An effort to push back on some of the anti-Obama smears circulating in Jewish circles.
« NAFTA Crosstalk | Main | Amateur Hour »
Jews for Obama
29 Feb 2008 05:28 pm
Comments (39)
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!!
It certainly is nice that Senator Obama surrounds himself with such stalwart Israel supporters as Zbigniew Bzrezinski, George Soros, and Robert Malley. Not. With friends like these, Israel doesn't need any enemies. A vote for Senator Obama is a vote for Hamas. Hizbollah, the Ayatollahs, and the Taliban.
http://jewagainstobama.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/more-on-obamas-anti-israel-supporters/
And friends like Marty Peretz and Colin Powell? Wait, so every person advising or supporting a campaign isn't in lockstep on every issue, and perhaps we have to actually see what the candidate has to say and, since he's a senator, how he's voted? So confusing.
Next we'll bring up Jeremiah Wright, who Obama has explicitly said he disagrees with on the issue of Israel. I know, I know, we Jews in particular are incredulous that someone would neglect to agree with their clergy on every issue. Why, every synagogue I've ever been to is virtually Borg-like in terms of its agreement on every issue -- you just have to ask the rabbi what he thinks, and you'll know how the whole congregation feels.
Luckily, though, we Jews are also noted for our lack of sarcasm and straightforward argumentation.
On Obama's foreign policy team:
Daniel Shapiro: A senior adviser on Middle East affairs, Mr. Shapiro is a long time Democratic operative who worked for four years for Senator Bill Nelson, a Democrat from Florida. In that capacity, he played a role in sponsoring some hawkish legislation such as the Syria Accountability Act and working to list Hezbollah's satellite television station, al-Manar, as a foreign terrorist organization. Also, Mr. Shapiro also worked briefly for President Clinton's national security council.
Yeah, that's a vote for Hezbollah.
http://www.nysun.com/article/71651
A vote for Senator Obama is a vote for Hamas. Hizbollah, the Ayatollahs, and the Taliban.
When I see statements like that, I have to come to the conclusion that SLC's lying is pathological.
One reassuring argument I've heard about Obama is that rich Chicago Jews, like Mrs. Pritzker, his campaign finance chairwoman, aren't, on average, as Likudnik-crazy for West Bank settlements as rich New York Jews, who provide much of Hillary's financial support. But I don't have any evidence one way or the other on this Chicago vs. New York difference. Does anybody have any insights?
Re Kevin
Mr. Kevin is a poopyhead.
Furthermore, Senator Obama was a practicing Muslim during his sojourn in Indonesia and is now considered an apostate Muslim by the Islamic world, having joined a Christian church.
Steve Sailer -
On average, midwesterners of all stripes, goyem included, as more temperamentally moderate than new yorkers.
And our pizza & hot dogs are better, too.
What the hell is a "sabra"? Is that a Jewish sabre-toothed tiger?
Trevor,
Let me introduce you to a wonderful new thingamabob they have on the internets called "wikipedia."
Of course if you're just humor-impaired, rather than actually uninformed, it's harder to remedy that.
Tumblina, I've been living in Chicago for a couple years now. It's true that Chicago is a lot more laid back than NYC.
However, that's not pizza. I don't know what the hell it is, some friggin' bizarro tomato sauce casserole. Not that I don't enjoy Gino's East now and again, but calling whatever the hell they serve "better pizza" is like saying Tiger Woods is a better quarterback than Brian Griese or Kyle Orton or Rex Grossman.*
And Sabrett owns Vienna Beef hard. It's pretty telling that you get a Sabrett hot dog with mustard, perhaps some onions or sauerkraut. You have to cover a Vienna Beef hot dog with a massive salad (lettuce, tomatoes, onions, sport peppers, pickles, day-glo relish, mustard, celery salt -- am I missing anything?) to obscure the fact that its flavor is mediocre at best.
*Wait, bad metaphor there. He well might be.
The psychotic SLC provides a link to the equally psychotic Daniel Pipes and we're supposed to take him seriously...
