I was reading Andrew Sullivan's blog regarding Obama's Middle East speech delivered this evening and wanted to paraphrase some interesting stuff. The right is getting apoplectic over this specific part, an Israel-Palestine two-state solution: While the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, and a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The American Spectator, a conservative magazine, reacted this way: In other words, Obama is now ready to advocate the next step of his plan to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. The Ace of Spades is a conservative political blog, and their take is that Obama pretty much announced that he wants Israel to return to its 1967 borders -- thus endorsing the terrorists' key demand without requiring any substantive concessions on their part. A rational commenter, Jeffery Goldberg, points out that the 1967 borders comment is not news: This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years. This is what Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat were talking about at Camp David, and later, at Taba. This is what George W. Bush was talking about with Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert. So what's the huge deal here? Is there any non-delusional Israeli who doesn't think that the 1967 border won't serve as the rough outline of the new Palestinian state? Obama is following the same course that the United States has for over a decade (this is almost precisely GWB's Israel policy), but because Obama is in office, and not a GOP president, the conservatives are going batshit. The Fox News line is that Obama's speech is a "stunning" attack on Israel. Matt Drudge is running the headline "Obama Sides With the Palestinians". But nothing has changed! This, again, is George Bush's policy, and here is Hillary Clinton voicing precisely the same policy position in 2009: We believe that through good-faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements. The right will take ANY Obama position now and mangle it and contort it and call him anti-american and a terrorist. Yet it's GWB's policy. Mitt Romney reaction: President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus." Michele Bachmann: "A shocking display of betrayal... Today President Barack Obama has again indicated that his policy towards Israel is to blame Israel first." We've lost the willingness to have calm, reasoned arguments. The right is all about hyped-up, over-the-top statements and an outrageous desire to deify Israel and cater to the Israel Lobby.