The LA Times reports on yet another friend of Obama, this time a Palestinian supporter. Yet again we are exhorted to remember that this says nothing about Obama's actual views and only demonstrates his vast ability to reach out to a wide range of viewpoints, all leftwing. The day is yet to come when we get the news that Obama has close friends in the NRA or the Federalist Society.
A snippet:
At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."
One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."
Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than either of his opponents for the White House.
"I am confident that Barack Obama is more sympathetic to the position of ending the occupation than either of the other candidates," said Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow for the American Task Force on Palestine, referring to the Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that began after the 1967 war. More than his rivals for the White House, Ibish said, Obama sees a "moral imperative" in resolving the conflict and is most likely to apply pressure to both sides to make concessions.
"That's my personal opinion," Ibish said, "and I think it for a very large number of circumstantial reasons, and what he's said."
Aides say that Obama's friendships with Palestinian Americans reflect only his ability to interact with a wide diversity of people, and that his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have been consistent. Obama has called himself a "stalwart" supporter of the Jewish state and its security needs. He believes in an eventual two-state solution in which Jewish and Palestinian nations exist in peace, which is consistent with current U.S. policy.
As to what Obama actually believes, how is anyone to know? Obama is the Mirror of Desire for the Democrats; why not the world?
The Ace and the Gateway Pundit join in and follow the money. From GP:
A top official at the Pentagon during former-President George H. W. Bush's Administration and a former CIA intelligence officer maintains that Barack Obama and former Weather Underground honcho William Ayers funneled money to Professor Rashid Khalidi, a known terrorist sympathizer.
Khalidi serves on the faculty of Columbia University in New York and is best known as the professor who invited Iranian President Ahmedinejad to visit Columbia University after he finished his speech at the United Nations. According to confidential sources, Khalidi has direct ties to the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), a group on the US State Department's list of known terrorist groups.
The LA Times story reported on one $40,000 contribution:
In 2000, the Khalidis held a fundraiser for Obama's unsuccessful congressional bid. The next year, a social service group whose board was headed by Mona Khalidi received a $40,000 grant from a local charity, the Woods Fund of Chicago, when Obama served on the fund's board of directors.
They also offered this Khalidi-PLO link:
In the 1970s, when Khalidi taught at a university in Beirut, he often spoke to reporters on behalf of Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization. In the early 1990s, he advised the Palestinian delegation during peace negotiations. Khalidi now occupies a prestigious professorship of Arab studies at Columbia.
When and why did Khalidi's relationship with the PLO end? Nothing here says it did, actually. Geez, where is my nose for news?
He claims he's the best friends of Jews ever--http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/obama_claims_hes_greatest_frie.html>Best friends
Well he's competing with Hill not only for the Dem nomination but, it seems, the mythomaniac of the year as well.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Yes, Obama does manage to be all things to all people. The best friend of Isrial today, but appologising to his Paletinian friends about not saying more about their issues back during his US Senate primary race, telling them "It's a tight primary race, but hopefully I can be more up front about that once it is over."
Posted by: Ranger | April 10, 2008 at 12:48 PM
As to what Obama actually believes, how is anyone to know?
How do we know what you “actually” believe? Most of the readers of this esteemed blog only know the “real” Tom Maguire by reading the posts posted on this blog - not just the words, but the tone, the style, the humor, the links, the blogroll, the occasional spats with other bloggers and commenters, and the people whom you have banned. That’s pretty much the sum total of what I “know” about you.
Are we reading reflections of what we what we want to hear and “see” in the mirror of JOM, or are we reading what you really think?
Sometimes I wonder.
In a similar fashion, one might try reading Obama’s detailed policy proposals on his website to get a clue about his goals (what he “thinks”) and observe his campaign to discern his strategies for achieving those goals. Really, what other method is there?
It seems you have determined that the proper method is attempting to tie Obama to various and sundry “enemies” of the right wing. Your frustration at dealing with a Teflon Democrat (a la Reagan) is, well, rather obvious/amusing. Apparently the Wright flap isn't sticking, so one throws up against the wall Communists, Palestinians, any "bad" person who may have had breakfast with Obama in the past 15 years, any tie, no matter how strained, to an enemy of the VRWC in the vain hope that something/anything will stick?
