| Author | Message | | Automatic432 | |  | | smallaxe | | Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:01 pm Post subject: |
| | What can I say except US politics is in the sewer and Obama like Hilary has blown his chances! I DESPISE career politicians, they have no principles or ethics, it's all ME ME ME! Vote Me! Love Me! I'll quit smoking just so you can love ME! | | | | Shamgar | | Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:11 pm Post subject: |
| http://www.nysun.com/article/49626
Obama Will Seek To Convince Aipac That He Is a True Friend of Israel
By JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
March 2, 2007
Senator Obama of Illinois plans to use a speech Friday to convince skeptical Jewish voters that he is as reliable a supporter of Israel as any of the better-known contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination.
"He recognizes that he is fairly new to the national scene and fairly new to the issues the Jewish community is concerned about," an adviser to Mr. Obama, who asked not to be named, said. "People are curious and wondering where he stands on Israel. … This is an opportunity to just lay it all out."
Mr. Obama is to speak in Chicago at a forum arranged by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The venue was chosen so that the Illinois senator could be surrounded by Jewish Democrats who have backed him for years and say he is sensitive to the issues facing Israel.
One such supporter, Alan Solow, said he expects Mr. Obama to demonstrate that the first-term senator is as positive toward Israel as other presidential contenders. "I can't tell you if it will be different or the same as others. I certainly don't think it's going to be any weaker than what anybody else is saying," Mr. Solow, an attorney and chairman of the local Jewish Community Relations Council, said.
One area where Mr. Obama may show some individuality is on Iran, an issue that has tripped up several other Democratic hopefuls in recent weeks. "The kinds of communications that he would engage in and the pressure he envisions on Iran may differ in some respect from the other candidates," the adviser to Mr. Obama said.
At an Aipac dinner in Manhattan last month, Senator Clinton encountered some negativity when she mentioned her support for a direct dialogue between America and Iran, a position Mr. Obama shares. In recent days, the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2004, John Edwards, got into hot water for talking about the possibility of a nonaggression pact with Iran. In a less-noticed comment, another hopeful, Governor Richardson of New Mexico, told MSNBC that a nonaggression treaty is "an option" for resolving the dispute over Iran's nuclear ambitions.
http://www.nysun.com/article/49626?page_no=2
Obama Will Seek To Convince Aipac That He Is a True Friend of Israel
By JOSH GERSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun
March 2, 2007
[Continued from page 1 of 2]
The chief Washington correspondent for an Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz, said yesterday that Mr. Obama is making the Chicago speech to assure Jewish donors that he is an acceptable choice. "I don't think his real motive is to win votes. It's, of course, Jewish money. In the Democratic Party, Jewish philanthropy plays a significant role," the journalist, Shmuel Rosner, said.
A panel of Israeli opinion leaders regularly surveyed by Mr. Rosner often gives Mr. Obama lower ratings than other Democrats, a showing the journalist attributed to the Illinois senator's short track record. He said Mr. Obama's team is aware of this skittishness and hopes to extinguish it with Friday's speech. The address is being prepared by the Illinois senator's main foreign policy adviser, Mark Lippert, and a former Senate aide who advises Mr. Obama on the Middle East, Daniel Shapiro.
Mr. Obama's record and past statements on Israel are fairly consistent with those of other prominent Democrats. He has condemned terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah while also criticizing the Bush administration for not doing enough to promote a peace accord between Israel and Palestinian Arab leaders.
" Israel wants more than anything to live in peace with their neighbors, but Israel also has real and very dangerous enemies," the senator told Ha'aretz recently.
Mr. Obama opposed the Iraq war from the outset and suggests at campaign rallies that he is the most authentic anti-war candidate. While his unabashed anti-war stance may turn off some hawkish Jews, it could burnish his appeal with most Jewish voters. A recent retabulation of Gallup polls taken over the past two years found that 89% of Jewish Democrats called the Iraq war a mistake. Given overall trends in public opinion, the current measure of Jewish opposition to the war could be even higher.
Mrs. Clinton's camp, as has become its custom, tried to upstage Mr. Obama yesterday by announcing the New York senator's sponsorship of a congressional resolution calling for the release of three Israeli soldiers captured by terrorist groups last year.