Bwahahahahahahaha!!!
Oh, I get it Steve Sailer -
it's not those populist Midwestern Jews that Obama wants Hamas to kill, it's only those "rich New York Jews"
Isn't ALWAYS those "rich New York Jews" that populists rail against
Will Husein Obama crawl on his hands and knees to Hamas and Hesbollah once he's done fellating Raul Castro and Hugo Chavez?
There is a strange strain of populism on the left now: hate America and embrace our enemies.
Hate the most productive people, embrace the screw ups who have wracked up huge mortgages and credit card debt. Hate glabalization that steals our jobs but love illegal immigrants who steal our.... wait a minute!
Back to the shop-worn "NY Jews" chimera, Steve
Furthermore, Senator Obama was a practicing Muslim during his sojourn in Indonesia and is now considered an apostate Muslim by the Islamic world, having joined a Christian church.
Repeating crap like that won't make it ever become true.
SLC, that Pipes article is a hack-job lacking any shred of credibility. See http://mediamatters.org/items/200801020004
One reassuring argument I've heard about Obama is that rich Chicago Jews, like Mrs. Pritzker, his campaign finance chairwoman, aren't, on average, as Likudnik-crazy for West Bank settlements as rich New York Jews, who provide much of Hillary's financial support.
I'm not entirely sure what that means, as I'm not up on all the various profiles of Jewish voters (said sincerely, not sarcastically).
But the kind that don't care for Obama at all because of his advisers and the belief that he's pro-Palestinian appear to be dominant in Florida, New York, and New Jersey, where Obama lost by 40 or 50 points in that particular category. In other states, I didn't notice any particular preference--as upscale voters, they tended to vote for Obama. So Florida's clearly the state where it makes a difference.
Cal:
Steve Sailer is a racist. Ignore him.
"SLC, that Pipes article is a hack-job lacking any shred of credibility."
He knows that. That's why he posted it.
That's what he DOES.
That's what ANY Zionist freak does. They have absolutely zero comprehension of the concept of intellectual integrity. They're born, obsessive liars committed to trampling the truth into the ground, then salting the earth over it.
Listen to anything coming from Dershowitz, the Israeli government or the AIPAC crowd. It's surreal. Every damn one of them are dangerous psychotics who would kill you if you disagree with them - if they could get away with it - which they can, in Israel.
Just ask the sailors on the USS Liberty.
They make the so-called "crazed Iranian mullahs" look rational - and the mullahs are, compared to Zionists. Even an Israeli think tank agreed with that assessment.
I don't pretend to be an expert, but I find that Jews are more temperate in smaller numbers. (I used to be orthodox.)
Which is to say, the more of them there are in a given place, the more likely they are to collectively brand somebody an anti-semite. Here in Ohio, for example, they love Obama just fine. In Brooklyn? He's fucking dead to them.
Yeah, Steve Sailer's a racist, but he's also a mindreader who knows that the self-loathing Michelle Obama has a stranglehold on her husband and will force him to "keep it real" in his second term. Seriously, the f%@king Klansman used "keep it real." He's so tuned in, "yo." What a cretin. That Ross Douthat defers to this shithead and actually links to it really reflects well on Douthat and the Atlantic. Maybe next Ross can link to the Klan directly and skip the middleman.
Obama is likely to offer a ME policy which is less accomodationist of Jewish settler chauvinism than Bush, Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton, or McCain. So it's not quite a smear to say that there is somewhat of difference netween the candidates on this issue.
otto says: "Obama is likely to offer a ME policy which is less accomodationist of Jewish settler chauvinism than Bush, Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton, or McCain. So it's not quite a smear to say that there is somewhat of difference netween the candidates on this issue."
If that "non-smear" were to say that he is "likely to offer a less accomodationist policy than Jewish settler chauvism" would prefer that's one thing. But that's not what the smears are saying, and you know it.
Osama's position is in lie with that of most Israelis. That's how it should be. Israel is a sovereign country fully able to handle its own problems.
