Why I wouldn’t vote for Obama.
By Ted Belman
My post Obama will win the nomination but lose the election got a lot of attention and caused quite a stir. It informed about his views on Israel, his church and its connection to SABEEL and Farrakhan, his pastor, his statements in his book and his association with the Palestinian cause and much more.
I got many emails accusing me of conducting a smear campaign, making arguments that were “nonsense” or “bullshit” and so on. Some attempted to convince me he was no different on Israel than the other candidates and was really a good guy.
Today, a new video of Pastor Wright delivering a sermon hit YouTube.
In it he said “Barak knows what it means to be a poor, black man in a country and culture controlled by rich white men”. He went on to draw a parallel with Jesus who was a “black man” in a country controlled by white men (Romans). And I thought Jesus was a white Jew.
This sermon, and all the others that we read about, preach the same message. It is enshrined in the mission statement of Trinity United Church of Christ which Wright heads and to which Obama belongs. The mission statement includes the following
-
“There is no denying, however, that a strand of radical black political theology influences Trinity [UCC]. James Cone, the pioneer of black liberation theology, is a much-admired figure at Trinity. Cone told me that when he’s asked where his theology is institutionally embodied, he always mentions Trinity. Cone’s groundbreaking 1969 book Black Theology and Black Power announced: “The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people. . . . All white men are responsible for white oppression. . . . Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil.’. . . Any advice from whites to blacks on how to deal with white oppression is automatically under suspicion as a clever device to further enslavement.”
ABC NEWS carried the story under the title, Obama’s Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11
WSJ just published a new article by Ron Kessler entitled Obama and the Minister. He draws the same conclusions I do.
It is too late for Obama to disavow such preachings. After all he chose this church twenty years ago and remained there ever since imbibing on the sermons. During this time he wrote two books which provide ample evidence that he shares such views. We set out a number of quotes in Obama: Why are the MSM and his opponents not on to it
-
“In Indonesia, I had spent two years at a Muslim school” “I studied the Koran..”
” I FOUND A SOLACE IN NURSING A PERVASIVE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE AND ANIMOSITY AGAINST MY MOTHER’S RACE”
“The emotion between the races could never be pure….. the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien, and apart.”
“I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites”
This is a church that honoured Louis Farrakhan.
You can decide whether that makes Obama a racist or at least prejudiced. America needs a president of all the people, one who is American first and colour blind. Wright in his sermon said “Obama doesn’t fit the mold”. I agree.
What’s more, Obama’s Church is Connected to Sabeel and Naim Ateek
-
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is troubled by the United Church of Christ’s continuing partnership with the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, a radicalized Palestinian Christian group whose leaders have openly questioned Israel’s right to exist.
In one of Wright’s sermons he said “we supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians, and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic.”
Beyond that, Ralph Nader, who hates Israel, said the Obama was always pro-Palestinian. He raised money for Palestinian causes and was friends with Edward Said.
So under no stretch could I believe that Obama is pro-Israel. At best he advocates “an even handed approach” which, as we know, is a euphemism for favouring the Palestinians.
It is a safe bet that Obama thinks that the Israel lobby is too strong as set out in The Israel Lobby. His crowd generally does. He didn’t hire Samantha Power, who embraces such view, for nothing. See Power is long gone but her views remain. In essence the book argues that America should shake itself lose from the lobby’s influence and act in America’s interests rather than Israel’s. It ignores the reality that America supports Israel, to the extent that it does, because it is in America’s interest to do so or because the US and Israel are allies or have shared values.
The Left, of which Power and Obama are part, wants to further abandon Israel so it makes the argument that “the Jews” are controlling the US to create a backlash.
An Obama presidency would also be a disaster for US foreign policy. He wants to remove US troops from Iraq within a year, though he is beginning to fudge on that. He wants to sit down with Ahmadinejad and settle differences. He even suggested invading Pakistan. Like others on the left he is soft on terror and terrorists.
No doubt people of like mind will vote for him. I wouldn’t. McCain recognizes the threats the US faces and is committed to dealing with them though I don’t like his respect for Baker who is a known enemy of the Jews.
