Friday Night Donut Thread

• One thing I missed in Obama's speech yesterday that really leaped off the page after I read the transcript was this:

For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is in fact a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government . . . This history is well known.

Whoa. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the first time an American President has publicly acknowledged the role of the US in the Mossadegh coup? If so, this is a huge development, and one which (one hopes) would signal an intent to negotiate over nuclear arms---or anything else--in good faith with the Iranians. And while I am certain this history is "well known" amongst Iranians, I doubt that more than a tiny faction of the American populace has a clue about any history of US-Iranian relations that predates Khomenei and the hostage crisis.

• Glad to see the warm reception our Friends in Freedom® have given the speech as well:

"With all due respect to President Obama, and there is respect, and to the deep friendship between Israel and the United States, no foreign leader of another country will set policy in

Hey, this works for me. And with all due respect to Bejamin Netanyahu, and there is respect, and to the deep respect between the United States and Israel, no foreign leader of another country should feel obligated to help foot the bill for your policies in Judea and Samaria. Greenwald:

. . . if Israel wants to be free of what it and some of its U.S. supporters call "interference" from the Obama administration, that's very easy to achieve: Israel can stop asking for tens of billions of dollars of American taxpayer money, huge amounts of military and weapons supplies for its various wars, and unyielding American diplomatic protection at the U.N. But as long as Israel remains dependent on the U.S. in countless ways, then Obama not only has the right -- but he has the obligation -- to demand that Israel cease activities which harm U.S. interests.

Especially when this kind of gratitude is expressed even when we do all these wonderful things:

Of course, I realize a fair number of these louts are not Israelis at all but the sons and daughters of American Jews who are either vacationing or kibbutzing in the Holy Land, but I think that the slovenly and uncritical mindset on display here represents, in some tangible way, the utterly predictable result of 30 years of largely uncritical US foreign policy towards Israel. The hard-liners have had their way for 30 years, and we've been largely complicit in the scheme all along; why should they pretend to play nice with us now?

Now, I'm fairly certain that Obama is never going to threaten to shut off the spigot of US taxpayer dollars to Israel for its recalcitrance in the West Bank, but it is a big bargaining chip that he should be willing to play if Netanyahu not only drags his feet, but actually defies the expressed wishes of his most generous benefactor. So is the threat of UN resolutions, come to think of it.

• On a totally unrelated note, it's a fair cry for me to endorse Mitt Romney for the presidency of anything, but after reading this piece at at Atlantic . . . let's just say I've heard much, much crazier ideas than this.

• Obligatory foodie post: Here's a novel idea---gourmet roach coaches. Hey, why not? As it happens, there are even a couple in my neighborhood, so rolling restaurant reviews will be forthcoming one day.

• Some people should write a book. This fella's life could fill an encyclopedia, and I for one, would buy it in an instant.

• Who knew that today was National Donut Day?

---Vitelius