If we wouldn’t believe him about the history of the conflict since 1947, why should we believe him when he says things that try to put Barack Obama in a bad light?

From the Democratic Party…”Nearly 24 years after voting against creating a holiday honoring Martin Luther King, John McCain is spending today at the inauguration of Alabama Governor Bob Riley who is a member of an organization that has been criticized for excluding African Americans. The “Grand Master” of the Grand Lodge of Alabama admits he knows of no African American members among the groups 30,000 plus membership. [AP, 9/30/2006] McCain’s push to cozy up to far right extremists is not surprising, given his contradictions in the past. In the 2000 presidential campaign, McCain reversed himself on the confederate flag first calling it “a symbol of racism and slavery” but then pandering the very next day by calling it a “symbol of heritage.” In past efforts to pander to a far right base that doesn’t trust him, McCain campaigned in Alabama for George Wallace Jr., a popular speaker at a white supremacist hate group, continues to employ a strategist who denounced the creation of a Federal holiday honoring Dr. King as “vicious” and “profane,” and even hired the man responsible for the racist ads against Harold Ford in the Senate race in Tennessee in 2006. [New York Times, 4/20/00, San Diego Union Tribune, 1/18/00; Associated Press, 11/17/05, Southern Poverty Law Center, Intelligence Report, Summer 2005; AP, 6/6/05; New York Times, 10/27/06; New York Times, 10/26/06; Union Leader, 12/8/06]”

1983: McCain Voted Against Creating Martin Luther King Holiday.

McCain Flip Flopped On The Confederate Flag, First Calling It Offensive And Then Calling It A Symbol Of Heritage.

McCain Endorsed George Wallace Jr., Called Him A “Committed Conservative Reformer,” Despite Speeches to Hate Group (CCC).

Racist Ad Against Harold Ford Approved By Terry Nelson, Senior McCain Strategist.

Richard Quinn, McCain’s South Carolina Spokesman, Criticized the MLK Holiday as “Vitriolic and Profane.

Now, what’s all the fuss about OBAMA?

The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten’s of billions.

Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.

http://www.associatedcontent.c…..ong…

Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.

Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.

Two years ago, Iraq’s Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin “Tony” Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.

Obama should be vetted and disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges — Obama needs to disclose why he is a Muslim and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It’s time to shove an introduction to this fake rip-off Obama and invite the thief pipsqueke to meet the Waukesheake Police Department.

Lets start with Obama’s kill the whitey Farakan supporting jew hating preacher who Obama can’t quite find a reason to denounce and leave the church.

African first, Minority second, American third, that is my kind of leader.

What would you say if your father was always at your neighbor’s house, fixing their water faucet, their gun fights, sending your brothers to die for them and cheating your mom out of money to the point where you couldn’t afford healthcare and your home spiraled to shambles?

Then one of your brothers ask your father to stop… but both your dad and the neighbor call you a terrorist, or an anti-semite. (an accusation which is seen as a sin by even your mom).

That’s the world we live in here in the States. Not even God can change that, because it’s reading his Word that has made us believe daddy’s actions are those of a good Christian.

Now come the psuedo-intellectual, claiming we can’t leave the Middle East alone else we perish, too.

My friends. It’s a good show, but the David Copperfields in the White House must be exposed; someone has to think rationally and yell that the bunny didn’t really appear from the hat.

Fear will always keep us in the Middle East. Fear propagated in everything you read, yet refuse, if for your own security’s sake, to CONSIDER whether we are being used as pawns, here.

If you will not take that into consideration, then please contact me. I’d love to trade bonds with you!!!

What would you say if your father was always at your neighbor’s house, fixing their water faucet, their gun fights, sending your brothers to die for them and cheating your mom out of money to the point where you couldn’t afford healthcare and your home spiraled to shambles?

Then one of your brothers ask your father to stop… but both your dad and the neighbor call you a terrorist, or an anti-semite. (an accusation which is seen as a sin by even your mom).

That’s the world we live in here in the States. Not even God can change that, because it’s reading his Word that has made us believe daddy’s actions are those of a good Christian.

Now come the psuedo-intellectual, claiming we can’t leave the Middle East alone else we perish, too.

