Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Enough political correctness: Obama is bad for the Jews!

As I listened to Israel Radio's 5:00 AM news magazine in the shower this morning, I heard that Malcolm Hoenlein, the Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said that the theme of 'change' in this year's American Presidential elections could be harmful to Israel:
"All the talk about change, but without defining what that change should be, is an opening for all kind of mischief," Hoenlein said at a press conference in Jerusalem.
Hoenlein didn't immediately mention any candidates by name. He didn't have to. It was clear to everyone whom he was talking about.
Hoenlein was careful to stress, "It's not the candidates themselves we are concerned about," pointing out that Obama, like the other major candidates, has signed on to found a national committee to celebrate Israel's 60th anniversary in the U.S.

"Of course Obama has plenty of Jewish supporters and there are many Jews around him," Hoenlein said. "But there is a legitimate concern over the zeitgeist around the campaign."

He also cited the fact that Obama has criticized his rival, Democratic candidate Senator Hillary Clinton, for her vote in favor of including the Iranian Republican Guards in the list of terror organizations.

The U.S. Jewish leader warned the American presidential campaign could signal a shift toward declining U.S. support for Israel.

"Support for Israel is at an all-time high, [but] our polling suggests that as broad as the support is, it is also thin, and most Americans see Israel as a dark and militaristic place," he said.

He termed the current election season "transitional" and said that it "could bring about a shift in the political life."
Obama's criticism of Hillary Clinton for voting to classify the 'Guards' as a terrorist organization is just the latest in a series of actions that taken alone might not mean anything, but taken together point to a level of indifference and potential hostility to Israel not seen in the White House since the Carter administration. Those actions include the following:
  1. The dispatch of his chief foreign policy adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, to Damascus yesterday, as reported in full by Debbie Schlussel, just the latest episode in his embrace of the State sponsors of terror in Iran and Syria.

  2. His continued embrace of Harvard radical Samantha Power, who in the aftermath of the phony 'massacre' in Jenin in 2002 was upset that the New York Times did not headline 'war crimes' after Human Rights Watch found that no 'massacre' occurred.

  3. His embrace of other foreign policy advisers who are known to be hostile to Israel, like Anthony Lake and Susan Rice, and the latent anti-Semite Robert Malley.

  4. His strong support for 'Palestinian rights,' which took a back seat out of necessity when he ran for the Senate from Illinois, a state with a relatively large and politically active Jewish population, but which is in all likelihood still a part of his political make-up and would be a part of White House policy in an Obama administration.

  5. His continued embrace of groups like the Sojourners and his choice of Jeremiah Wright as his pastor and religious adviser.

  6. His speech to the National Jewish Democratic Council about the need for a 'tough discussion' with Israel about working toward a 'two-state solution.'

  7. His apparent embrace of Latin American radical Ernesto Che Guevara, who in 1964 (before there was an 'occupation') denounced 'imperialist' support of Israel.
Hoenlein is too politically correct to come out and say it outright, but I will: Barack Hussein Obama is bad for the Jews. And that's not an endorsement of Hillary Clinton either. But with this much smoke coming out of Obama's campaign, there has to be a fire, and that fire doesn't love Jews or Israel. If American Jewry cannot overcome its knee-jerk liberal tendency to vote for Obama because is the Democratic candidate, a disaster could befall all of us.

16 Comments:

At 12:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Forget about 'bad for the Jews' for a minute.

Just look at what you listed. It's bad for America. Period!

And if anyone hasn't seen these yet, wise up:

Obama's Accomplishments (1)

Obama's Accomplishments (2)

But what's good for America? McCain?

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

America's choice is like Israel having to choose between Olmert, Barak and Peres.

Nothing good for the world will come out of these elections. Universal stupid voters unite!

 
At 2:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

On the contrary, it's excellent for the Jews. It's like that horrible medicine or that dreaded painful surgery that one would rather not have but nows that it is necessary to bring about the cure.

 
At 3:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hoenlein backtracks.

Stupid Jews.

 
At 6:34 PM, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Hi Carl,

A vote for Obama is a vote for CHANGE! So who wouldn't want change, exactly?

Obama stands for CHANGE more than any candidate ever did in the history of the world. That alone is the reason he should be worshipped!