Of course the smears are saying that Obama may hate the jews etc, etc, but that it of course how Jewish settler chauvinism defends itself in the US, by casual accusations of anti-semitism to cover up colonisation and ethnic cleansing, past and future.
And in fact of course most Israelis favour colonising East Jerusalem, keeping settlers there and in the West Bank etc. It could hardly be otherwise since all Israeli governments adopt the approach of expanding settlements in those places.
Israel is a sovereign state all right, but its policies are permanently infused with ethnic chauvinism, as a result it causes enormous negative externalities for the US, and it doesn't remotely 'handle its own problems' since it relies on the US blank check for its international political suppport. Under Obama, the check is likely to come with more conditions which may run contrary to the widespread chauvinism of many ordinary Israelis and their enablers in the US. And it is fear of that outcome which is prompting the current smear campaign
If HRC belonged to an Aryan Nation church would she be allowed off with the excuse that she disagreed with her "minister" about many things?
Of course not.
If she belonged to a group that gave a humanitarian award to Pinochet, would she be forced to denounce and resign?
Of course she would.
Obama supporters are willing to give him a pass on many things they condemn in others. They are not alone in this foolishness.
But it is simply unreasonable to expect the rest of the world to accept the Obama cult standards. It may be unfair and hypocritical but it is Democratic.
Obama will be hammered on his "friend, advisor, and minister", a vocal antiSemite, and he should be. It is notable that Wright has just resigned his ministry at Trinity.
Now Obama must reject and renounce Wright. It is not just Jews who will be troubled by Wright thought once they know of it.
Obama had no trouble embracing openly homophobic black ministers. Criticism was deemed racist and then Obama made a hypocritical speech. And he was given a pass.
Now Obama has the same problem with his affinity for antiSemites. I very much doubt he'll be able to play the race card and get away with it again.
But maybe if he starts singing Kumbaya in Yiddish...
Re Richard Steven Hack
Mr. Hack is really an amusing fellow, labeling others as psychotic. Talk about tossing stones from glass houses. Most people would consider somebody who commits armed bank robbery to be rather less then mentally normal, to say the least. In addition to Mr. Hacks' advocating the assassination of police officers which also does not demonstrate mental normality.
Re Jesse M
It should be noted that the Pipes column I linked to was a response to the criticism that he received from his original FrontPageMag article. Thus, the link supplied by Mr. Jesse M is inapplicable as it does not refer to the linked Pipes column.
If this is the way people like SLC treat their friends and benefactors, I'd hate to see how they treat their enemies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte
SLC,
So if the entire Muslim world regards Obama as an apostate, you should have no trouble coming up with an example of an actual Muslim saying this? And if the entire Muslim world wants Obama dead, wouldn't he be the most anti-Muslim president ever?
Just to balance my previous comments relative to Senator Obama, attached is a column from noted Chamberlainist M. J. Rosenberg, which has also appeared in the Jerusalem Post.
http://web.israelinsider.com/views/12674.htm
Obama will be hammered on his "friend, advisor, and minister", a vocal antiSemite, and he should be. It is notable that Wright has just resigned his ministry at Trinity.
You know what the problem is? Barring some knowledge of Wright that I don't possess your anti-semitism snipe hunt has defined nearly everyone on the planet outside the loudly zionist community as anti-semitic which means that 99% of the population of earth are Jew hating crazies. If that's true I guess you are in big trouble. If, rather more likely, you are not correct you are delusional and crazy and no one has to listen to you.
Re Ed Marshall
Reverend Wright is an asshole buddy of Louis Farrakhan. Birds of a feather flock together.
SLC, like you even believe that Obama is religious. That's not your problem with the man and it's not worth even engaging the argument (which is on it's own merit's pathetic, the horror, the horror). He doesn't sing Hativka in your key and that's not a great argument so you are going to pull out black bogeymen and wave them around through whatever tangent can be arranged and it's risible and foul.