Democrats like me who have taken the time to read his proposals like the “message” and they are also enormously impressed with the talents of the messenger. A brilliant messenger in support of policies I support is the candidate I see in the Mirror of Desire.
Posted by: TexasToast | April 10, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Shorter version:
I take him at his word 'cause he's never actually done a damn thing.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 10, 2008 at 12:58 PM
LOL
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2008 at 01:03 PM
I think as his first official act of duty as President, Obama should pass the BLANK SLATE LAW, in which every American gets to be whatever anyone else wants him to be - provided that one leans left, it is all good, and if one leans right, it is all evil.
Let's make the world just as lovely as Obama is himself.
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2008 at 01:05 PM
candidate I see in the Mirror of Desire.
The problem isn't so much that Obama is a crypto cypher. The problem is that modern liberalism is crypto socialism.
Of course soothing socialist cypher sounds good to all y'all.
Posted by: boris | April 10, 2008 at 01:07 PM
In a similar fashion, one might try reading Obama’s detailed policy proposals on his website
That's actually been done here. Perhaps you just missed it. We had a good guffaw over many of his economic policies.
Posted by: MayBee | April 10, 2008 at 01:09 PM
What supposedly sets Obama apart from other liberals is that he does not see the other side as greedy neanderthall racist warmongers, he actually understands that our POV is based on experience, reason and fact. So he can reach out to "us" from that basis and give enlightenment that transcends experience, reason, and fact. From the presidential podium with the presidential seal he will deliver us and make us see world as it should be rather than what has been and finally perceive hope, change, and the emperor's new clothes.
Posted by: boris | April 10, 2008 at 01:21 PM
Well Boris
I don't see you as a "greedy Neanderthal racist warmonger", just someone who I generally disagree with who has a particular fondness for ad hom in expressing that disagreement.
Posted by: TexasToast | April 10, 2008 at 01:31 PM
Obama Funneled Cash to Former PLO Operative's Anti-Israel Foundation
How many more questionable and antisemitic/terrorist associates does Obama have to have before it is too many?
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2008 at 01:35 PM
Democrats like me who have taken the time to read his proposals like the “message” and they are also enormously impressed with the talents of the messenger. A brilliant messenger in support of policies I support is the candidate I see in the Mirror of Desire.
TT, I'm surprised to read this from you. I know you lean left, but I never thought you were a raciest and antisemite. So sad.
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2008 at 01:37 PM
Obama is a lightweight who has accomplished not one thing in his public life. His "detailed policy positions" place him on all fours with a series of candidates who have been thumpingly rejected by the American electorate since the days of George McGovern.
A large part of his appeal is to those voters who believe they--and the nation--can be absolved of all the past sins of racism simply by the mere act of voting for this man.
He had twenty years in which to end racial hatred in the congregation of the church he attends regularly. He did not do so. He is best known for assiduously avoiding voting on controversial matters in the Illinois legislature, where his accomplishments, like those in his US Senate career, are essentially a nullity.
He has zero chance of being elected president, and he won't be.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2008 at 01:42 PM
fondness for ad hom in expressing ...
Really ??? I post for the fun of it. But let's take a look at this for an example of "ad hom" though ...
As mentioned before, actions speak louder than words and such associations are a valid consideration. But rather than address them as such your preference is ad hom derision.
Posted by: boris | April 10, 2008 at 01:45 PM
We do, indeed, know people by what they do, in addition to what they say. In that respect I feel that I know a great deal about John McCain, and next to nothing at all about Barack Obama. Some of what I know is less than admirable.
As to whether the Reverend Wright thing isn't "sticking," we shall see what we shall see.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2008 at 01:59 PM
Assertion: Barrack Hussein Obama talks real purdy.
Rebuttal: Barrack Hussein Obama is an empty suit, without a single accomplishment of merit achieved aside from winning a few elections. No legislation bears his name nor has he ever engaged in any bipartisan effort of any note whatsoever.
Counter - Rebuttal: Barrack Hussein Obama talks real purdy and you are engaging in ad hom.