At least McCain would be obligated to his base which is pro-Israel, whereas Obama’s base is anything but.
Now Obama’s mantra is “Change”. I shudder to think of what change he has in mind.
His financial dealings and support is now coming to light which may also have a negative effect.
It is for all these reasons, that I don’t believe that Middle America will vote for him. It is also why I wouldn’t vote for him.
You are doing a great job, Ted Belman.
Comment by Mary Hogan — March 14, 2008 @ 1:11 pm
It is unwise for this blog to focus suspicion and criticism on B. Obama, to the exclusion of H. Clinton or J. McCain.
Regarding Obama, much has been made of his father and childhood, which has never risen above smearing him with unproven suspicions. Such kinds of attacks on Obama do far more damage to the credibility of those so attacking Barak Obama then they do to Obama. In so undermining the credibility of those who use Obama’s father and early childhood as a basis to cast suspicion on him, it undermines the credibility of more substantive points these Obama condemners make.
There is more then enough fodder to criticize Obama and to raise questions of what he really thinks and presume from that, where he might stand if President in his:
1. Prior statements as regards the Middle East, fundamentalist Islam, terrorism, Israel and the Palestinians, be they found in his
speeches or in his books;
2. Senatorial record;
3. Long and continued affiliation with the Chicago South Side Holy Trinity Church led by Pastor J. Wright, who by his words and deeds has
virtually proven beyond doubt he is an antisemite and an anti-white racist;
4. Views that without any preconditions, he would negotiate with Islamic fundamentalist leaders that hate the West. It makes sense of
course that one does have at times to negotiate with one’s enemies, but seeking to negotiate with enemies that don’t want to
negotiate calls for a different strategy, such as not negotiating with one’s enemeies, except with respect to the terms of surrender
of Western Islamofacist enemies;
5. His choice of advisers for his campaign;
6. Position on how he intends to bring about change, including the fact that his means to that end are awfully thin and suggest he will
be throwing grease on the recession slide America is currently on.
I encourage Israpundit and followers to stick with criticisms of Obama based on proven facts and stay away from his parentage, his name and his early childhood.
Attention here however should also be turned to H. Clinton and she too can come in for much criticism.
The first concern is that she may try to finish what her husband almost accomplished and that was forcing Ehud Barak to offer Arafat almost all that the Palestinians were demanding. It was only because of Arafat’s folly, his arrogance, his unwillingness to let go of the dream of getting all he wanted so that he could be written up in the annals of Arab history as a great leader, his inability to let go of his desire to see Israel destroyed, his fear of assassination by those as or more extreme then him for having given up even a scintilla of the Arab dream for the elimination of Israel and Jews from the region or any one or more of these reasons, that stood in the way of Clinton achieving his legacy as the President who brought peace to the region and Barak’s legacy of giving the Palestinians/Arabs the graveyard of Israel.
Secondly, given H. Clinton’s own words and deeds as regards Israel, the Palestinians and the Muslim Middle East, there is good reason to fear that American foreign policy will pretty much stick with current State Department thinking, which has been accused of being pro-Arab/Muslim, be it because those long term bureaucrats in the bowels of that department are antisemitic or because they, persist in believing that America can best advance her interests in the Middle East by trying to curry the favor of and appeasing Muslim Middle East leaders and nations, notwithstanding that such policies continue to backfire and bear only sour fruit.
Then consider Clinton’s plan to get the American economy back on track, which is very similar to Obama’s. Being similar it deserves the same degree of scrutiny and skepticism.
As for John McCain, his positions on Israel, the Middle East and the American economy also should not give Jews, Americans or Israelis warm and fuzzy feelings, though his words do seem to strike a more favorable note then do Obama’s and Clinton.
Yes, McCain seems a strong advocate against Islamofacism, but so far he has focused on Iraq and Afghanistan.
What precisely is he advocating beyond tough talk with Iran?
McCain’s policy as regards immigration and illegal aliens crossing into America over the Mexican border has not sounded nearly as tough as the situation demands. Is he soft on tightening up immigration controls that would put America’s security first and demand real proof that any applicant for immigration or even entry to the U.S. must pass the smell test and prove they pose no threat to America? Is McCain for amnesty for illegal aliens?