An aide to Mr. Obama said the senator met with the mother of one of the soldiers earlier this week. The Illinois senator promised to keep the plight of the missing soldiers in the spotlight and plans to follow through by raising the issue during his speech on Friday, the aide said. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:22 am Post subject: |
| From: "Jeffrey Blankfort"
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:38:07 -0800
Subject: Obama seeks anointment as Zioinist Puppet No. 1
"On Israel's security: "Our job is to rebuild the road to real peace and lasting security throughout the region. That effort begins with a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel: Our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That will always be my starting point."
"It is no secret that Jewish money plays a big role in the Democratic Party. "They don't have the number [of voters], but have the means to get the voters," a prominent Democratic operative told me last week. That's why I told the told the NY Sun that "I don't think his real motive is to win votes. It's, of course, Jewish money." Will he get it? Here's one clue. Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida is going to co-chair Barack Obama's White House drive in the state. And why would Wexler do such thing? Because "I have spoken with Barack to discuss the dangers facing our ally Israel, and I am convinced there will be no stronger supporter of Israel than President Obama", his statement says."
We all know that money has long perverted our election process to the point that it might be beyond repair, but when it is has been done and done repeatedly in behalf of a foreign nation, Israel, the American people need to be informed about it without any punches being pulled. What we are dealing with a fifth column that is so powerful that it doesn't even have to disguise its insidious operations, confident that the fear of being smeared as "anti-semites" will silence its critics. -JB
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtml?itemNo=832667&contrassID=25&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=1&listSrc=Y&art=1
Ha'aretz.
Rosner's Blog
Shmuel Rosner Chief U.S. Correspondent
March 2, 2007
Obama supports Israel. Period.
Barack Obama's big speech on Israel is now over, and as expected, the candidate made no secret of his support and dedication to the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel. "My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction," were Obama's words to Haaretz last week. Today, he sounded as strong as Clinton, as supportive as Bush, as friendly as Giuliani. At least rhetorically, Obama passed any test anyone might have wanted him to pass. So, he is pro-Israel. Period.
Iran
"The kinds of communications that he would engage in and the pressure he envisions on Iran may differ in some respect from the other candidates," an adviser to Barack Obama told the NY Sun yesterday. And in the speech he made today, in Chicago, Obama showed his cards. He was clear, but not as tough as Edwards' "Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons" or Clinton's "we cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons."
Here's what Obama said: "The world must work to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons."
As I wrote for Slate last week, I don't believe there's a big difference between Democrats and Republicans in regards to Iran-policy. Nevertheless, Obama today sounded somewhat different, more cautious, than the 2004 Obama I quoted at the end of that Slate piece: "In light of the fact that we're now in Iraq, with all the problems in terms of perceptions about America that have been created, us launching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in ... On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse. So I guess my instinct would be to err on not having those weapons in the possession of the ruling clerics of Iran."
Speech
On engaging Iran: "We need the United States to lead tough-minded diplomacy. This includes direct engagement with Iran similar to the meetings we conducted with the Soviets at the height of the Cold War."
On stopping Iran: "Tough-minded diplomacy would include real leverage through stronger sanctions. It would mean more determined U.S diplomacy at the United Nations. It would mean harnessing the collective power of our friends in Europe who are Iran's major trading partners. It would mean a cooperative strategy with Gulf States who supply Iran with much of the energy resources it needs. It would mean unifying those states to recognize the threat of Iran and increase pressure on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment. It would mean full implementation of U.S. sanctions laws. And over the long term, it would mean a focused approach from us to finally end the tyranny of oil, and developing our own alternative sources of energy to drive the price of oil down."
On Iraq and Israel: "A consequence of the Administration's failed strategy in Iraq has been to strengthen Iran's strategic position; reduce U.S. credibility and influence in the region; and place Israel and other nations friendly to the United States in greater peril."
On American aid to Israel: "We must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs."
On diplomacy: "Our job is to do more than lay out another road map."
On Israel's security: "Our job is to rebuild the road to real peace and lasting security throughout the region. That effort begins with a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel: Our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That will always be my starting point."