CHANGE!

/

In truth I wholeheartedly agree with every word you wrote.

 
At 6:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree. The situation stinks. Time for a change.

 
At 1:45 AM, Blogger Orde said...

Ha! and McCain's status quo on steroids is not bad for the Jews!?!

(@shy guy, what's good for America, and Israel, is Mike Huckabee! McCain and the establishment after goofing w/Giuliani, Fred, and Mitt, are now bolstering McCain saying it's a mathematical impossibility for anyone but McCain to win the nomination--but, what they are not telling the people is that McCain (1) has to win 50% of all remaining delegates (over all the others combined) to get the nomination, and (2) there's only one, count it, one, more winner-take-all state, a tiny one, the others will split their delegates. So, McCain's chances of avoiding a brokered convention aren't all that we've been led to believe...and don't get me started on how unelectable he is in facing the young, articulate, less-entrenched, less-reminding-the-people of the same-old-same-old, Obama. He can't win.)

 
At 8:45 AM, Blogger kronik said...

Stemir: I definitely disagree, that is somewhat like saying it is good for Israel to be attacked so they can wake up(then again look at Sderot, ugh). You think the US of A gives too much money to the Pali's? Wait until B. Hussein Obama becomes Commander-in-Chief...

Orde: Well, they bashed Huckabee(most so called conservatives) and now you get McCain. I know Huckabee would be a great friend to Israel, he is not a Catholic... Just look at the flattering posts CiJ initially posted about him, but now he has a chance to be President and judging from his posts on LGF, it seems CiJ is leery of him, and I think it it because he is a Christian, unfortunately (correct me I'm wrong, Carl).

OTOH, the Jewish people have every right to be leery considering what the Roman Catholic Church and even Protestants did to them in the past.

I'm in the process of reading Dave Hunt's book - A Woman Rides the Beast: The Roman Catholic Church and the last days. The Roman Catholic Church still believes that Israel belongs to them.

Now that I'm finished going off-topic :) I'll say that McCain is a far better choice than Hillary or Obama and it is utter foolishness to not vote to punish the republican party. Whoever does so is a fool unless there is a non-negotiable moral issue in which they are handcuffed from voting. Please do not sit out unless the above applies to you!

BTW, I voted Huckabee and prefer him, although McCain can sway the moderates and Independents far better IMO thus a better chance to win the general election.

 
At 8:48 AM, Blogger Barack Hussein Obama BAD for Israel said...

Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright’s intimate relationship with Barak Obama should be very concerning for any person who supports America's greatest ally in the middle east, Israel. Obama originally invited Rev Wright to deliver the invocation when he announced his candidacy for president, but personally retracted the invitation at the last minute when advised that there could be a backlash from supporters of Israel(New York Times).

Following from CBS quoting the New York Times:
Wright also told The New York Times in an interview published March 6: "When his (Obama's) enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli" with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan to visit Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, "a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell."

In conclusion, it is possible that Obama has completely opposite views than his “spiritual leader” but many find that hard to believe. With that said, his allegiance to Israel is at best questionable.

 
At 11:39 AM, Blogger Carl in Jerusalem said...

Kronik,

My hesitations about Huckabee are not because he is a Christian, but because in so many ways he strikes me as a liberal in conservative clothing. Look at some of the stuff I wrote about him in early December here and here. If Huckabee were the Republican nominee, I would vote for him.

But it looks like McCain is going to be the Republican nominee, and while that's far from ideal (to put it mildly), I do not plan to sit home and let Obama or Clinton become President. Of course, if Condi ends up on the ticket, I might reconsider.

 
At 12:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kronik: "I'll say that McCain is a far better choice than Hillary or Obama and it is utter foolishness to not vote to punish the republican party."

---------------------------

I see only a minimal difference between Clinton and McCain. I don't trust McCain to uphold the few vague conservative commitments he's pledged to adhere to. And they are few! And McCain's flippant, just like Kerry was.

It's not to punish the RP. It's to save the RP from an even greater calamity in any following elections, by letting Hillary run the country into the ground rather than McCain, who will do the same.

Obama is a different story. He's a squeaky faced nobody with dangerous tendencies and associations.

