(Via Josh Marshall.)
ADDED: More on Khalidi here:
Mr. Khalidi, the Edward Said professor of Arab studies at Columbia, was born in Manhattan in 1948....I don't know what the whole quote was, but I see subtlety in that statement. Obama is speaking at an event honoring a colleague, so it's no time for insults. Obama gracefully uses self-deprecation as he speaks of his own flaws, which Khalidi reminded him to see. We don't know from that whether Khalidi successfully argued that Obama had blind spots and biases or whether Khalidi served as an example of blind spots and biases. I think we see a polite and circumspect man -- perhaps even a man who follows the teaching of Jesus:
He taught at universities in Lebanon until the mid-’80s, and some critics accuse him of having been a spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization. Mr. Khalidi has denied working for the group, and says he was consulted as an expert by reporters seeking to understand it.
He was an adviser to the Palestinian delegation during Middle East peace talks from 1991 to 1993. From 1987 until 2003, he was a professor at the University of Chicago, where he became friends with Mr. Obama.
At Mr. Khalidi’s farewell party in 2003, according to the Los Angeles Times article, Mr. Obama fondly recalled their many conversations, saying they provided “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases.”
Matthew 7
1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
Posts
292 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 292 of 292Why doesn't the LAT release the video let voters be the judge? I think we all know the answer.
PUMA's have a few comments about how Obama has and is running his "honorable" campaign.
The slander against Mr. Khalidi is unconscionable. McCain is losing ugly.
And the objection to the Ayers bullshit isn't primarily a semantic objection to the use of the word "terrorist," it's that Obama isn't responsible for what Ayers did or said.
Baloney. McCain is being accused of making voters think Obama is a Muslim and a terrorist. Now if Obama's name was Abe Goldstein and a lot of Americans thought he was a Jew, you wouldn't exactly fall out of your chair in shock or wonder where they were getting such a nutty idea, am I right? It wouldn't matter very much how many times he told us he was a Christian. But in this case the insistence by many Americans that Obama is a Muslim is being generated by the thugs on the right. And if those same thugs use the word "terrorist" (even when talking about a terrorist), it is all of a piece.
If Khalidi and the dinner were such a placid affair as Juris describes, why would LAT refuse to release the video? I don't buy 'they promissed to' non-argument. Would this argument work with the media, Juris including, if there was a tape that "implied" McCain participated in Israel bushing affair?
Mc Cain's is dirty campaign? The media are projecting, they are the ones that are guilty of dirty campaigning. McCain was prominent senator for ages and media were digging his stool for ages and now they come to new discoveries about his character? Pleeeeeeze ...
I don't side with Mc Cain, I never liked him. I'm not for Obama either. His pitch of "hope" was a strike of genius, because with him being a big unknown, the thing you need most to support him is hope that he delivers at least on some of his promises without making mistakes that we'll have to pay for for ages. OTOH, to the lesser extent the same applies to McCain, but his "dirty campaigning" is another fable written buy the "reporters".
For those of you who are buying the narrative that Rha is just some middle eastern scholar... He was a spokesperson for the PLO.
Don't believe me... how about Thomas Friedman in 1982?
The evidence for the connections between Khalidi and the PLO are much more explicit than that. Thomas Friedman, in a June 8, 1982 New York Times piece about the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, referred to Khalidi as "a director of the Palestinian press agency, Wafa." To be clear, Wafa is controlled by the PLO --and you don't have to take my word for it. Even Khalidi himself, on page 7 of his 1986 book Under Siege: P.L.O. Decisionmaking During the 1982 War, describes it as "the P.L.O.'s news agency."
Why doesn't the LAT release the video let voters be the judge? I think we all know the answer.
Yet, you keep asking the question.
The answer is "because they got the tape with the agreement they would not release it publicly."
Althouse has truly rounded the bend from being a ditz to being a complete and utter idiot.
I'd really like to see her response to a few from this list of reasons to oppose Obama.
They don't have to release the tape. They could just release a transcript. Why not do that?
"They don't have to release the tape. They could just release a transcript. Why not do that?"
Because it's obvious that the tape and its contents will be extremely damaging to their candidate. And Obama's probably threatened them, as he likes to do to our supposedly free press.
And Obama's probably threatened them, as he likes to do to our supposedly free press.
$20 says Palladian was one of the clowns calling for the imprisonment of NYT reporters for exposing the (an) illegal government wiretapping program.
How the hell does this rise to a top concern for you people? This is just bizarre.
All of a sudden you all are experts on this guy all or most of you probably never heard of before last week!