What is McCain precisely advocating as regards overall strategies and tactics to be employed against Islamofacists of all stripes, be they outside or already within America?
As for McCain’s reputation for having a temper, McCain has yet to convert that temper to passion.
Thus far not one of these Presidential candidates appears stellar. McCain’ being somewhat more conservative and offering America at least some of what America needs in terms of a tough stand to at least some extent against America’s enemies, McCain should get the nod.
Thus far with all the hoopla and attention on Obama and Clinton, it is sometimes easy to forget while watching the news that the Republicans have a candidate running for President.
Comment by Bill Narvey — March 14, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
Wake up, Ted. If Osama instead of Obama ran here, 90% of Obama’s core group would vote for him. Or for Arafat if he were alive.
I don’t know about you, but I spent a lifetime in non-white America. There are countries, two peoples, one continent, just like in Israel.
Obama, “Rev” Wright, Hitler, Rosenberg, where’s the difference?
I am sorry
Comment by vova — March 14, 2008 @ 2:25 pm
None of the 3 contenders will be either good for Israel, the Jews in general and even America! I marvel at the insane Jews who support Obama with their votes and money. Is having the monsters such as Carter and Brzezinski on his team not enough to qualify Osama as pathological anti-Semite? Or do they need his friend Farrakhan’ endorsement to scratch their collective head? Of course, Jews gave money to Hitler before he confiscated the rest of it. Our people had always had their share of traitors.
Now, I don’t care about Obama’s intents of reforming American politics to the better. He is bad for Israel, bad for Jews. Incidentally, he is also bad for Americans. Does having the old guard Brzezinski on board sounds like an attempt to drastically reform the American politics? To me, it only sounds like a direct path for heads-on collision with Russia, since Brzezinski, like most Poles, is viciously anti-Russian. Anti-Semitic, too.
Look at the amount of donations Obama has collected. Did the political donors suddenly feel charitable altrustic and support someone who promises to do away with corrupt politics and lobbying? Or did they give money to Obama because he promised to repay them manifold through government contracts, concessions, and subsidies? Obama is a newcomer, investing in him is risky, and he could only attract large donors with promises of unusually high returns.
The Clinton-II is a disgrace to America. Is this country a monarchy now? Where are those dynasties coming from? Lady, you were a bad wife of the bad president. You couldn’t keep your husband in check. And now you want to handle Iran’s nuclear threat? Give me a break.
Like Rice, Hillary is the sort of the Portrait of Dorian Gray. All her moral ugliness translates into her mimic. If that is the face of America, pity the country.
What are the Clinton-II presidential qualifications? She is a political schemer. Bismarck created political schemes, that is very different from being a schemer. Clinton-II never tackled any serious political issue. Her stance on Iran amounts to hysteria: maybe bomb, maybe talk. Her talks with Assad undermined the US efforts against his terrorist regime, and gave him carte blanche for renewed involvement in Lebanon. Her position on Israel is well-known: her husband the sex maniac had already arranged with Barak to give up Jerusalem to Arabs. Clinton-II, who poses as sort of a Christian, prefers ripping the holy city away from Jews and giving it to Muslims.
Clinton’s domestic prescriptions are simple: tax more, steal more. The vast pork-barrel programs are her trademark. Now she wants universal health coverage for illegal immigrants and the criminal mothers who neglect their children so as to refuse buying them a $50-a-month medical insurance.
Any random mobster would make a better US president than the Clinton-Obama duo. More on McCain Lster…
Comment by yamit82 — March 14, 2008 @ 3:02 pm
Bill was responsible for his own behavior. I see you are of the Dr.Laura school of thought that wives are to blame for their husband’s infidelity. She blames Mrs.Spitzer for Eliot’s behavior.
Comment by Laura — March 14, 2008 @ 4:29 pm
Laura, I was expecting your comment, actually I just threw that in to get a rise out of you although in spite of Dr. Schlesinger or as she is known Dr, laura. there might be at least in this case much truth in the Statement as Bill was unfaithful it seems for much if not all of the marriage, Apparently she did not satisfy Old Bill and I could not begin to understand their relationship unless greed and ambition are the dominant glue that keeps them together.