But if Rice becomes McCain's running mate, and they wind up squaring off against Obama, then I really don't know what I'd do.

I've mentioned this elsewhere: don't we dual Israeli/US citizens get the feeling that the Republican and Democratic parties have shifted left much like Israel's Likud/Kadimah and Labor parties?

Personally, I'm for a blog initiated united campaign to vote for and promote an independent candidate. Someone has to pick up the batton and run with it.

 
At 5:06 PM, Blogger Orde said...

McCain is way more offensive, and therefore unelectable, to the Democrats than Huckabee--and not because Huckabee's more liberal, his record is anything but, but because McCain's recently gotten a lot of support from establishment Republicans that Democrats are really sick of--and his indebtedness to them for it is already showing since just yesterday he flip-flopped his position on waterboarding and voted to support Bush's position.

Can you imagine the contrast of a vibrant Obama vs. an inarticulate, McCain who reads off cue cards, and on top of his age had surgery to remove type II malignant melanoma from his head--so there's always that doubt in people's mind, too.

Huckabee would be perceived as "change" because he's not an insider, plus he's had executive experience. Outside of Washington insider states and winner-take-all states McCain's not been able to get the 50% of delegates he now needs to avoid a brokered convention. People need to pull behind Huckabee now. McCain's best states are over.

 
At 6:41 PM, Blogger kronik said...


My hesitations about Huckabee are not because he is a Christian, but because in so many ways he strikes me as a liberal in conservative clothing.


I'm glad to hear it Carl, but I wouldn't blame you at all if you were leery because of his religion. * The fact the last Southern Baptist we had was Jimmy Carter...yea, now I can clearly see it :) But, I'll take your word for it, he (huckabee) really is liberal in some area's, but those area's don't seem to dictate how much of a friend he would be to Israel IMO, nonetheless it is good of you to think how good he will be to this country as well. :)

*In fact, the book I mentioned I was reading is giving me a guilt trip as I'm reading what the Roman Catholic Church did to the Jewish people whom I love, I'm a Christian[Independent Baptist]-- never been a Catholic, but what these people did in "the name of Christ" is horrific. I knew about the Crusades and a little about the inquisitions but there is much more.

to All: Listen, I'm glad McCain is the nominee, not one conservative candidate would win this election. This country is tired of war, tired of the gas prices, and tired of recession. If you think another real conservative has a chance in hell to win, you are dead wrong.

I estimate Barack Obama in 4 years would tear this country down, especially our military more then what Clinton did in 8 years. Oh, and to those saying McCain=Clinton, don't you know Clinton is probably not going to be the nominee? After all, Obama is the new JFK...

 
At 9:40 AM, Blogger Orde said...

kronik,
McCain is not the nominee.
As you may know, but in case you don't, Jimmy Carter has not been a Southern Baptist for a very long time.
Huckabee is in no way a liberal--100% rating pro-life; pro-2nd ammendment; strongly pro-10th ammendment (federalism, states rights--i.e., a Constitutionalist!); wants to get rid of the IRS! (fair tax instead); refuses to yield any Israeli land; staunchly pro-sovereignty (first candidate to oppose sovereignty Law of Sea Treaty, for ex; not in CFR; not a globalist, yet not an isolationist); strongest position (backed by signed pledge) on immigration of any candidate; advocate of school choice (public, private, or homeschooling); determined to get energy independence within 10 years; conservative on gay special rights; etc. Of all the candidates, Huckabee has the most fiscally sound campaign--no loans, no debt--this is a clear illustration of his leading by personal example, practicing what he preaches.

If you don't like Huckabee, fine, but don't base it on a lie (that he's a liberal is a flat-out lie) or the lie that McCain is the nominee; he might eventually be, but now he is not. If it goes to a brokered convention all bets are off because most delegates of dropped out candidates are unbound!

 
At 1:09 AM, Blogger kronik said...

Orde,

Where did I say he is a liberal? I said I believe he holds some liberal positions like pardoning way too many criminals for my taste. I could even be wrong on that. I did say I voted for Huckabee and he is my #1 choice. I like him, but I don't see him winning the general election but I do see him carrying the south. You are correct about McCain not being the nominee (yet) but have you looked at the delegate count? You treat Huckabee(whom I really like) as an Obama supporter, ie. he is your messiah. The Messiah won't come back on AirForce 1 btw.