And you know enough about this guy to hate him, to condemn anyone who has had anything to do with him. What judgment you have!
This is about the 5th or 6th association Obama has had with another person that the Repubs have gone bonkers over. And it's just hurting your candidate. It's not working.
Beyond that, people have a right to free association in this country. Talking with, and relating to, people you disagree with is no crime. It's actually to a person's credit as an individual to talk with many different people, not just one kind.
God, this is dumb. Mean-spirited and dumb.
Oh, and quoting Matthew 7:1-5 is extraordinarily lame, Althouse. It's right up there with quoting the dictionary.
Read a little further in Matthew 7:
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
All of a sudden you all are experts on this guy all or most of you probably never heard of before last week!
Uh, actually, no, this has been bubbling for months. Months.
This is just how long it takes to actually get MSM attention.
Uh, actually, no, this has been bubbling for months. Months.
You've just got to read the really, really disgusting right wing blogs to catch the wave early.
"$20 says Palladian was one of the clowns calling for the imprisonment of NYT reporters for exposing the (an) illegal government wiretapping program."
You lose, big spender. But don't you think there's a better way to spend your welfare check than making silly bets on weblogs?
But don't you think there's a better way to spend your welfare check than making silly bets on weblogs?
How much does your mom charge for a beej?
OOOOOHHHHH!
Doyle:
Except, of course, for the fact that they obtained it on the condition that they wouldn't release it.
Good grief, Doyle, even you aren't stupid enough to believe that, are you?
Today's conservatives behave very much like the followers of Mao or any other authoritarian or totalitarian leader. Mao had a Cultural Revolution but today's modern American conservatives have a Culture War. Same difference.
Modern conservatives are like the bleating hordes in Orwell's Animal Farm. When told to turn on a person, even someone they know noting about, they do so unthinkingly.
It's a storm of idiocy and blind devotion to a party.
AL:
The answer is "because they got the tape with the agreement they would not release it publicly."
Good grief, AL, even you.....oh, nevermind.
AL:
It's a storm of idiocy and blind devotion to a party.
A very apt description of you AL.
Today's conservatives behave very much like the followers of Mao or any other authoritarian or totalitarian leader.
Except for the authoritarian or totalitarian part.
Why not? You really should. It is racist fearmongering. The presumption of scary anti-American goings on is pure McCarthyite wingnut fantasy.
So why not release a transcript? Wouldn't that put us all in our places?
Someone who made McCain look bad had his personal information researched by a government employee and released to the public.
Oh wait... that was Obama, not McCain.
Funny about that promise not to release it.
I mean, yes, the press does an admirable job of protecting source anonymity. You read about it all the time: a source is quoted as saying "who spoke on the condition of anonymity because..." "whose asked his name be withheld because..." etc. etc.
Nothing like that in the original LA TImes article. They obtained the tape. That's it.
Then when people started asking for the tape? No comment. When that didn't work? "We reported on it in April, that's good enough."
Sure took them a long time to come up with the latest story.
And why did they feel the need to volunteer the additional information that releasing the tape could put their source in jeopardy? Just who are we dealing with here? Why would seeing a video tape of the events put anyone in jeopardy?
So why not release a transcript?
My guess? Because that would qualify as "releasing" it.
Too many jims said...
"To start a narrative that she lies about things you need to know either that she lied or that it could be portrayed as a lie. I just can't believe the campaign was stupid enough or undisiciplined enough to start that ball rolling if they did not know she was lying."
The Obama campaign has time and again demonstrated an understanding of the importance of speed. They get Patton's quip that in war, a good plan that can be violently executed today is better than a perfect plan that will be ready next week. Everyone knew in advance when McCain would announce his pick; I find it entirely plausible that they were ready to immediately fire back, had a plan ready to go for Ridge, Romney, whomever, but were genuinely blindsided by the pick. (Even those of us who advocated Palin didn't think McCain was actually smart enough to do it.) So what were they to do? Cede the entire cycle to McCain and Palin - or fire back with anything they could stuff in a cannon? I think they might well have reached for anything that they could use to strike back with, a conclusion bolstered by what I said above about corrections issued later having less impact than headlines. Besides, if they changed strategy and floated the story out via an anonymous blog account, it wasn't as though they were going to get any blowback, even if it turned out to be wrong. I find it sufficiently believable.
"The second was much sillier. It was also petty and I regretted posting it. My apologies. I do usually try to avoid such postings with you."
Water off a duck's back. :)
"I can only say that I have been diagnosed as being dreanged for suggesting that Bush and Republicans were irresponsible with the deficit and suggesting that we needed more troops in Iraq before the 2006 elections."
