Obama has no credibility
By Ted Belman
Finally, Obama’s Denunciates Rev. Wright
- After days of largely ignoring the media blitz his former pastor has waged, Barack Obama reversed course and denounced the Rev. Jeremiah Wright in the strongest and most direct terms yet on Tuesday. It was a decision that may help him reclaim some of the initiative in a tight presidential primary contest, but it is not without risks.
The decision to specifically address Wright’s controversial statements came after the campaign maintained for days that Obama had said all he had to say on the subject - a sign that there has been growing concern that the controversy was damaging his candidacy. The result was not just a denunciation of Wright’s comments, but of the man who attracted Obama into the Trinity United Church of Christ, married him and baptized his children.
I don’t care how strong the denunciation was. It makes no difference to me. It is self serving and therefore of little import. This is not about Rev Wright and not the black church but about Barack Obama.
Remember this is the man who first said of Wright,
-
“As imperfect as he may be,he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. … I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.”
Obama has never been a moderate. He always has part of the far-left crowd which crowd favours anti-Americanism, considers America a terrorist and is against war and in favour of socialism. Whether Obama now denounces Wright is neither here nor there. It doesn’t change who Obama is or has been.
And remember this,
-
Barack Obama’s political career was launched in Ayers’s and Dohrn’s home, when a group of “influential liberals” gathered in 1995 to meet the young organizer who was Illinois lawmaker Alice Palmer’s chosen successor. In the years that followed, Obama and Ayers would serve together as (paid) board members of the Woods Fund, a leftist Chicago foundation, and appear jointly on academic panels, at least one of which was organized by Michelle Obama. Ayers would even donate money to one of Obama’s political campaigns.
Ted,
This underscores everything I have said about Obama. He has no ethics, no character, no standards, and no honor. His denunciation of Wright is not the act of a man who does the right thing even when no one is watching, it is the act of a thief who is caught red-handed with his hand in another man’s pocket. Only when the thief gets caught does he offer to put the wallet back.
(1) Obama joined this church and remained in it for 20 years.
(2) Obama refused to “reject” the endorsement of Louis Farrakhan until Tim Russert and Hillary Clinton cornered him like a rat–and I think “like a rat” is not an overstatement–on national television. He equivocated and evaded until they asked him three times.
(3) Obama got rid of the New Black Panther Party page at my.barackobama.com only when it became an Internet-wide scandal.
(4) Obama got rid of Tony Wicher’s “Jewish Thought Police” garbage at my.barackobama.com only when it became a scandal.
(5) Obama got rid of the guy who said McCain was an “old man” who should “visit the undertaker” at my.barackobama.com only when it became a scandal.
(6) Obama is still consorting with Al Sharpton only because it has not yet become a national scandal (although Michael Savage is finally talking about Sharpton’s skills in “combustion engineering,” as in the combustion of Freddy’s Fashion Mart.)
(7) Obama won’t reject the endorsement of Michael Moore because it has not yet caused him enough trouble.
(8) Obama solicited and accepted the endorsement of MoveOn.org, thus joining MoveOn’s insults to our Armed Forces, and will continue to do so until it does him more harm then good, because he has no character, no ethics, no standards, and no honor.
Comment by Bill Levinson — April 29, 2008 @ 7:09 pm
The real question about Obama’s complete disassociation and denunciation of Rev. Wright is how this will affect his support among African-American voters. It appears as if most African-Americans support the radical hate of Rev. Wright. If this is the case, they will view Obama’s condemnation of Wright as an “Uncle Tom” move to appease White voters. Consequently, a significant number of African-American voters will not vote for Obama because he turned against Wright, now viewed as a significant, African-American leader by the mainstream African-American community.
Comment by obamaisevil — April 29, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
Remember how Gomez in “The Addams Family” liked to stage train wrecks with model trains? The real thing is going to happen at the Democratic National Convention this year.
Comment by Bill Levinson — April 30, 2008 @ 1:11 am
Anyone every notice how unsure Obama is when “apologizing”. His voice wavers and he searches for the right words. He has great difficulty dealing with the flak and shows a fatal flaw. That’s why he did so poorly in the last debate.
Comment by Ted Belman — April 30, 2008 @ 7:04 am
Obama may be getting a bum rap as regards his anti-Iraq war stance.
It seems he was precient in his 2002 anti-Iraq war speech when he said inter alia:
The full text of his 2002 speech which outlines his views on a number of issues can be found at the following site:
http://www.lessig.org/blog/2008/01/barack_obamas_2002_speech.html
Comment by Bill Narvey — April 30, 2008 @ 8:24 am
Obama is not the devil. He seems like a nice guy. I don’t think he is antisemitic, though he may harbour some such feelings. My attack on him is based on his attempt to present himself as moderate in his views and a uniter.