My friends. It’s a good show, but the David Copperfields in the White House must be exposed; someone has to think rationally and yell that the bunny didn’t really appear from the hat.

Fear will always keep us in the Middle East. Fear propagated in everything you read, yet refuse, if for your own security’s sake, to CONSIDER whether we are being used as pawns, here.

If you will not take that into consideration, then please contact me. I’d love to trade bonds with you!!!

There those Jews go again…crucifying people. Thanks for that insight. You’d think they’d learn…

It’s not a matter of pro-Israel policy, but a pro-American one. Appeasing a cult of death unable to form a society and sworn to undermining and destruction and supremacy over the west–which is milennia old primitive culture and religion–is not in the american interest no matter how delusional westerners like you are that if you just dump israel, you’ll save your ass from jihad. doing that will whet not sate the islamists’ appetite for destroying the west.

relative to the 7th century supermacist, mysoginistic, opressive, treacherous and blood-thirsty muslim/arab culture and religion how ignorant and stupid do you have to be to have the nerve to even mention the “merit of Israel’s contention”?

Moron.

Do you guys realize how stupid this stuff sounds as you’re writing it? We know of course that your most fervent desire is that our foreign policy be unabashedly pro-Israel whatever the merits of Israel’s actual contentions and whatever effect it has on our own national security, but is it necessary that you be so obvious about it?

You forgot to preface your comments with the appropriate “Sig Heil!”

I think not.

just as i thought. and they’re all like him.

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/01/obamas_nation_o.html

when a society is in serious crisis and decline — like the US is now due to its own ignorant and incompetent policies — the instinct is to seek scapegoats. and there is hardly a more convenient one than the jews: they’ve always been scapegoats, nobody likes them, there are too few of them and are unlikely to blow themselves up or drive planes into skyscrapers, in fact there are even self-hating jews who see the jews as villains to “save their ass”. that’s exactly what happened in 1938 and what is happening now in europe and the US. the notion that america is unique and not subject to the same social forces as any other society has always been a crock.

so it’s not just obama that should be expected to give it to the jews at first opportunity. anybody who will become president will do it, because that’s the easiest and most expedient thing to do; and easy and expedient is the american way. the delusion that this will somehow appease the jihadis and stop them is simply too attractive relative to what the US really needs to do but cannot because it is both morally and economically bankrupt.

so it’s not obama that is a problem. it’s western decline in general and american decline in particular. the elite only reflects it.

If ethnic American lobbies were to be expunged from the American political system, leaving all their concerns to be communicated most probably by Caucasian technocrats with Western European and Christian family backgrounds, then there would be justification to worry about an elite and hegemonic conspiracy and a lack of accountable representation in the American body politic.

Worth reading: http://tinyurl.com/yqs5mp

Israel, however, has done none of that. Israel has continued to treat the first Palestinians- who havent been violent- like dirt, and have walked all over them throughout the Peace Conference. With Islamic Extremism at an all time high, one would think a show of respect and progressive thinking towards the Arabs would be in order, especially considering the sensitivity of the Arab-Israeli issue. Instead, we have no progress, and we now risk losing our opportunity to convince Palestinians that Israel indeed even wants peace that isnt based entirely on their terms.

So what is it going to be? Are the Jews going to crucify a man who actually shows an intent to get things accomplished? Or is he going to be crucified by a lobby that cares so much about itself that its putting the United States at risk? Israel is a strong ally of the US, and should certainly remain so. But enough is enough. This is the United States, not Israel. With our soldiers dying across the world to battle this extremism, our country’s interests come first, not those of 3000 jewish settlers and AIPAC.

As a Muslim student in a government school Obama would also have had to take lessons in Islam for a couple of hours a week. Had his parents registered him as a Protestant, a Catholic or a Buddhist, then these lessons would have been devoted to one of those faiths instead.

There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest that Obama has ever been a believing Muslim, much less a practicing one. (Not that there’s anything wrong with either.) There is evidence to suggest that his mother and stepfather–neither of whom were particularly religious–chose to register their son as a Muslim when other options were available. But these were attenuated options; they could not have registered Obama as an atheist, agnostic, humanist or theist.

Why this should be an issue at all beats me.