On the Palestinian leadership: "We should all be concerned about the agreement negotiated among Palestinians in Mecca last month."
On U.S. mediation: "We should never seek to dictate what is best for the Israelis and their security interests. No Israeli prime minister should ever feel dragged to or blocked from the negotiating table by the United States" - or is that about Syria?
Rivals
Is he really as friendly to Israel as any other candidate? Yesterday, writing about Clinton and Edwards, I mentioned the fact that "the constant interest in, and the open sympathy for, Israeli affairs that is required of all important elected officials in the most Jewish of states in the U.S. has had its effect on" Clinton and Giuliani, The Israel Factor favorites. Obama doesn't have this advantage. He isn't from New York and, more importantly, is relatively new to the public sphere.
Money
It is no secret that Jewish money plays a big role in the Democratic Party. "They don't have the number [of voters], but have the means to get the voters," a prominent Democratic operative told me last week. That's why I told the told the NY Sun that "I don't think his real motive is to win votes. It's, of course, Jewish money." Will he get it? Here's one clue. Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida is going to co-chair Barack Obama's White House drive in the state. And why would Wexler do such thing? Because "I have spoken with Barack to discuss the dangers facing our ally Israel, and I am convinced there will be no stronger supporter of Israel than President Obama", his statement says. It "appears as Obama plans a big day on March 25 of fundraising in Florida, where he will be looking for help from the Jewish Democratic donor community", writes Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun Times today.
Conclusion
So, did Obama achieve his goal? Sorry, but I will have to repeat here what I wrote just a week ago. It is as true today as it was then: "After talking to people about him all week, I can tell you this: They very much want to be persuaded that Obama should win their backing, as they all understand the excitement and enthusiasm surrounding his candidacy and the importance of Obama adding his voice to the camp of Israel supporters. With such an attitude, it is relatively easy to be convinced." | | | | Alpha | | | | Edithann | | Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject: |
| Didn't take him long to sell out...I guess he was waiting to up the stakes..
Anyway, he's another off my list of those with possible integrity...he's proven he has non..
There has to be a better way of governing..But then, have we ever seen a government that's worked?
I don't know about Sweden or Norway, but they never seem to have problems..I think the secret is homogeneity...except isn't that what Israel is striving for? So how come there isn't any calm within the Jewish state??
Maybe they can't be any better than the rest of us...and that 'Light Unto Nations' is a load of YKW!
I always thought that 'Light onto Nations' bit was so presumptuous...
especially when one studies their history...but then, they were never known to be introspective...only lies, more lies and lots of propaganda...
All food for thought!
TATA | | | | harrietbuster | | Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:15 pm Post subject: |
| Don't worry tata...you can still write-in "Osama Bin laden"
 | | | | Edithann | | Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:32 pm Post subject: |
| Well I bet Osama is more democratic than any ISRANAZI/JEW could ever be...haven't you decided to give us that Pariah group yet?
I see you missed me...I bet I'm the 'Shiksa' you couldn't bring home to mother....
TATA | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: |
| General (Ret) James David (who is mentioned on the cover of former Republican Congressman Paul Findley's 'They Dare to Speak Out' book) wrote the following:
Republicans and democrats have little in common, but when it comes to courting the Jewish vote you couldn't distinguish one from the other. Both parties know how to spell "political suicide." Unequivocal support of Israel may be in the best interest of our politicians but, in the end, the American people will pay the price. We see it happening today. When will America wake up?
THE ROAD TO 2008 / WEEK IN REVIEW | ajc.com
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/printedition/2007/03/04/natpolcol0304a.html
Obama makes pitch to Jewish voters
Sen. Barack Obama told an audience in Chicago that he considers Iran "one of the greatest threats to the United States, Israel and world peace" and pledged he would try to end that nation's uranium enrichment program. He suggested that the danger has grown. "One of the most profound consequences of the administration's failed strategy in Iraq has been to strengthen Iran's strategic position, reduce U.S. credibility and influence in the region, and place Israel and other nations friendly to the United States in greater peril," Obama told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. | | | | Alpha | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