If anything, he is far left/liberal. Many people are. His past and association place him among the dividers. He is a fellow traveller with the left. He shares their views . He is pro-Palestinian and therefore anti-Israel. He is for talking to our enemies based on the assumption that we can give them enough to make war uncessary. He is too tolerant of Islam and the Arabs. He is a marxist, a tax and spend liberal, pro nanny state advocat and so on.
Ultimately this election will come down to policy positions. Americans will decide on whose policies they like best on Iraq, taxes, the economy and energy independence.
Comment by Ted Belman — April 30, 2008 @ 9:18 am
I go further then you Ted and say that I simply cannot believe or accept that Obama is antisemitic. That said, his “balanced” position on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, based on his apparent liberal-left thinking, does seem at least potentially unbalanced by many pro-Israel supporters who share similar views with those in the main expressed here.
As I have pointed out before, I am concerned about Obama’s thinking on foreign policy generally. I think he is inclined to seek out greater alliances with the EU as regards Middle Eastern policy and thus push, pull or drag America towards the EU way of thinking. That as has been stated time and again has hurt the EU more then helped.
Further I have concerns with not only Obama’s, but Clinton’s domestic policies which as regards immigration appears to loosen not tighten the controls that now are already ineffective in many cases from keeping undersireables and illegal aliens out of America. It is not a far step from that to lessen legislative and governmental policy and controls as regards monitoring, identifying, apprehending and charging potential terrorists and dealing with them to their ultimate imprisonment or deportation when convictions result.
If there is a weakening of the governmental resolve and effort of America to rid itself of the anti-American 5th columnists in America, Canada could follow that lead. If American policies allowed the 5th columnists to strengthen, Canada would suffer the same consequence.
As for the economy, both Obama’s and Clinton’s policies would in view of a number of credible economists and economic pundits would hurt and not help the American economy. If the American economy suffers, it is likely there was be fall out falling on Canada that its international border with America will not save it from.
That said about Obama and Clinton on these matters, I am not impressed with the Bush administrations efforts on these foreign and domestic matters and John McCain is a knight in shining armour on these issues either.
Back to Obama.
I was just addressing the singular point as to Obama’s views on war and in particular the reasons why he was against America going to war in Iraq.
With all the criticism of Obama including his stance on the war in Iraq, no one bothered to find out his reasons for that stance. I did bother to find out.
What I have found suggests Obama had some very valid points in this regard, which the evidence has borne out.
Comment by Bill Narvey — April 30, 2008 @ 10:28 am
Dumb Jews by Julia Gorin
Did you hear the one about the Jews who paid a thousand dollars a plate to hear Bill Clinton speak — after he sold Israel down the river (by rewarding genocide bombings with more land)?
Or the one about the Jews who are still loyal to a political party whose members pass out 9/11-Israel conspiracy literature at public forums?
What about the Jews who heard that most Muslims would be voting for John Kerry and so they voted for John Kerry?
Now, did you hear the one about the Jew who dropped his watch in the subway tracks but decided to look for it on the platform because it was easier?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/julia/gorin120105.php3
American Thinker Ari Kaufman http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/07/know_who_your_friends_are.html
The media often tells us that anti—Semitism is on the rise. What they don’t tell us is that it is not necessarily on the rise in Alabama or Idaho (although modern leftist Jewry’s despicable actions make me occasionally angry); it’s on the rise in the Black Community, in Europe and, undoubtedly, on American college campuses. Somehow this news, for obvious reasons, slipped past CNN and NPR, even though hundreds of books have been written on these topics, not to mention numerous websites and articles. The liberal, PC Jew, would rather eat pork than chastise their beloved Blacks and Europeans.
When I present information of anti—Zionism’s rise on campus to parents of prospective Jewish college students, they laugh, and excuse themselves to write their mid—five figure checks to Michigan and Yale, totally unconcerned with the atmosphere therein, or in say, Boulder and Cambridge, or the fact that some of this money may be funneled to Pro—Islam campus organizations. So long as Sarah will join the Jewish sorority her mom belonged to in the 70s and maybe meet a “nice Jewish guy” or that Justin will have a better chance of attaining admission to GW Law via Emory undergrad, these ancillary factors are as unimportant as the Israeli divestment campaign or the poor farmers in Kansas.
Anti—Semitism may not be a visible thing to many Jews, but the blatant disrespect of our Judeo—Christian values, our religion’s glorious past and an unsubstantiated and outdated hatred of Christians is difficult to swallow. A bequeathing of all traditions and history simply to live life to the fullest in New York or Los Angeles makes me apoplectic, no matter which way one votes. And no, a six—figure Bat Mitzvah for Rachel does not make you a “good Jew.” Your mother would not be proud. Our ancestors worked years in the ghettos simply to muster enough money and courage to bring you to this country you now degrade and embarrass with your expenditures. The American Jew by rights should be far more familiar with abject poverty in his/her former homelands than an African American whose lineage last set foot in Africa more than 250 years ago.