Hmmm.... Hard to pick a winner at this point.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 10, 2008 at 01:59 PM
Personally I liked the Obama who said he had never heard Reverend Wright say all those bad things. And I also liked the Obama who said that if he had heard the Reverend Wright say all those bad things, he would have left the Congregation. The Obama I don't care for though is the 3rd Obama, the one who said that the 2 previous Obama's were liars when they said that stuff, and that this third Obama would never distance himself from racist hatemongers like Wright etc. So I don't think it's a Mirror of Desire thing. I think it's a 3 Faces of Eve schizoid multiple personality thing. And though I might like 2 of the 3 Obama's that pop up from time to time, Obama number three scares the crap out of me. It's sort of like that minor character from the Old Legion of Super Hereo's---he could split himself into 3 to take on the bad guys, yet in Obama's case, while 2 of him are off fighting crime, the third one is hanging out in the back alley with Wright and Farrakhan and the boys, badmouthing whitey and mugging truth.
Posted by: Daddy | April 10, 2008 at 02:09 PM
Everyone posting on this thread has a fuller understanding of TM than anyone in the world not named 'Obama' has of Barack Obama.
any tie, no matter how strained, to an enemy of the VRWC
It reminds me of how people have attempted to demonize Bush not because of what he has done, but because of the actions of other people - Ken Lay, Janis Karpinski, Lynndie England, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney - none of these people are named 'Bush', are they? Yet somehow every little thing done by somebody who may once have had a cabinet meeting with the President becomes his fault.
Posted by: Al Gore | April 10, 2008 at 02:09 PM
Isn't it funny that Obama seems to have so many "friends" that are either racists, anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-white, anti-business or domestic terrorists. And in every single case he embraced these folks after they showed their true radical colors. Its not like Obama is shocked by any of these revelations.
You might actually get the impression that he chose these people for friendships because they were radicals ...
Posted by: Jeff | April 10, 2008 at 02:09 PM
Boris
Commenting on the method of argument of your opponent in a debate, as I did in your example, is not ad hom. I’m attacking Tom personally or calling him dishonest – just commenting that his various posts regarding Obama’s “connections” suggest a pattern in his argument regarding Obama’s qualifications. I respect Tom enough to think that if he had a better argument, he would use it.
Moreover, you left out the "it seems..." part. Was that deliberate? Tisk tisk.
If you want to see real ad hom, check out the above post by Sara - "anti-Semitic and racist".
Posted by: TexasToast | April 10, 2008 at 02:09 PM
Stupid sock puppet.
Posted by: bgates | April 10, 2008 at 02:10 PM
Interesting she said-he said making the rounds. It's another indication that Wright's anti-semitism is more prevalent that we've been led to believe. But what interests me is how those in attendance use the same "I didn't hear him say that excuse" that Obama used.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 10, 2008 at 02:16 PM
You are the one TT that I took to say you saw yourself when listening to Obama. I think Obama is both a racist and an antisemite and I think it surprising and sad that you see yourself in the mirror of his remarks. How is that ad hom?
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2008 at 02:30 PM
OT:
Dan Rather Suit Dismissed
Dan Rather's lawsuit against CBS has been dismissed by the judge in the case. The only matter left is whether Rather was "utilized appropriately in the remaining months of his deal as a correspondent on 60 Minutes."
Hehehehehe
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2008 at 02:34 PM
Commenting on the method of argument of your opponent in a debate, as I did in your example, is not ad hom.
Oh BS. "Your frustratiomn ... is amusing" Hardly a method. Clearly derisive in a personal fashion, ridiculing the mindset rather than the substance.
Posted by: boris | April 10, 2008 at 02:35 PM
BTW I don't care how you choose to address your points, just that your "ad hom" appears as frequently as anybody's.
Posted by: boris | April 10, 2008 at 02:37 PM
A new day, a new unsavory character, and of course, Obama Ties
"It is Mr. Alsammarae's ties to Mr. Rezko that connect both men to Mr. Rezko's political protégé, Senator Barack Obama."
"Companion Security’s linkage to the Chamchamal deal is most critical to understand, because that is how this international scheme arrives at the doorstep of Senator Obama in August 2006."
"It is confounding to the point of incredibility that the senator’s staff, in its routine due diligence with constituents seeking Mr. Obama’s assistance, was unable to discover that Mr. Frawley was in partnership with Mr. Rezko and Mr. Mahru. To believe that Mr. Obama’s office had no knowledge of the context of the Companion Security contract is to believe that no one asked for Mr. Frawley’s bona fides, no one contacted the Iraqi government about the bona fides, no one in Mr. Obama’s office thought to call the governor’s office to discover on what basis the Savanna training site had been offered."
