There is a particularly ugly email circulating called “A Pilot’s Perspective on Obama” where the anonymous author questions Barack’s ties to the white community and his ability to attend private schools. The smear also includes some innuendos implying that Barack is Muslim and questioning his ties to Rezko. The following is one response to this email.
From New York Times
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, injecting himself directly into the presidential campaign, forcefully denounced on Friday what he called a “whisper campaign” linking Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, to Islam.
Speaking before a crucial constituency in the coming election, Jewish voters, in the pivotal state of Florida, Mr. Bloomberg said that rumors of Mr. Obama secretly being a Muslim represent “wedge politics at its worst, and we have to reject it - loudly, clearly and unequivocally.”
“Let’s call those rumors what they are: lies,” said Mr. Bloomberg, who has been mentioned as a potential running mate for both Mr. Obama and Senator John McCain, the likely Republican nominee.
You may have had a chance to see a video in which Sean Hannity of Fox News tries to paint Senator Barack Obama as anti-Israel on the grounds that he knows Prof. Rashid Khalidi, currently the Director of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University.
Here are a few things that Hannity hides from us in this video: (more…)
There are so many things wrong with the attacks leveled against Senator Barack Obama because of his relationship with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright and the Trinity Universal Church of Christ that it is hard to know where to begin a discussion of them.
By Lincoln Mitchel
June 9, 2008 - Now that the Democratic Primary is finally and definitively over, we will probably begin to hear even more about Barack Obama’s relationship, even his problem, with Jewish voters. Barack does have a problem with Jewish voters–there aren’t enough of them. Lost in all the noise about Obama’s supposed problems winning Jewish support, is that the latest polls show him winning this group by a margin of almost 2-1. If this constitutes a problem, Obama should wish for such problems with Christian and other voters as well.
The RJC today are amplifying an editorial flourish in a Reuters headline:
On Wednesday, Barack Obama committed that “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided” in his speech before the AIPAC policy conference. On Thursday, Barack Obama backtracked on this position and reversed it… Barack Obama on Thursday announced in an interview with CNN’s Candy Crowley that “obviously, it’s going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues. And Jerusalem will be a part of these negotiations.”
Jerusalem is quite an emotional issue on all sides and it did at first sound like “code” for moving the American Embassy from Tel-aviv to Jerusalem, which might undermine final status negotiations of the two-state solution Obama discussed immediately prior to the remark. Some people heard “Kick out the Arabs,” while others heard “Don’t build a Berlin Wall.”
Let me be clear: Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive, and that allows them to prosper — but any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized, defensible borders. And Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.
Jake Tapper of ABC summarized this the best today on ABC News blog: (more…)
Washington, D.C. (June 6, 2008) — In a surprise move, the Republican Jewish Coalition today released a statement containing not a single lie, distortion, baseless slander, or half-truth about Senator Barack Obama.
In April 2008, a top Hamas Adviser, Ahmed Yousef, told a radio interviewer that Hamas liked Senator Barack Obama and hoped he would win the U.S. presidential election. Senator Obama’s detractors immediately branded him the “Hamas candidate for President,” claiming that the Hamas “endorsement” somehow proved that Senator Obama would not be tough enough in the fight against terrorism.
It turns out, however, that Hamas had one thing in common with the people using them to attack Obama — they had not actually taken the time to understand Senator Obama’s stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. When Obama reiterated that stance in a speech to AIPAC on June 4, Hamas apparently caught his speech on TV and didn’t like what he had to say, because they responded as follows:
“Obama’s comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the U.S. administration’s foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict,” Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza.
“The Democratic and Republican parties support totally the Israeli occupation at the expense of the interests and rights of Arabs and Palestinians,” he said.
“Hamas does not differentiate between the two presidential candidates, Obama and Mccain, because their policies regarding the Arab-Israel conflict are the same and are hostile to us, therefore we do have no preference and are not wishing for either of them to win,” Zuhri said.
How embarrassing for Hamas to have to withdraw their endorsement! All the other terrorists must be snickering at them behind their backs. They could have spared themselves the trouble by taking the time to read about Obama’s stance on Israel in his own words.
Senator Barack Obama’s detractors frequently claim that he has offered nothing concrete to back up his calls for “change” in Washington. In reality, Senator Obama has published excruciatingly detailed policies and positions on pretty much every important issue you can think of, all of which can be easily located and viewed on his Web site. In fact, Senator Obama’s published policies and positions are far more complete and detailed than those of Senator John McCain. For example, while Senator Obama has explained in detail his positions on Israel, Senator McCain’s Web site says nothing on this topic.
Senator Obama’s foreign policy plan, in particular, is exceedingly detailed. Too detailed to repeat here, in fact, but you can read all about it here. Here’s a little taste:
“When I am this party’s nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq; or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; or that I supported Bush-Cheney policies of not talking to leaders that we don’t like. And he will not be able to say that I wavered on something as fundamental as whether or not it is ok for America to torture because it is never ok… I will end the war in Iraq… I will close Guantanamo. I will restore habeas corpus. I will finish the fight against Al Qaeda. And I will lead the world to combat the common threats of the 21st century: nuclear weapons and terrorism; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. And I will send once more a message to those yearning faces beyond our shores that says, “You matter to us. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.”
— Barack Obama, Des Moines, Iowa, November 10, 2007
Senator Barack Obama’s detractors claim that he opposes declaring the Iranian Republican Guard a terrorist organization; they claim that this proves that Senator Obama is “soft” on Iran. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Senator Obama opposed the Kyl-Lieberman resolution declaring the Iranian Republican Guard a terrorist organization because the resolution also declared that the U.S. military in Iraq should be used to counter Iran, a proposition that Senator Obama does not support. In fact, Senator Obama cosponsored the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, which would designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organ, prohibit trade with Iran, freeze Iranian officials’ assets, and help combat terrorist financing. More information about Senator Obama’s stance on Iran is available on Senator Obama’s Web site.
You are currently browsing the Jews for Obama REACT! blog archives for June, 2008.