Comment by yamit82 — April 30, 2008 @ 11:15 am
It’s all part of his facade. One who associates with the likes of Wright is not a nice guy.
Why not? We can say Carter is an antisemite, or brzezinski and so many others based on their views of the Middle East, so why does Obama get a free pass? Now I can see how he has been able to come this far, he apparently casts a spell over people which even leaves staunch conservatives, appalled by his views, nevertheless tend to separate that from obama the person. Why this compartmentalization when it comes to obama? This type of dissasociation of the personal from the political is not ordinarily displayed by conservatives when it comes to leftists.
Comment by Laura — April 30, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
I have never accused Obama of being a racist, anti-Semite, or Catholic hating bigot. The fact that he consorts with, endorses, and empowers racists, anti-Semites, and Catholic-hating bigots, however, makes him just as bad. By appearing with and endorsing the likes of Al Sharpton, he clothes them with an aura of respectability and empowers their hate-mongering.
Comment by Bill Levinson — April 30, 2008 @ 3:39 pm
Laura and Bill,
I hold my views based on facts and evidence, but I do believe to conclude he is antisemitic or tantamount to one is overreaching the evidence available.
While Obama has embraced Al Sharpton as a noted black leader, do not forget that the Democractic party at the last democratic convention nominating John Kerry as their candidate for President, gave Sharpton the honour of making the keynote speech. If one is to draw any conclusions from Obama’s embrace of Sharpton, should not a similar conclusion be drawn as regards the entire democratic party?
Obama has not empowered any racists or anti-semites as far as I know unless one means by that by his just friendly associations with some or by taking on certain people as advisers, he has raised them up in the eyes of America amounts to empowerment.
Obama has gathered about him advisers with anti-Israel credentials. That does not make him anti-semitic, but it does raise some concern as to what kind of American Middle Eastern policy he will establish as being “balanced”.
The fact is however that there is a substantial sector of the American Jewish community that does support Obama. Is it that he is not what he seems to be to the right leaning conservative Jewish sectors of America or is it that the liberal and liberal left sectors of America that support Obama have been duped?
As I noted before, Obama’s moral credibility is suspect because of his 20 year affiliation with the UTCC. J. Wright has suggested that Obama is now distancing himself from him because of political expediency. There has to be some truth to that, but in that truth, it could just be that Wright’s self aggrandizing headline grabbing display may have been what finally pried open Obama’s eyes to finally see Wright for the man he is.
There are however other reasons to criticize Obama and in the same breath Clinton for their foreign and domestic policies to the extent they have explained them.
Comment by Bill Narvey — April 30, 2008 @ 4:54 pm
There is a great deal of concern that the North American Jewish communities are reacting to the mid-east situation with apathy and disinterest, particularly amongst the under 35 year old set. Why should that be? the answer is obvious. It is almost impossible to sustain an attitude of heightened anxiety and fear for a period of 60 years. And even more important is the tactics of fear mongering being employed.Every enemy of Israel is Hitler.Every enemy of Israel is threatening the Holocaust. Nasser was Hitler, in 1991 Saddam was Hitler, in 2003 Saddam was Hitler again, Arafat of course was Hitler, but much worse. And now we are working ourselves into a lather over Obama.It does not take a genius to realize that if you cry wolf falsely too many times your cries will eventually be ignored.
The present situation in the mid-east is not even remotely related to what occured in pre-second world war Europe. The Holocaust was a very distinct event and any attempts to capitalize on it for some political advantage is immoral and in the long run self- defeating.
As a member of a family which was largely wiped out in the European ghettos, I am very resentful that the memory of those victims are being exploted and debased in this manner.
Comment by h peskin — May 3, 2008 @ 10:34 am
HP
Who likened Obama to Hitler? It seems to me that many of us acknowledged that he personally was OK but it was his policies we didn’t like.
So I was surprised by your statement
Obama aside, the condition of the Jew today bears ominous resemblance to what it was in the thirties. The same demonization and deligitimation. The same turning its back on the Jewish people or Jews by the West that existed then exists now. Plus we have Ahmedinejad’s threat to wipe Israel off the face of the map and the fact that he keeps investing in a nuclear bomb and terrorist armies to carry out his threat, all testify to a recurrence of the thirties. What does “never again” mean if not to be diligent. It has nothing to do with it being seventy years after the holocaust, it has to do with a real and present danger.
Comment by Ted Belman — May 3, 2008 @ 10:56 am
I stand by my statement. The false analogy is no longer being accepted. It is a Turkey that just won’t fly. Ted, you might not agree but the majority of North American Jewry is proving my contention by their loud silence.
Comment by h peskin — May 3, 2008 @ 12:40 pm