For a clue as to how this was a deal with no resources, read the last comment (By Bessie) in the comment section of the link.
Posted by: pagar | April 10, 2008 at 03:50 PM
Tread carefully, Pagar--we don't want any "guilt by association" around here.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2008 at 04:10 PM
What we may be seeing here is Red Witch's Last Stand. If so, we wouldn't really want to be joining her - the proper position would be on a knoll some distance away. Close enough so that our shouts of "Oh, nice shot, Running Bear." could be heard by Sitting Bull's folks but not so close as to give Red Witch any hope concerning a breakout.
IOW - this is Ed Rendell's "other 50%" - let him spread it.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 10, 2008 at 04:20 PM
Apparently the Wright flap isn't sticking,
Um Kemosabe, did you see the AP/IPSos taken 4/7 to 4/9? This is a RV poll with way more Dems than Reps, but it comes up with a GE tie of 45 to 45 for Obama and McCain. Know what it was only six weeks ago ( same polling firm )? Well let me tell you as I just happen to have that right here.
Obama +10
In one month.
Did you mean it was not sticking with you?
this is a RV poll notice, not a LV poll which would have McCain up significantly. Look at the poll that Marist just released, they have McCain beating Obama in NY! Ouch.
Posted by: GMax | April 10, 2008 at 04:48 PM
My guess--and I make it in part just to be all by my lonesome--is that she won't stick it out to the convention. Sooner or later she may come to understand that she cannot possibly win (she may realize that already), and that to go on further would make her a pariah within the Dem party. Her eye has never been on anything but the Main Chance, and when it becomes unattainable this time around she will not want to do anything to destroy her hopes for 2012.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2008 at 04:48 PM
It seems you have determined that the proper method is attempting to tie Obama to various and sundry “enemies” of the right wing.
How does one "attempt to tie" someone to peole they associate with?
Is this some sort of suggestion that terrorists, and the PLO is a terrorist organization, are only "enemies" of the "right wing"?
Posted by: The Ace | April 10, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Democrats like me who have taken the time to read his proposals
You are a liar.
You've read no such "detailed proposals" because there are none.
Posted by: The Ace | April 10, 2008 at 04:53 PM
are only "enemies" of the "right wing"?
Or that only the right wing sees them as enemies. Remember TT is not a believer in the clash of civilizations.
Posted by: boris | April 10, 2008 at 05:04 PM
In a similar fashion, one might try reading Obama’s detailed policy proposals on his website to get a clue about his goals (what he “thinks”) and observe his campaign to discern his strategies for achieving those goals. Really, what other method is there?
Well there is the method of comparing what he is saying now that he is running nationally to what he has said for the last twenty years and more importantly what he has actually voted for while a legislator.
He can talk all he wants, but you don't earn a rating to the left of Bernie Sanders with bland policy pronouncements; you earn it with consistent hard left votes on the record.
Posted by: Barney Frank | April 10, 2008 at 05:07 PM
The NAACP just invited Jeremiah Wright to give a speech? Does Hillary have some operatives working behind the scene? Didnt they get the memo that Wright has retired to a $10 mill house behind a gate until at least the first Wednesday in November?
Oh lordy, how are we going to keep making the argument that its not sticking if they guy wont go away and shut up?
Maybe the flight service that Wellstone used will need to pick him up for this speech?
Posted by: GMax | April 10, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Are we reading reflections of what we what we want to hear and “see” in the mirror of JOM, or are we reading what you really think?
Sometimes I wonder.
As do I. But a blog really is going to be "just words", and I am not running for President (and I try to keep my gloomy, whiny side away from the typewriter; Michelle's handlers, take note.)
Back in reality, actions can speak louder than words. In McCain's case, he can point to his biography to answer questions about his brand of patriotism, just for example.
I suppose we could judge Obama's commitment to Israel by his Senate votes.
But trying to judge Barack by his actions does not yield often encouragement - as Brooks noted, he has passed on multiple opportunities for bipartisanhip in the Senate. One might argue that this does not mean he is not really bipartisan; or one might argue that compromising with idiots is idiotics; but folks who believe Barack is some sort of unifying, bipartisan figure really are engaging in a faith-based initiative contradicted by some facts and not supported by any.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | April 10, 2008 at 05:12 PM
Apparently there are some things you cant say on Air America Radio. Not about Republicans mind you, but nevertheless baby steps forward are progress. Cussing out Democrat standard bearer women will get you tossed. Randi Rhodes has just been fired. Think she may go have a drink to drown her sorrows?
