A dispatch from Jerusalem reports: "While the United States and Europe have long said that the 1967 borders, with minor adjustments, should be the basis of a two-state solution, since March the Obama administration has echoed Israel's rejection of preconditions."
I don't think the first part of that sentence is accurate. What's a "minor" adjustment and what is a "major" one isn't entirely clear. The Jerusalem Embassy of 1995, for example, declares as the "policy of the United States" that Jerusalem "should remain an undivided city" and "the capital of the State of Israel." The United States has never said Israel needs to give away the Western Wall or the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. Neither of those places were within Israel's borders between 1948 and 1967. That's not a "minor" adjustment.
In an April 2004 letter to Prime Minister Sharon, President Bush specifically disavowed the 1967 borders, writing, "As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities."