Obama’s positions on the Jewish state seem to change depending on who is listening.

So how do we know what he REALLY believes?

I’d say the mutual friendship with the jew hating Rashid Khalidi and the praise Obama heaped on him reveals the REAL OBAMA.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Brian Miller,

What you do not understand is that Obama is for Palestinians, he likes the Hamas. But Hamas is a terrorist party who hates Israel and the United States. Don’t you remember seeing the Palestinians dancing in the streets when the WTC was crashed? What’s the matter with you?

Israel is the most legitimate country in this World. Their country was given back to them by UN, when UN was still an honorable organisation in 1948. Israelis turned that desert area into a magnificent country with their love and effort. They have never kicked the Palestinians out; on the contrary, they asked them to stay. It is the Arab league who asked Palestinians to leave so they would fight Israel and throw it to the sea. But, Israel won that war and they stayed there. Israel is the only peaceful democracy in that region, it is an ally and it wants peace. But the hateful Palestinians do not want their own country; they want all the land for their country. They keep launching rockets on civil Israelis daily. And Israel shouldn’t defend herself? What is that bullshit? Israel is very decent and all the anti-Semites like you keep criticizing her constantly.

Obama will lose the Jewish vote, believe me. And that’s fine with me, Obama do not like Israel, he is just pretending he does, because he is a complete fraud and he wants the vote of the Jewish people, but he won’t get them, they are not stupid. As a matter of fact, they are very brilliant. Just look at all the Nobel prices this country gets each year.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Sorry about not being able to read. I guess if Alan Dershowitz says so, that’s enough for some.

Are you referencing what I quote or being sarcastic? I can’t tell. What I cited from him is related directly to your point regarding putting America’s interest first, not Israel’s.

And Dershowitz, of course, is no right-winger, and I do believe is supporting Senator Obama.

Still I don’t see Obama as much of a threat to Isreal. And those pesky anti-Israel Democrats, like Democrat Senators Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin, Barbara Boxer, Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders…. Not sure I’m buying that they are overly critical of Israel. What is considered harshly critical anyway? Any critism? I’ve harshly criticized my friends, that’s what friends do.

There’s a strong difference between criticizing a friend, and siding with your friend’s enemy (ies) whose perception of events and history is fundamentally flawed and distorted.

Carter got the sides to talk, helped Egypt and Israel sign a peace treaty, that’s something.

Something…Investor’s Business Daily:

Let’s start with the idea that Carter brought Sadat and Begin together. He didn’t. It was Sadat who made perhaps the bravest gesture ever by an Arab leader, traveling to Jerusalem and speaking to the Knesset in 1977, a year before Camp David. It cost him his life.

Carter did provide Israel and Egypt with a venue — the presidential retreat at Camp David. Problem is, the pre-arranged “deal” was struck only after it was clear that the U.S. would give massive aid to both nations to keep them at peace. As Mideast scholar Bernard Lewis would later say, “Obviously, they needed someone to pay the bill, and who but the United States could fulfill that function?”

Even today, thanks to Camp David, Israel and Egypt are the two largest recipients of U.S. foreign aid — between $3 billion and $5 billion a year since 1978. Despite that, only one of the two nations can be called a friend.

Two years after Camp David, Sadat was murdered by Muslim extremists angry at the deal. And today in Egypt, there are no plaques of remembrance, no great monuments to Sadat. Only anger and bitterness.