Seth, Seth, Seth, my Atlantic bro Seth,
Ah dogs. The dogs. Strip them clean and place them lovingly in a nice poppyseed bun, the one with the crisp clean snap, that delicious flavor - that's the Chicago dog; that flabby, mushy, tasteless tube of, well you know, with the giant ego, that's the NY dog.
And yeah, I've had NY pizza, it's called Dominos Extra Crispy.
But you're right on Grossman, you all the win points on Rex Grossman, sigh. O for the Bears of '85.
So SLC wants to murder all Palestinians using "Hama Rules" as he constantly repeats all the time here.
I'll take a bank robber over a genocidal psychotic Zionist any time.
Nothing irrational about a bank robber who robs banks because "that's where the money is", as Willie Sutton put it.
Besides, I never claimed "mental normality" since 1) I don't care to impress people of SLC's ilk, and 2) "mental normality" apparently includes assholes like George Bush since he got elected President. Who wants that kind of "normality"?
As someone once said, "Sanity is vastly over-rated."
As someone else once said, "Insanity is but the first step in becoming that which I am."
Cal writes:
"But the kind [of Jews] that don't care for Obama at all because of his advisers and the belief that he's pro-Palestinian appear to be dominant in Florida, New York, and New Jersey, where Obama lost by 40 or 50 points in that particular category. In other states, I didn't notice any particular preference--as upscale voters, they tended to vote for Obama. So Florida's clearly the state where it makes a difference."
Abe writes:
"Which is to say, the more of them there are in a given place, the more likely they are to collectively brand somebody an anti-semite. Here in Ohio, for example, they love Obama just fine. In Brooklyn? He's fucking dead to them."
Thank you. That's most informative and helpful. So, that suggests, although hardly proves, that Obama's financial base among Midwestern Jewish fundraisers, like his finance chairwoman, Mrs. Pritzker, will be less likely to get in the way of a sensible solution in the Holy Land of the kind that Matt endorses rather while Hillary's financial base in the New York Area would tend to be more obstructive. That sounds like good news, assuming Obama gets elected.
You have to sort through a lot of non-informative comments on this site, but it is good to know that there still are commenters who answer honest questions honestly in order to add value to the discussion.
SLC wrote:
It should be noted that the Pipes column I linked to was a response to the criticism that he received from his original FrontPageMag article. Thus, the link supplied by Mr. Jesse M is inapplicable as it does not refer to the linked Pipes column.
Pipes' entire case in his response is that since Obama occasionally accompanied his father to mosque, that would be enough to brand him an "occasionally practicing Muslim". Do you really think most Muslims have such loose criteria that they'll judge someone a Muslim for attending a Mosque with a relative? Does Pipes provide any evidence whatsoever that any actual Muslims argue this way? Do you have any reason for believing this to be true?
Thank you. That's most informative and helpful. So, that suggests, although hardly proves, that Obama's financial base among Midwestern Jewish fundraisers, like his finance chairwoman, Mrs. Pritzker, will be less likely to get in the way of a sensible solution in the Holy Land of the kind that Matt endorses rather while Hillary's financial base in the New York Area would tend to be more obstructive. That sounds like good news, assuming Obama gets elected.
You have to sort through a lot of non-informative comments on this site, but it is good to know that there still are commenters who answer honest questions honestly in order to add value to the discussion.
And you believe this is true for no other reason than an offhand comment by Abe? Are you sure you aren't judging his response "honest" merely because it agrees with a prior hunch of yours (i.e. confirmation bias)? It would be helpful to get an actual opinion survey of, say, NY Jews on the subject of Israel/Palestine (or on Obama) before jumping to the conclusion that they are largely hawkish Likud supporter types. This survey of American Jews mentions that 54% support the establishment of a Palestinian state while 38% disapprove (and this page shows midwestern Jews make up a relatively small percentage of U.S. Jews).
Comments closed March 14, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
No Matt Ylgesias signature??!
Posted by MNPundit | February 29, 2008 5:57 PM