Comment by yamit82 — March 14, 2008 @ 4:42 pm
email
Keep up the great work!
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 5:43 pm
email
Thanks Ted. This is FANTASTIC!!!
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 5:53 pm
email
Darryl Everett knows but Barak Obama (Private schools, rich mom, Harvard and never having
had a real job) does not!
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 5:55 pm
email
But how can Obama be stopped. He is like a cult leader. When I bring the
facts you have cited up to Jews, especially New York Jews, I am told I am a
bigot. And then my emails are blocked.
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 6:04 pm
email from Peru
Thanks for your really interesting article.- I agree with you, would never vote por Obama,
he is a plain S O B.-
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
From The Forward
The letter is now the basis for a Web site, jewsforobama.net, and has been signed by about 450 people, including such high-profile figures as writer Ayelet Waldman, sociologist Todd Gitlin and filmmaker Aviva Kempner. One signatory, former United States Court of Appeals judge and congressman Abner Mikva, once tried to hire a young Barack Obama as a legal clerk; Obama turned him down. Later, the two became friends.
Jewsforobama.net plays both defense and offense. The site approvingly quotes Alon Pinkas, an Israeli politician and diplomat who has called Obama’s voting record on Israel “impeccable.” It also dismisses the Jewish-themed attacks on the senator as “vicious,” “scurrilous” and “inaccurate.”
Likewise, in interviews with the Forward, signatories emphasized both their enthusiasm for Obama and their frustration with anti-Obama sentiment in the Jewish community. A common thread ran through their responses: All had received e-mails claiming that Obama was a closet Muslim, a Farrakhan apologist and an enemy of Israel.
Waldman, who has spent much of the past year campaigning for Obama, had particularly harsh words for those involved in what she called “a truly despicable whispering campaign” against the candidate.
“The Jews who believe that he’s a Muslim or not a friend of Israel have clearly forgotten the blood libel,” said Waldman, who is married to novelist Michael Chabon, a vocal Obama supporter (although not a signatory of the letter). “People with our history, knowing what we know about what rumors and lies do, who believe this stuff — it’s a shande [‘disgrace’ in Yiddish].”
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 6:29 pm
Yamit82 wrote,
I doubt the entire Emperor’s Club VIP could satisfy Old Bill. If Spitzer was Client 9, it wouldn’t surprise me if Bill was Clients 1 through 8.
Bill and Hillary probably do have the French arrangement, although there is no evidence that Hillary has exercised her prerogative to take a lover.
Comment by Bill Levinson — March 14, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
Author: H Peskin
A wise business executive spreads his political donations amongst all potential candidates. That is called hedging your bets.
and that would be the way to go with regard to Obama ,Clinton, and McCain.
We are getting our knickers in a twist over associations. Remember that John F. Kennedy’s dad was a notorious pro Nazi and antisemite. The connection between father and son is significant. But history proved that J.F.K. was reasonably good to Israel.
But that can not be said for Kissinger who as Secretary of State during the Yom Kippur war purposely delayed military resupplies to Israel when the Israeli forces were in dire straits. It mattered little that he was a Jew with impeccible associations to the American Jewish community.
What is important is that the American electorate is now mainly concerned with the economic crises prevailing in America. They are crying out for change. McCain represents old politics. And much worse he represents the old politics connected to the Bush legacy; A legacy , given its horrendous record, spells defeat.
There is a strong possibility that Obama will be the new President. Why not think strategically and abstain from alienating him . Too often the American Jewish community has used their collective sharp tongue to cut their own collective neck.
Comment by h peskin — March 14, 2008 @ 7:37 pm
email
Experts have long ago announced that Jesus, if he lived, would have been a dark-skinned Semitic. The European-esque romantic vision of him as white and angelic was a natural outgrowth of those that painted him in their own image.
As for Barack, your guilt by association attacks will fall on deaf ears as he is nothing like Rev. Wright and can’t be made into that by the likes of you.