Israel did return the oil-rich Sinai to Egypt in return for peace. But the “aid” we give Egypt mostly goes to buy U.S. weapons. The average Egyptian has no democracy, and the standard of living has barely budged since 1978.

~~~

Even more important is what Camp David didn’t achieve: a deal with the Palestinians. Carter failed to get his “friend,” PLO terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, to sign on to his vision for peace in the Middle East, though it meant autonomy for the Palestinians.

Why? “Peace for us means the destruction of Israel,” Arafat said two years after Camp David. “We are preparing for an all-out war, a war which will last for generations.” Arafat never renounced those beliefs. And today, thanks to him and his terrorist brethren, the Middle East is as full of bloodshed and hate as it has ever been.

What I actually had in mind, though, in referencing Carter, was his recent book. The one that had 14 board advisory members from the Carter Center resign in protest of it.

Yet that is the dread it is feared Obama will bring? That’s the threat? I keep hearing it said that Obama will be like Carter, and that he will bring about destruction in Israel, the end of the America we know, rioting in the streets, Socialism, and more. Which is it? I don’t remember those things from the Seventies?

Brian, Carter’s legacy is felt to this day. In not backing the Shah, he helped to enable a “bad” dictator to fall and an even more ruthless regime to gain power. It’s one half of the rise in Islamic militancy that threatens the world to this day. The Shah of Iran didn’t live up to his sanctimonious high standards of American moral purity. People like Carter don’t recognize why temporary alliances are necessary…in the form of Stalin….in the form of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam. Sometimes you have a choice between A and B. That’s it. If A is bad and B is worse, you go with bad.

When Obama says unhesitatingly that he would meet with Iranian, Syrian, North Korean, etc. leaders- America’s enemies- without preconditions within his first year as president, it tells me that he doesn’t have the foreign policy worldview that I agree with. He cites JFK as meeting with Khrushchev, as if that were a plus event in history. It was not.

When it comes to national security and foreign policy, in recognizing who our allies are and why it behooves us to stand with them (re: Georgia), I trust the experience and worldvew of McCain over that of Obama.

The only accepted way for the United States to interact with Israel, in the conservative Republican view, is with no accountability, no critism, no restraint, no expectations, simply let whatever Israeli leader is currently under investigation in his own country call all the shots. And until Obama agrees to that, he is no friend of Israel, hence no friend of America. So if you want Israel to do whatever the heck they want, don’t vote for Obama. You’re dressing up your fight with a liberal Democrat as Israel’s fight for survival, that’s not very kosher.

That’s not what I wrote in my post. But thanks for the opportunity to clarify. What I take issue with, is the notion that Senator Obama truly understands the Israeli perspective. Like a liberal Democrat, he seems to sympathize and empathize with the version of history that Rashid Khalidi believes in. The kind that inspires Jimmy Carter to write a book that is hardly well-received by Israelis, no matter how befuddled Carter is over the criticism.

I think Obama has presented himself as a centrist and friend of Israel, because it serves him politically to do so.

Israel isn’t a saint, but like America, I think it has been maligned and its history distorted in the same spirit that America’s actions have been twisted and criticized in lopsided fashion by the Chomskys and Ward Churchills.

And of course it was politically expedient for McCain to distance himself from Bush, he’s not crazy. I’d suggest others do the same.

I think McCain has distanced himself mostly on honest policy differences between himself and the President. I doubt they are warmly fond of each other and it has nothing to do with the hyperbolic criticism the left has smeared Bush with; I think there’s some bad feeling from 2000; but I do think politically, they are mostly in alignment as conservative Republicans. Especially in the area of foreign policy. McCain campaigned vigorously for Bush in 2000 and 2004, loyal to the Party. Bush is strongly in support of McCain, and has already cast his vote for the Republican nominee.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“They may do more wondering about it if it’s not released.” (Gayle)

Right on the dot. I know that all my Jewish friends in New-York thinks this way. If they don’t want to release it, it must be terribly wrong for Obama’s image. I think that Obama will lose all the Jewish vote, because of the Los Angeles Times. Bravo!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I would not change my opinion of Obama if George W. Bush endorsed Obama either, Mata Harley, and not even if the Pope endorsed him!

Wordmsith, this post is excellent, and it is indeed obvious why the Los Angelels Times won’t release the tape. It doesn’t surprise any of us, I’m sure. I think it’s backfiring on them though. It’s probably being discussed more precisely because they won’t release it. The video may be damning indeed, but so what? So are all of Obama’s other associations and many Americans simply ignore them. They would probably also ignore anything on that tape. They may do more wondering about it if it’s not released. People are very strange indeed.

Again, great post!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

[...] The “Distraction” of Questioning Senator Obama’s… Power was a senior foreign policy advisor to Obama until she was forced to resign after calling Senator Hillary Clinton “a monster” in [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Forrest, INRE your comment:

the MSM might debunk it, but the wingnuts on both sides that hang out in the blogosphere don’t seem to care about real journalism anyway. Both sides are already making up and perpetuating garbage…if it generates page views, it’s news!

Possibly the saddest state of affairs is most of the indepth analysis and exposure of facts – right along with the smut – has been done by bloggers and citizen journalists. It was the blog false charges of Palin being some sort of prim, restrictive schoolmarm who was against birth control that led to her membership in the Feminists for Life becoming public. (yes, there are feminists who believe you shouldn’t have to choose between career and family, and that abortion isn’t the only answer)

It’s been the citizen media doing the job of what the MSM should have been doing, vetting Obama. The MSM spent plenty of time with negatives on Hillary… everything on discussing whether it would be a co-Presidency to her cleavage or pantsuits. Chicago Annenberg Challenge? Obama’s only “adminstrative experience” which he never discusses? Nary a word from the MSM on that one. It took a liberal Santa Clara attorney to start that ball rolling. And he remains the quintessential expert on it to date… with Stanley Kurtz a close 2nd.

But then a free press will always have both facts and garbage. At least with the blogosphere, it is a debate the nation can participate in. Until the Info Age, we were basically indoctrinated with whatever the MSM media wanted to spew daily, and we had little way of learning anything different.

Now, as we see, the MSM are probably the least researched and educated sources … and they have been in control of educating the US electorate. This season, they have proven they are just plain an embarrassment to the ethics of journalism.

Brian, I agree that Israel will likely survive any US presidency…. unless the unthinkable happens with Iran. Personally, I doubt Obama will be able to advance any peace in that region… just as POTUS predecessors. One major difference has been that Israel and Syria have been in negotiations with the past year. Then again, after their recent election, one has to see if the new leadership works the same way.

But the hatred in the region lies deep, and thru centuries. Obama will not “heal”, and it’s also doubtful he can “destroy” unless the US totally abandons Israel. As the prime functioning democracy in the region, the US should be shamed if they do not support free countries against despots and int’l jihad movements.

Thus there is no sense to your “Country First” comment and Israel. To put “country first”, events that can affect our national security – not only today, but in the future – are of course demanded of a POTUS. Unfortunately, Obama has never demonstrated the “character, courage and decisive actions” required to tackle this job.

And we’re supposed to care what the Frenchy President married to the anorexic model thinks about our choice for President. I don’t. But maybe that allegiance follows the first.

Leaving aside your own less than stellar representation of the high road, more moral Obama supporter by your snide remarks for people you don’t know, I agree that my opinion for POTUS does not rest on what Sarkozy thinks.

And since you took the “are we supposed to care?” route, I suggest you apply that to the various endorsements of Obama you all like to tout as well. And that includes all of Europe, whom we are told are just totally in love with Obama.

I’ve said this before on this site, and I’ll repeat it here. I don’t care if George W. Bush himself endorsed Obama. It would not change my opinion of “that one” as a leader who would take this country over the economic cliff into socialism… or, for the hypersenstive and PC crowd… Europeanization.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Sorry about not being able to read. I guess if Alan Dershowitz says so, that’s enough for some. Still I don’t see Obama as much of a threat to Isreal. And those pesky anti-Israel Democrats, like Democrat Senators Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin, Barbara Boxer, Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders…. Not sure I’m buying that they are overly critical of Israel. What is considered harshly critical anyway? Any critism? I’ve harshly criticized my friends, that’s what friends do.

Carter got the sides to talk, helped Egypt and Israel sign a peace treaty, that’s something. Yet that is the dread it is feared Obama will bring? That’s the threat? I keep hearing it said that Obama will be like Carter, and that he will bring about destruction in Israel, the end of the America we know, rioting in the streets, Socialism, and more. Which is it? I don’t remember those things from the Seventies?

The only accepted way for the United States to interact with Israel, in the conservative Republican view, is with no accountability, no critism, no restraint, no expectations, simply let whatever Israeli leader is currently under investigation in his own country call all the shots. And until Obama agrees to that, he is no friend of Israel, hence no friend of America. So if you want Israel to do whatever the heck they want, don’t vote for Obama. You’re dressing up your fight with a liberal Democrat as Israel’s fight for survival, that’s not very kosher.

And of course it was politically expedient for McCain to distance himself from Bush, he’s not crazy. I’d suggest others do the same.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

[...] The “Distraction” of Questioning Senator Obama’s Commitment to …a senior foreign policy advisor to Obama until she was forced to resign after calling Senator Hillary Clinton “a monster” in March 2008. [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

You might consider not jumping all over first-time posters if you want to maintain and build a readership.

Forrest, welcome to FA! Seriously, I apologize if it seemed like I was jumping down your throat. It wasn’t my intent, but I’m sorry if that was the apparent tone of my response.

I’m actually out the door, on my way to work, so I’ll have to do a more thorough response later.

If anyone is abrasive, don’t be put off by it. Some debate hardball; others are more polite. Quite a number are very informed. So whether we agree or disagree, stick around and take a look around.

Like or Dislike: 0  0