There is also the issue of Muslims killing those that leave the religion. To admit he was a Muslim but is now a Christian creates a lot of issues he probably doesn’t want to deal with. So is it honesty or logic, belief, and self-preservation?

Rather, Jewish concerns regarding Obama’s candidacy should focus on whether Obama and his posse view American Jewry as a stumbling block in the way of promoting U.S. interests in the Middle East.

There is absolutely no doubt that American Likudniks are a stumbling block in the way of promoting U.S. and Jewish interests in the Middle East. Obama is running for the Presidency of the United States - not Israel - and there is no reason for him, or any other Presidential candidate, to listen to the weasel voices of treason voiced in the Contentions blog and Commentary magazine.

For more detail on Obama’s Muslim background, see the excellent articles on the subject at Daniel Pipe’s website.

I would argue that Democratic elites break down into three broad categories, all of which for somewhat reasons, oppose current policy with varying degrees of intensity:

1. Transnationalists. (S. Huntington’s term) This class represents those whose commercial interests are now multinational, and thus, have weakened national loyalties. (Think Wall Street, Davos attendees, etc.) In many respects, this is the new face of the Democratic elite, having replaced the antique, once-Republican paradigm of “Big Business.” This group has no inherent policy leanings, certainly few moral ones, other than a preference for the kind of “stability” that fosters commercial activity. Add to that the natural bias that comes from representing various sovereign entities (i.e., petrodollars) that do have a dog in the fight, and lo and behold, the US-Israel relationship suddenly becomes “counterproductive.”

2. Academicians. For regular posters here, this should require little comment other than the observation that US academics have taken their cues from their European counterparts at least since the 1820s, and the fads of “over there” eventually show up here. The fad that Bat Yeor finds “over there” is what she calls the “Palestinianization” of the European academy. Coming soon to a university near you.

3. African-American Leadership. Of course, the “black-Jewish rift” has been discussed since the 1960s. Less often mentioned is the hallucinatory and deeply entrenched anti-Semitism of the black community. Polls bear this out, and I’ve never seen a good study as to why this is–perhaps another poster can help. But putting aside their prejudices, it should be noted that every group (especially the Jews) suffers from a tendency to project its past onto somebody else’s present and future. Thus, Arial Sharon became Bull Connors, Yassir Arafat became MLK, and so forth.

The point of the foregoing is that other than for their fundraising potential, the Democrats have less and less need for Jews. In short, they will become much like the medieval princes who found Jews useful for helping to budget wars, but had little problem turning on them when the mobs howled for Jewish blood.

David: there was a poll done by the LA Times in August 2006 in the midst of the Israel-Hezbollah war. You won’t be surprised to learn the following:

When asked if Israel was justified in making war on Hezbollah and if Israel’s response was not excessively harsh, a total of 43% said yes. Of those saying yes, 29% were Democrats and 64% were Republicans. When asked if Israel was justified in making war on Hezbollah but if they also thought Israel’s response was excessively harsh, a total of 16% said yes. Of those saying yes to this question, 20% were Democrats and 11% were Republicans.

It gets worse: when asked should the US continue to align with Israel, only 50% said yes; of this 50%, 39% were Democrats and 64% Republicans. Adopt a more neutral posture? 44% said yes, of which 54% were Dems and 29% were Repubs. My guess is Obama and his creepy advisors are aware of this polling data, showing Democrats to be far less supportive of Israel than Republicans.

For the poll itself, go here: http://latimes.image2.trb.com/lanews/media/acrobat/2006-08/24694273.pdf. Daniel Pipes has information on this poll and others as well, here: http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/579.

There is a fairly well organized minority, some quite well-to-do and willing to donate to candidates, and some in the punditocracy, who embrace and give great weight to a combative version of Zionism. There are also Christian dispensationalists who are pro-Israel for different reasons. All viable Democratic candiddates for two generations have made their obeisances to this view, even if not fully embracing it. Sen. Obama is no different in this regard.

Since the demise of the Soviet Union, the close alliance with Israel has made very little strategic sense, but the domestic political cost of soft-pedaling it has outweighed any immediate foreign policy advantage to be gained by doing so. As long as these political realities exist, whether or not a President feels warm and fuzzy about Jews in general, the policy won’t change.