know, do anything. so this is just i m just excited. i never cry with joy for anything. finally, back to the diamond for the catch of the day. no luck needed, just a plastic cup. a foul ball bounced around and into a full cup of beer. suds went flying and the guy got drenched. didn t seem to mind. he was happy about the whole thing. you re probably wondering did he drink the rest of the beer after that? oh, yeah. this bud s for you. that s your first look at sports. i m fred rogan. cheers. now for another look at the weather, here is bill karins. he has your weather channel forecast. hey bill. i know, give the guy a little credit, right? absolutely. he s covered in beer head to toe. he knew he s on cam rashera, cool. thunderstorms are pretty widespread. as we go into tomorrow, it s similar. we re pinpointing areas from the
bibby could have gotten a standing ovation. that would also have been in his long-term interest. let s say bibi had stood before congress and said, you know, my fellow friends and my american friends, your president, president obama, has come to me and said that he believes that there s an opportunity here to break through with the palestinians. i have to tell you, i personally don t believe it. but i know one thing. when our best friend, our oldest ally, our most important strategic partner in the world, comes to me and makes the request, there s only one right answer. mr. president, yes. you want a six-month moratorium on settlement building? i ve already got 500,000 settlers in jerusalem and the west bank. you know what, mr. president? that s not really a strategic risk for me. the potential payoff of that is so great, i don t believe it. i m skeptical. but when you, president obama, ask me that, there s only one right answer. yes, sir. we will do that. barack obama, this bud s for
we will do that. barack obama, this bud s for you. then he would have gotten a standing ovation that would have not just included the u.s. congress, it would have included europeans. it would have included arabs. it would have included people all over america. said hey, there s a guy who s going the extra mile. and that s my point, fareed. i have no idea whether there is a palestinian partner for a secure peace with israel. along the lines of president clinton has laid out. i just know one thing. given the implications for israel, if it gets stuck permanently holding the west bank, it is in israel s overwhelming interest to test, test and test again, okay? because that would be a huge strategic threat to israel if it has no choice but to absorb the west bank. but you travel there a lot. and you know the american jewish community here, both those crucial constituencies, it s always struck me that to get peace, you re going to have to convince a majority of israelis because they have t
but first up the chances of peace in the middle east after the latest round of speeches by prime minister netanyahu and president obama. i ll be joined by tom friedman of the new york times who is just back from the middle east. now, here s my take for this week. we ve just gone through an arcane debate about whether barack obama said anything new when he called for an israeli/palestinian settlement based on 1967 borders with mutually agreed upon land swaps. in fact, that has been the working assumption of all negotiating parties, america, israel and the palestinian authority, for over 20 years. it is what the camp david talks of 2000 were based on. it s what elmerit s talks were based on. the real shift in u.s. policy was president obama publicly condemning the palestinian strategy to seek recognition as a state from the u.n. general assembly in september. instead of thanking obama for this, prime minister netanyahu chose to stage, in the words of the former israeli di
but first up the chances of peace in the middle east after the latest round of speeches by prime minister netanyahu and president obama. i ll be joined by tom friedman of the new york times who is just back from the middle east. now, here s my take for this week. we ve just gone through an arcane debate about whether barack obama said anything new when he called for an israeli/palestinian settlement based on 1967 borders with mutually agreed upon land swaps. in fact, that has been the working assumption of all negotiating parties, america, israel and the palestinian authority, for over 20 years. it is what the camp david talks of 2000 were based on, it s what elmert s talks were based on. the real shift in u.s. policy was president obama publicly condemning the palestinian strategy to seek recognition as a state from the u.n. general assembly in september. instead of thanking obama for this, prime minister netanyahu chose to stage, in the words of the former israeli dip