Posted by: GMax | April 10, 2008 at 05:18 PM
I am not running for President
If drafted, would you serve? We have done, and almost certainly are about to do, worse.
Posted by: bgates | April 10, 2008 at 05:19 PM
Via Suitably Flip:
Mr. Shambles Hits the Airwaves
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2008 at 05:52 PM
Speaking of the data, I spotted this item yesterday, and couldn't resist:
"Democrats on the Economy in 1996:
“'Our economy is the healthiest it has been in three decades.' (President Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996)
"Democrats on the Economy in 2008:
“'The bottom line is that this administration is the owner of the worst jobs record since Herbert Hoover.' (Senator Charles Schumer, Press Release, March 7, 2008)
"Key Labor Market Statistics in 1996 and 2008
March 1996 March 2008
1. U.S. Unemployment Rate
5.5% 5.1%
2. Number of Long-Term Unemployed
1.33 million 1.28 million
3. Average Weeks Unemployed
17.3 weeks 16.2 weeks
4. Median Weeks Unemployed
8.3 weeks 8.1 weeks
5. Not in Labor Force because discouraged over job prospects
451,000 401,000
6. Democrats calling for Extended Unemployment Benefits?
No Yes
7. President’s Party Affiliation
Democrat Republican"
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 10, 2008 at 07:00 PM
Posted by: cathyf | April 10, 2008 at 07:17 PM
Make that another ditto.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2008 at 07:19 PM
This may explain a report I saw that said that Maliki asked Petraeus to seal the border with Iran.
Posted by: Neo | April 10, 2008 at 07:30 PM
Hey Neo...
Good analysis of JAM over at Long War Journal, if that was you.
Posted by: Soylent Red | April 10, 2008 at 08:10 PM
I might be wrong,but I don't think the estimable Mr Maguire has his finger on the nuclear button.Mr Obama is asking you to vote him this facility consequently even his bowel movements will come under scrutiny.Doesn't that sound probable to you TT?
Posted by: PeterUK | April 10, 2008 at 08:15 PM
"Guilt by Association"
Who's against it? Link
"And Governor Blagojevich continues to duck on the issue, after his initial claim of ignorance that a Nation of Islam member was on the commission, and then his remark that he does not believe in "guilt by association".
Could it be that who one associates with causes one to be against "guilt by Association?
Posted by: pagar | April 10, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Obamasiah or true leader of America. Maybe some coins with his image:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/in_pictures_chairman_mao_badges/html/1.stm
Posted by: BGk | April 11, 2008 at 07:46 AM
don't forget that Obama has already been endorsed by his buddies The New Black Panther Party and Ludacris - http://nationalsquib.com/index.php/barack-obama-ludacris/
Posted by: Alicia | April 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM
I would encourage every American to read the link Alicia posted above concerning ~ Ludacris, and then tell us who they are voting for.
Posted by: pagar | April 11, 2008 at 05:00 PM
The biggest terrorists in America are in the White House, Bush and Cheney. I don't see any anger from you that the Mossad fed information through Chalabi that got us into an unnecessary and costly war that violated our Constitution and put an end to our good name globally. You fear mongers are ridiculous - Hey, did you know John McCain's real name is McChaimali, he's actually a mole planted here by the Islamo-Commies of North Vietnam, you can find this on the link I'll spuriously invent on some web-host somewhere, some time - and - he has a black daughter!
Posted by: Emmanuel Winner | April 11, 2008 at 06:47 PM
pagar | April 10, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Ann Leary is good people. I had some dealings with her on the Jay Grodin Marine car keying incident.
Thanks for the link.
Posted by: M. Simon | April 12, 2008 at 12:32 AM
Ludacris
Posted by: M. Simon | April 12, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Emmanuel Winner,
Nice to see you are suitably terrorized. Is there any thing further we can do to augment your condition?
Posted by: M. Simon | April 12, 2008 at 12:42 AM
Nice to see you are suitably terrorized. Is there any thing further we can do to augment your condition?
Posted by: wow gold | October 09, 2008 at 11:14 PM