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 8:21 pm
This story is expolding throughout the mainstream media. The Democrats are desparate to explain it away. Black spokiespeople are defending Obama and saying that there is nothing wrong with what Wright has been saying.
Hannity is going for the jugular and demands that Obama resigns as Senator.
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 8:30 pm
HP
Your answer to everything is to give in. You must be a leftist.
Comment by Ted Belman — March 14, 2008 @ 8:33 pm
Bill I received this fro Teshuva yesterday –Interesting?
http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2007/11/hililarys_conne.php
Yamit82 wrote,
>>>Apparently she did not satisfy Old Bill and I could not begin to understand their relationship unless greed and ambition are the dominant glue that keeps them together.
I doubt the entire Emperor’s Club VIP could satisfy Old Bill. If Spitzer was Client 9, it wouldn’t surprise me if Bill was Clients 1 through 8.
Bill and Hillary probably do have the French arrangement, although there is no evidence that Hillary has exercised her prerogative to take a lover.
Comment by Bill Levinson — March 14, 2008 @ 6:42 pm
You might advise Bill Levinson that BC is quoted as saying, “Hillary has had more women than I have.”
Atlas Shrugs: Hillary’s Lesbian Affair with Muslim Aide?
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/11/hillary-lesbian.html
Atlas Shrugs: Sauduction: Hillary and Huma
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/11/sauduction-hill.html
Comment by yamit82 — March 15, 2008 @ 1:54 am
Bill #13
check this out!Hililary’s Connection To Islam (Alternative title: Who Is Huma Abedin And Who Is Funding Her Lifestyle?) ‘Updated’
Topics: Political News and commentaries
huma_hillary.JPG
I’m not sure what to make of this story and actually stumbled upon the post on it by happenstance. But Senator Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin (the daughter of an Islamic scholar that was raised in Saudi Arabia), does indeed appear to be leading an elaborate lifestyle and no one seems to be able to explain where Ms. Abedin gets the money to own a $649,000 apartment (check out her Privately Financed Travel).
Ms. Abedin’s presidential campaign title is “traveling chief of staff”…
Then there’s this from the BHDC “Huma Abedin File”:
When one takes into account Ms. Abedin’s known salary and compares it to her extravagant lifestyle, one can’t help but belive that she is a kept woman. The question seems to be only of “by whom”!
With all the new rumors popping up about Hillary Clinton’s alleged affair with her aide Huma Abedin - and the possibility that the LA Times is holding a story about it - many tipsters have reminded us of page 42 of Gennifer Flowers’s 1995 book, Passion and Betrayal. Starting on that page, Bill Clinton’s ex-flame says that he very clearly told her that Hillary is a lesbian …
From Tim Worstal comes this:
… rumours certainly are swirling:
A major sex scandal story involving one of the leading presidential candidates is believed to be soon published by the LA Times, Big Head DC has learned. Details are slowly trickling in through people who’ve heard about the story, and with Larry Flynt saying he’s set to reveal a “huge” sex scandal story involving a sitting senator in the coming days, the rumors seem to be gathering traction.
…Several commenters on Rosenbaum’s article strongly believe that Hillary Clinton will ultimately be revealed as a lesbian, and that the recent GQ story her campaign helped kill by threatening to withhold a Bill Clinton interview may have gone into some shocking details into her sex life. Rumors of a close Hillary relationship with one of her top aides Huma Abedin, shown above, have long been swirling. Hillary has long denied being a lesbian.
One wonders what will in fact, if anything, be revealed?
Tims’s closing sentence is worth repeating: “One wonders what will in fact, if anything, be revealed?”
Image below: Is there any truth to this rumor?
hillaryurinal.jpg
All joking aside, there’s this to think about:
How does the child of two university professors [one of them deceased], who is single, never married, and living on a clerical salary, in one of the most expensive cities in America, afford to “never… wear the same outfit twice”?
Much less purchase from the likes of Oscar de la Renta, Catherine Malandrino, Charles Nolan, Prada, and Marc Jacobs? Not to mention Yves Saint Laurent?
