - and this is what we got from the Palestinians and the Arabs in return.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/netanyahu-will-return-to-israel-a-victor-after-address-to-u-s-congress-1.363888
Clara, I realize you are Jewish, I hope you understand I in no way was trying to be offense to the Jewish Nation. I only wanted to point out the emigration had everything to do with International Law. I do believe the Jews has the right to exist. I don't know if I ever posted this( I'd have to check the archives) about my cousin who emigrated to Israel and is now living in Africa. She claims to be a Black Jew. I don't agree with her either since she has no DNA to my knowledge to prove this. Anyhow , as far as I'm concerned Ben Ammi Ben Israel and his many wives got kicked of Israel.
Black Hebrews - Israel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDu1U0EPImE
Did you the Hannity interview? Hannity mentioned the word blood when Bibi talked about fighting for peace.
It's almost comical to think some of you believe Bibi should listen to President Obama when it comes to Israel.
Reid rebuked Obama. THe democrats know where there money comes from and they are walking it all back already.
" Netanyahu on Obama: 'We agree on a lot more than meets the eye'"
NO, Mr Prime Minister- don't say THAT! It will give Hannity and the rest of the far right less to whine about on this fine day!!
PM Netanyahu is certainly the diplomat. He of course is giving Obama an out for stupid statements he made about Israel going back to the '67 borders. The PM certainly is correct by saying the only place Muslims are free in the Middle-East is in Israel! Whereas it is clear that Obama views Israel as being what is wrong with the Middle-East, Mr. Netanyahu views Israel as being what is right with the Middle-East. Israel will recognize the right of a Palestinian state to exist, now it's time for the other countries in the Middle-East to recognize Israel's right to exist.
With PM Netanyahu's visiting, it's certainly interesting seeing a real leader in Washington DC.
OK, maybe they will STILL whine in the usual, copious, amounts....
must piss you off that a foreigner will give him a pass; but you haters must amplify your own twisted view, eh?
You righties standing with Israel and Netenyahu as the 'standard' bearer are completely cracking me up.
Here's a vowel (E), buy a clue!
"With PM Netanyahu's visiting, it's certainly interesting seeing a real leader in Washington DC"
Praising a foreign leader at the expense of our own President. Neat, SMiff. I bet you, like Hannity, accuse Obama of 'apologizing' for the United States every chance you get, too.
Bibi NetenYahoo misses Chicken George, ya think!
JoAnnaSmith1
it's ok to oppose everything obama says or do hence he's stupid. may be we can then view 57% of Israelis who believe Bibi should go with Obama on his peace call as stupid also. is that ok with you?
Buzz's creed: "My President, right or wrong!!!".
Then Buzz does his little fist pump. It is just so cute to watch.
Cute or not- address my premis: Is it un American, in your eyes, to praise a foreign leader, and denigrate our own? Save the cute-sy garbage for some other time.
"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration."
Hillary R. Clinton 2003
Truer words. Now Buzz, you can get back to your butt-kissing of Obama.
And you, door-knob, get back to your treasonous trash talk about the president of the United States of America.
DBO
I guess she just proved she doesn't have her own thoughts on ANY topic, eh? And don't you think she takes disagreement to a Dixie Chick-Like level?
Except that she would never have the cajones to stand on foreign soil and do that,...she'd much rather stand in Texas with her 'peeps' to bolster her idiocy.
Thanks for drawing her out, Buzz!
Ah, now we're up to treason. You just don't have any limits on your stupidty do you Buzz?
And, Clara- she calls ME stupid! Protective gear on and secure! Let 'er rip!!
JoAnna ~ See my post above. It was meant for you.
drive-by-observer
Cute or not- address my premis: Is it un American, in your eyes, to praise a foreign leader, and denigrate our own?.
..................................................................
Is it un-American to denigrate a foreign leader and ally because he disagrees with yours? Read the posts here and decide.
drive-by-observer.. and JoAnnaSmith1
With reference to JoAnnaSmith1 comments.
When does her opposition to what Obama's formulation of what Middle East policy should be become treason? Wow, suspend the First Amendment and hang her ass for disagreeing with you and all those that agreed with you. You folks call yourselves liberals? Look up the definition of the word before you use it again.
JoAnnaSmith1
"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic
And I'm tired of every time a president calls Israel out like obama, Clinton and at times Bush senior they accused of not wanting Israel to protect them selves.
you know joanna the world does not revolve around Israel.