BTW, you bring up many great points that I had not even knew of because the whole conservative blogosphere hates the guy, with much prejudice since he holds a Bible in his hand. He also took for heat for suggesting that the Mormons believe Christ and Satan are brothers, but anyone who knows a tad of Mormon theology knows this is true, at least according to Joseph $mith.

Orde, I love the fact you support Huckabee and are so brazen to support him even on sites in which so called conservatives punish him daily and possibly they swayed me a bit. I do wish you had never left LGF,though. Again, we both like Huckabee as our #1 and clearly you are more knowledgeable on his positions than I. Keep up the good work, but looking at the delegate count it does not seem too likely.

Much Respect to you Orde,
Daniel

 
At 9:11 PM, Blogger Orde said...

Daniel, you ask "Where did I say he is a liberal?" and so I rhetorically ask you, "Where did I say you said he is a liberal?"--HA! teasing, my point is there was/is a false Huck-is-a-liberal lie started and still out there that is tainting perceptions. I was exhorting you and anyone not to base any anti-Huckabee decision on this Huck-is-a-liberal lie, wherever the origin. I got the impression you'd been influenced by this due to the italicized portion of your post that said: "My hesitations about Huckabee are not because he is a Christian, but because in so many ways he strikes me as a liberal in conservative clothing." Perhaps you were just quoting someone else , don't know, but I'm just saying the truth is that the liberal rumor doesn't check out.

As for Huckabee's Mormon suggestion (yes, true) excerpted from a long interview, it was a dumb foot-in-mouth thing for Huckabee to say (along w/a few other careless things), but (1) it's trivial, and (2) he seems to have learned the lesson of guarding his mouth from careless words that could be lifted, misrepresented, etc.

Re: your concern about "pardons" and "parole", the soft-on-crime lie floating, Huck, who's carried out the death penalty 16 times, responds to it at the 3:48 point in this CNN video, and specifically rebuts the Wayne Dumond Incident here.

I do not appreciate the false accusation that I treat Huckabee as my messiah, my support for Huckabee is only a small part of my life and is consistent with my faith in the real Messiah, not a replacement. I support separation of church and state, but not to the extreme of disengagement with culture and having my own voice suppressed among the others. Many in Christendom are obsessed with politics for religious reasons due to faulty replacement/covenant theology--I am not one of them, and actally spend more time fighting that than supporting Huckabee. I do, however, absolutely believe Huckabee is the only presidential candidate that will change our anti-Israel, Islamofascist-abetting foreign policy, but that doesn't make him the messiah, stop jumping to conclusions.

Enough with the lame delegate count lie, too--don't worry, not your lie, but the lie that influenced you to mention the count--Huckabee and the other nonMcCain candidates only have to get enough delegates to push a brokered convention, that's it, where Huck will compete for the unbound delegates (including most of Romney's--yep, unbound). If he wins Texas, then a string of support at the end could influence the brokered convention. (Reagan beat Ford, the establishment choice, by brokered convention.)
Best regards, just obeying my conscience leaving results to God,
Orde

 
At 11:25 PM, Blogger OnTheBall said...

Yes..Obama is VERY bad and will always be bad for the Jews. And that's why we love him!!!
Go world Peace!

And what's so wrong about him wanting to give the Palestinians rights? Thats not the problem here. But I'll tell you what IS the problem. Giving ISRAEL rights. You give them a hand and they take the whole damn arm, killing innocent women and children everyday for the sake of their 'protection'. Protection from what? The Palestinians have NOTHING! Only these harmless cheap rockets, and stones. It was the Palestinians land in the first place ANYWAY. Oh but wait, you want to claim you guys are the "chosen ones from God and the land, 'historically, was yours first'." Hey, Mexico and the Native Americans can say the same exact thing to America. Do you see Mexicans or Native Americans bombing us, pushing us out of America, while making the world feel sorry for them everyday with movies of white men shooting Indian tribes?? ( How many Holocaust movies are there? Too many to damn count, at least one every damn 6 months, get over it already.)

Point is, Obama will bring peace by stopping Israel's evil cast over the world. Go OBAMA!!!!!!!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google