How does the child of two university professors [one of them deceased], who is single, never married, and living on a clerical salary, in one of the most expensive cities in America, afford to buy her own “apartment in the vicinity of 12th and U streets”?
What would such an apartment cost? $500,000? $750,000? $1,000,000?
Where is she getting that kind of money? Who is the co-signor on her loan?
People get nervous & flighty & anxious in life when they CARE.
People are unflappable when they DON’T CARE.
Just from a purely psychological point of view, the fact that she seems to be unflappable within the confines of the biggest pressure cooker in American politics suggests to me that she doesn’t care about American politics - that, instead, she cares about something else - something other than American politics.
And certainly the easiest way to not care about a set of circumstances in life is when you aren’t actually participating in those circumstances, but rather are merely ACTING THE PART of someone who is participating in those circumstances.
The very fact that she spent 15 or 16 years in Saudi Arabia [from roughly the age of 2, until roughly the age of 18], and then showed up in the Clinton Whitehouse, as an intern, in 1996, at roughly the age of 21, is, in and of itself, a massive security breach.
Definitely something to think about!
Related:
Is Hillary’s Aide Huma Abedin An Agent Of Saudi Intelligence?
What TV Skipped: Hillary Pledged on ‘Ellen’ To Pursue Gay-Left Agenda as President
Other Hillary news: Has Hillary begun a slow bleed?
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/11/hillary-lesbian.html
http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2007/11/hililarys_conne.php
Comment by yamit82 — March 15, 2008 @ 1:56 am
I guess being a pervert and a liberal Democrat go hand in hand. If this stuff continues we will have John MaCain can go on vaction till Nov as the Democrats in their leftist wisdom are beginning to implode. McCain might stand some Chance in spite of Bush?
Comment by yamit82 — March 15, 2008 @ 2:02 am
email
Ted,
I just wanted to thank you for your GREAT email’s in support of beloved Israel, and the courage to speak forth the truth…….we do not have the gift of ‘life’ here on this earth to ‘please men and offend none’ ( impossible!! ) but to glorify G-d, and to please Him with holy lives, according to His Word, the Bible.
I really do not recall how I began receiving your emails…perhaps a friend sent one….but I do appreciate your time and attention to these critical days we live in….we can not continue to stay on the same course, the one of: keeping our heads in the sand, and if nothing effects “me and mine” all is well. That absolutely can not continue. The “head-in-the-sand” folks will one day soon find out they are no longer protected by the American laws and constitution this country once had. When the heads are raised, and it will be too late under Shira law and the Koran monopoly.
Blessings to you,
Comment by Ted Belman — March 15, 2008 @ 9:01 am
Author: H. Peskin
To Yamit and whomever is interested. In a previous posting titled ” A Modest Proposal”, I recommended that the borders of the territories be sealed and no food or medicines be allowed in. Than nature would innevitably take its course. Death through disease and starvation would solve the demographic and rocket crisies.
Yamit was delighted. He immediately responded - Peskin: Right on!! you finally have seen the light !!! WOW miracles before our eyes!! I thought you were a MORON but after this I must be forced to rethink all. How could I have been soooooo Wrong about you?
Well Yamit’s reaction is not surprising, but how about the many other commentators who did not respond at all. Were my comments so very mainstream in the prevailing climate at Israpundit that no replies were necessary?
And for your information, my comments were purely satirical. It followed in the tradition of Jonathan Swift, a 17th century Anglo Irish writer and poet. He wrote in his famous essay ” A modest Proposal”, that the Irish problem of over population and and ongoing rebellion and starvation could be solved by merely turning Irish infants into sausages.
Quotation:
Irish babies constitute a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled …”
Well if this modest essay does not get me turfed out of Israpundit, nothing will.
Comment by h peskin — March 15, 2008 @ 10:36 am
I received the following email
For the record:
Jesus was not a white Jew. The Catholic Church acknowledges this. Obama is a Christian and not a Muslim
I replied
He certainly was a Jew and was not black. He was semitic which is far closer to white than black.
As for Obama, Islam considers him a muslim and conversion out is punishable by death. Maybe that’s why there is no record of his baptism.
