Obama: Israel's security as a moment of opportunity

  I'm the first to admit I don't know much about foreign policy. I'm also the first to admit I kept falling asleep through The One's press conference with AIPAC and therefore did not carefully consider each nuance to be able to come up with 10 theses concerning the differences between the Thursday bombshell and the backup on Sunday.
  My impression, then, not to be construed as a political opinion because I sure don't want to run into the buzz saw that determines you're a moron because you don't grasp the significance of a phrase like "right of return," was that Obama was disappointed that his grandstanding about Osama's death was coming to an end because people were remembering they had no jobs and gas costs a lot.
  So, as Clarice Feldman says so eloquently over at American Thinker, his "narcissistic needs needed stoking with some bold new initiative" and thus he dreamed up the brilliant idea of telling Israel to go kill itself. In fact, the struggle to establish some kind of message by that lead tongued doofus Jay Carney. Look at his comments here, uttered before the Israel speech:

MR. CARNEY:  I actually was -- happened to be in his presence when he said he wanted to do this, which was a while back in the wake of the successful bin Laden mission.  So this was a presidential decision that he wanted to make this trip.

      So, with questions.

      Q    Jay, what can you tell us about the reports on the aid package for Middle East tomorrow?

      MR. CARNEY:  I’m not going to get into any specifics.  I’m not going to go beyond where I was yesterday.  I think that we will have a call later this afternoon backgrounding on the speech a little bit.  I’ll simply say that the President views the situation in the Middle East as a moment of opportunity, the Middle East and North Africa, as a real moment of opportunity for America and for Americans.

      In the last decade, our focus in the region was largely on Iraq, which was a military effort, and on the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the fight against al Qaeda.  That fight against al Qaeda continues, but there is an opportunity in that region to focus on advancing our values and enhancing our security, and that’s what the President looks forward to discussing tomorrow in his speech.

  Here the focus is certainly not on Israel, as a thoughtful assessment might be when considering a drastic policy shift. The focus is on America's security, not the security of the state of Israel.
  Back to Feldman at AT and her take on the policy shift:

First, of course, he patted himself on the back for imaginary achievements, indicating that he had supported democracy in the Middle East from the moment of his Cairo speech.  Actually, for those who paid attention, he did no such thing.  He ignored the popular revolts in Iran and Syria, and he was slow to respond to the events in Egypt and Tunisia.  Of Syria, in fact, he said this week, "The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to democracy.  President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that transition or get out of the way."  I'm not sure Assad or his people heard the clarion call.  At the moment it was made, Assad's forces were firing at and killing peaceful civilians gathered in pro-democracy demonstrations in Banias and Homs.

  So here's my professional non wonkish opinion. Obama needed to ramp up his numbers again, so he sought to do that with the first speech, never imagining he'd stir up such a nasty hornets' nest. 
  When he was called on the carpet at AIPAC, he was generally really ticked off and angry that this latest gambit could not parallel the SEALS' courageous actions. 
  Watching both AIPAC and the previous Israel conference (admittedly not in entirety), it seemed to me that The One contradicted himself several times.
  But then, what do I know.