PM Netanyahu is certainly NO diplomat, he is a old time thug that want everything his dam way, has everybody noticed that when this goof is PM the peace process get derailed. he want peace like a pig hates slop. Its aint happening as long as he is in charge.
It hasn't happened with anyone in charge Jeff. You talk about the "peace process" like that means something. Don't you get it Jeff, the process is not about peace, it never has been.
JoAnnaSmith1
It hasn't happened with anyone in charge Jeff. You talk about the "peace process" like that means something. Don't you get it Jeff, the process is not about peace, it never has been.
thats not true, seem to remember a american president helping to bring peace between Israel And egypt or Joanna i may be wrong. Jimmy carter that crazy Liberal remember him. he runined the US but the peace between the two is still strong.
then it was a peace agreement between the PLO and the Israel but some israelly nut kill the, then PM and it was derailed. Joanna there have been many chances at peace.
And when has there ever been peace?
You see Jeff, you (and others) have been told the warm-fuzzy words "peace-process" over and over, and for some reason you think that's what happening. A treaty here, a document there, but yet Israel is attacked daily with the stated goal of it's neighbors being "We'll wipe Israel from the map". "Peace-process". Nothing could be further from the truth.
GROUCHO ---Drive by only cares about the constitution when it pertains to him, not others.
Exactly, That's why I pled with others to NOT collapse folks, no matter what they said....
MSNBC will lean forward as far as it takes, to defend their guy.
Andrea Mitchell, playing defense for the Obama Team:
"You and the president of the United States and so many of your early (ph) supporters, friends of Israel, said that you were lecturing him, that it went too far.."
Ms. Mitchell struggles when she can't decide if she's a reporter, or an advocate for Obama. Like every Leftie, she gets her shots in. The PM handled her derogatory comments well, he's a true professional.
Oh, pish, Bob, even Pat Buchanan said Netanyahu was wrong and that republicans are wrong to have criticized the President for his speech. I thought Hell would immediately freeze over. The fact that it didn't merely reinforces the existence of global warming.
You see though Annie - we on the Right are not all lemmings like you and your ilk. We don't need re-enforcement of our ideas from others to support our view points. You want to be a disciple of the lectures of Buchanan, hey, knock yourself.
Next you'll be quoting some poll, correct?
They've agreed to attack the Iranian Nuclear weapons program in OCTOBER of 2012.
I DID warn everyone over on First Read, didn't I, that we would need protective gear on today?? I didn't think I believed in 'spontaneous human combustion' until the last few days, when the paid posters seem to have completly burst into flames.
Must suck to be them.
DBO-- I agree totally. The paid posters are all over the map trying win the message war for the corporations. It's a twofer, running around with their hair on fire while peeing their pants. Not a good look!
Very interesting, Bibi says the 1967 borders are "indefensible". But, if there is a peace agreement, then there's no reason to defend the borders. They would have to be open so that all the memebers of all the religions can worship where they please. If there was an organized attack by the Palestinians after the signing of a peace agreement, then the world would turn against them and demand they abolish their state. If the Israelis think that the Palestinian State can control each and every individual in Gaza, then they should read about Timothy McVeigh, or remember who assassinated their own president. Israel has been stalling for 60 years so that they could annex more land. Sorry, game's over, no matter how many U.S. Congressmen give this "diplomat" a standing ovation.
I think Netanhahu completely misread President Obama and thought he could push him around, only to find out what so many other have---that the President does in fact do things differently than other politicians and he is no pushover. And now we find out that 57% of Israelis agree with the President so Bibi has to backtrack somehow.
agree on how to protect the 911 big lie
Where do these right wingers get their education, that is stuck on stupid?
Why, from all that 'liberal' media, Job1- where else??
Job1
Where do these right wingers get their education, that is stuck on stupid?
When does a discussion about opposition to what Obama's formulation of what Middle East policy should be become stupid and treasonous? Wow, suspend the First Amendment and hang all those posting opposing discourse for disagreeing with you. You folks call yourselves liberals? Look up the definition of the word before you use it again. Suppression of free speach and opposing points of view smacks of smoothing horrbly different.
Groucho Marx,
Not when we have a President who is doing an outstanding job as President, and many of these people on the right are not given any real tangible ideas from their base of what they would do to improve our country, if the far right gained control of our government. There stance is based on intolerance and in many cases a hate brought of by the real far right extremist, with no plans to run the country once they get elected, Their voters are so filled with lie-fed hatred they don’t demand a candidate that has a plan to solve our countries problems, other than go back to the failed policies of the Bush years that damaged our country.