Comment by Ted Belman — March 15, 2008 @ 11:02 am
I think Larry Craig and Mark Foley would disagree.
Comment by Laura — March 15, 2008 @ 11:40 am
Peskin : you are sooo full of yourself all of us understood your attempt at literary irony and not only was it vacuous but fatuous and inane. None except me whoever is prepared to argue with what for want of another word a lost cause closed minded left wing fanatic. Now occasionally we get someone with extraordinary debating skill and a razor sharp intellect that has been able to sway us or at least give pause for reflection of our own opinions, not often but as I said occasionally. So far Peskin you haven’t moved us and some of us had such high hopes for you? You can also take it to the Bank that many who have conservative opinions and even ultra conservative opinions are literate as well and can even on occasion string more than two words together to make a conjugated sentence.
No a good choice here as however good Irish baby sausage may have tasted and still might we real Jews only eat Kosher so we can never discover if you or swift is correct. Now if we can can find a place to hold all those Pali children till Passover, using their blood for the Baking of Matzos would really be killing 2 birds with one shot and we get to eat the prizes as well/
Comment by yamit82 — March 15, 2008 @ 11:57 am
Laura you are correct!
Perversion is not a Liberal Democrat monopoly. Perversion does cross party line but the Democrats seem to be able to always get away with it.
Comment by yamit82 — March 15, 2008 @ 12:04 pm
Email received
Well and ardently argued.
I think from conversations, with some dozen people this weekend and earlier, that most of us find it impossible to judge Obama innocent of complicity in these offensive views and statements. Had he truly ‘disagreed,’ a presumption we have zero reason to credit, he would long since have repudiated this ugly demagogic lipoprotein at the lectern. He stayed and submerged his family in the acid bath. Beyond that, he is opaque and mildly subversive, not what we need at all. Finally, he has no resume of achievement to match his ambition. Being black or Kenyan/Hawaiian/what-have-you and a freshman senator is not vitae enough to warrant the highest office in the land.
Obama: A Bummer
Comment by Ted Belman — March 17, 2008 @ 6:08 am
Nothing wrong with Obama being a racist anti-ameri…
I believe that even after two or three dirty bombs go off, the US will survive just fine - we are a strong country. As to why we will be attacked? What do you think Islamic terrorists will do after Obama yanks our troops out of Iraq? Retire?…
Trackback by Planck's Constant — March 17, 2008 @ 3:00 pm
If it talks like a leftist, if it walks like a leftist, it must be a leftist.
So why does anyone even imagine that if, God forbid, he is elected, he won’t follow the leftist line when it comes to Israel. Yet Jews are falling over themselves to prostrate themselves before him.
Of course, one can be a black nationalist & still sound like a leftist & get the backing of the left, and liberal Jews.
I am sorry to say that I disagree with you, Ted, re Hussain Obama’s chances of winning the election. If the economy continues to nose dive, Americans will either vote Democrat, regardless of who is their candidate. Or the Rep will stay home giving the election to Hussain Obama.
Comment by aitlaasot — March 17, 2008 @ 11:27 pm
This story just gets bigger.
The following link is to a statement from the United Church of Christ, of which Trinity is a member. It has elicited a lot of complaints from church members, including Reverends. Many members are appalled that the UCC leadership is excusing Jeremiah Wright’s commentary and are even calling for the resignation of the leader of the UCC and expulsion of Trinity from the UCC.
http://www.ucc.org/news/responding-to-wright.html
Comment by Shelley — March 18, 2008 @ 1:28 am
[...] Belman over at Israpundit tells us Why he wouldn’t vote for Obama cataloging a litany of complaints: Obama is pro-Palestinian, that his pastor is anti-American and [...]
Pingback by Marginalized Action Dinosaur » Why you should vote for Obama — March 20, 2008 @ 8:10 am
[...] response to my Email Obama Doesn’t fit the mould otherwise known as Why I wouldn’t vote for Obama, I received this email You’ve been accused of a smear campaign because you are leading a [...]
Pingback by Israpundit » Blog Archive » Reader compares Jews to blacks — March 21, 2008 @ 11:19 am