Job1..
You've just expressed an OPINION and NOT fact. Your whole post is an opinion and not fact.
Why are you entitled to your opinion about the republicans and the otherside is not allowed to answer in the exact same tone you just did.
Groucho,
And yours is based on facts? I don't think so. I use fact checks that many people on the right refuse to do.
Job1..
You just don't get it do you? You miss the whole point.
Moving on....
Good, Me too.
NETANYAHU: "Because deep down, I mean the reason we don't have peace is the Palestinians have refused to accept a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian state.
I agreed to do that. I said to my people, I'm willing to do it. The Palestinian leaders should be asked to say these simple words -- I will accept a Jewish state. Believe me, he says that, all the walls, all the fences, all the problems will be swept aside and we can negotiate a real peace. I want to have a real peace with somebody who will make peace with me. I don't want to give him a state for him to continue the battle against Israel."
What more needs to be said or argued about? Recognize Israels right to exits and the barriers will come down. Pretty clear.
To another point, this question:
MITCHELL: Prime Minister, there was a moment in the Oval Office on Friday. You and the president of the United States and so many of your early (ph) supporters, friends of Israel, said that you were lecturing him, that it went too far. You disagree about borders, you did not like what he did, but, in fact, what he said was implicit in what previous presidents have said, they just haven't said it as explicitly and that you shouldn't be lecturing, taking such a hard line with the president of the United States.
In retrospect, do you think you went too far?
Who is Andrea Mitchell to question a frank discussion between the leaders of their respective countries? Why isn't he allowed to lecture Obama on the history of the region and why he is against the proposal. Obama is NOT the know all and be all of Middle East politics, and Bibi has a perfect right to defend the nation he is sworn to defend. Is it insulting to disagree with Obama? That clearly was a biased and stupid question in an otherwise insightful interview.
I listened to the BBC news after the international broadcast of the meeting between Obama and Bibi was shown. The reporter in her fine British accent described how Bibi lectured Obama and how the world saw Obama sit their like the petulant child that he is. Pretty much sums up the world view of Obama. Of course if that was reported by a US news corporation, they would be called racists.
OK, Rocco--then why is Bibi backtracking?
She's a journalist asking a tough question. I think Netanyahu is a big boy and can handle himself in such a situation, don't you?
Who does she have to be to ask a question of a man visiting a country that believes in free speech and a Free Press?
Da Noid
She's a journalist asking a tough question. I think Netanyahu is a big boy and can handle himself in such a situation, don't you?
..........................................................
Then she should ask Chuck Todd to ask the President at the next news conference the very same question. Do you think you went too far in demanding that Israel go back to the 1967 border formula proposed by Saudi Arabia. Never gonna happen.
Bethie, Bibi and Obama are both backtracking. But that really has nothing to do with the BBC news broadcast now does it. I just reported it as it was stated.
No rocco, you made an attemt to bash the president. Seems now YOU aere backteracking.
Why shouldn't Israel go back to its 1967 borders? After all, but for the 1967 war, they would not be in the West Bank Gaza or Golan Heights!
And if the arab nations all agreed to the right of Israel to exist as a soveriegn nation, in a homeland they historically came from there would not have been a 1967 war.
patHuntingtonNY
Why shouldn't Israel go back to its 1967 borders? After all, but for the 1967 war, they would not be in the West Bank Gaza or Golan Heights!
.....................................................................................
Or if Israel had lost, a State of Israel.
Or a 1973 surprise attack on Israel.
Or....lets make the world spin in reverse and go back in time with the or's and if's.
Obama just doesn't get it. Running off at the mouth with only campaign rhetoric will not resolve issues. Carter at least encouraged Egypt and Israel to sit down and work their issues out.
Obama says that they must return to the 1967 borders, or that (paraphrased)mubarak must go", "assad must lead his people or get out of the way", or "qaddafi must go". It appears that he only wants to hear himself talk.
Obama chooses inflammatory remarks, not remarks that encourage finding common ground or to host a site for meaningful and private dialog.
The last time I recall obama doing this was very early on in his presidency when he hosted the "WH beer summit"
Thank You, Mr. President.
The President has the right to his own thoughts on this matter, and he strongly is defending his position intellectually. I respect the President to fight for what he believes in, and he still willing to listen to others. As a citizen. I have the right to question my President, and I expect the President to explain his point of view. It is good to see a President thinking aloud to others, and not having someone else thinking for him. Like how VP Cheney did the thinking for President Bush. That is fact!