That's unfortunate, and silly (their silliness, that is, not yours), because by those metrics, you and I were both suffering from BDS, and are still. That can't be right. By BDS, I understand things like "Bush Lied People Died" and the 9/11 truth squad. Similarly, by ODS, I tend to think of the "Obama is a muslim" meme. I don't think that covers my position.
"Ok, you're not ready to acknowledge that some of the deterioration in support for her is due to her shortcomings. I'll check back some other time."
I'd wait until ABC releases the full, unedited raw footage of the Couric interview.
Except for the authoritarian or totalitarian part.
You. have. got. to. be. kidding.
Like when you told us we couldn't criticize Bush all those years after 9/11?
Like when you said this year that Sarah Palin couldn't be criticized?
Like when you march in lockstep behind whatever idiotic ad hominem your party leaders trot out?
Like when you tell us that we need to surrender civil liberties for imagined security, we need to trust authorities with the power to torture people, we must not associate with people who might have differing views from the conventional wisdom?
Except for the alarming "Unitary Executive" theory that would subjugate other branches of government to a kingly Presidency?
Modern Republicans are alarmingly autocratic and hostile to the very notion of freedoms this country was founded on, like the freedom of association
OK, I just got back from the Gays For Palin rally.
I have to say I was a little disappointed in the turn out but what we lacked in number we made up for in spirit.
Two country western guys came because they thought this was some "Gays for Patsy" meeting. As in Patsy Cline. The gays love her. They left after finding out it was Gays For Palin.
There were two gay guys, two lipstick lesbians. There were also two draq queens who came thinking it was a Palin look a like contest but left when they realized it was a Gays For Palin rally.
We had lovely banners and marched through Chelsea. Our fellow gays yelled bad things at us. I guess my people really don't celebrate diversity like our motto says.
If the tape makes Obama look bad then the person who gave it to the LA Times will probably get tried for some sort of wiretapping thing, recording someone without permission.
Certainly that person would be in jeopardy.
If Obama didn't do it, one of his followers would.
If nothing else the "guilty" party would have some lady with access to personal information in a government office someplace, do a back ground and records check on him.
Doyle cracks wise:
So why not release a transcript?
My guess? Because that would qualify as "releasing" it.
Thanks for the laugh. These jokers aren't that funny around here.
What is funny is how they were arguing (in lockstep, or goosestep) that Judith Miller should not have had to release her sources who outed Valerie Plame, the CIA agent working on weapons of mass destruction.
After the parade I did it with the other gay guy that attended.
I also think the lipstick lesbians were going to be moving in with each other over the weekend.
So in my small way I brought people together today and for that I am very happy.
Ah, that was nice piece of polemic there, AL. Project much?
What consequences did you suffer when you criticized Bush or Palin, AL? Besides of course coming across like an idiot and being excoriated for it here, I mean.
Did we rifle through your tax records? Did we investigate your voter registrations? Did we publish your personal address on the Internet? Did we open a case file at Child Protective Services?
Oh, I'm sorry, that was Joe the Plumber.
Yeah, AL, like I noticed anyone NOT doing those things.
Wow.
It's easy to rail against the totalitarian authoritarians when there is NO RISK to do so because they aren't, you know, either totalitarian or authoritarian.
But make Obama look bad and expect someone with access in a government office someplace to make sure you pay by digging through your personal life and releasing your private information.
What is funny is how they were arguing (in lockstep, or goosestep) that Judith Miller should not have had to release her sources who outed Valerie Plame, the CIA agent working on weapons of mass destruction.
Is that how you want to roll, AL? You want to concede those arguments were correct back then? Or do you want to concede they would be just as wrong now?
Republicans have done more than their share of bombings.
No kidding. Like their "Shock and Awe" bombing campaign on Baghdad.
"Shock and Awe" being another word for "terror." (You can look it up). But Republican terrorism is okay when visited on Arabs.
mcg, Judith Miller helped to cover up the act of a crime. (Just ask Scooter Libby).
That's a bit different than not releasing a video to help the right wing conduct another witchhunt.
I doubt you can see the difference.
Yes, of course, AL.
Are you going to be all brave and trash the military now?
You go ahead let us know when you've excommunicated Bill "Kosovo" Clinton from your party, AL.
That's a bit different than not releasing a video to help the right wing conduct another witchhunt.
Good to know that you and Doyle agree that the tape would be bad for Obama. No doubt you know what sort of pandering to the PLO, anti-Israel, crap is undoubtedly on it.
After doing the other gay guy from the Gays for Palin rally we went and got matching Palin tattoos on our butt cheeks.
Of course, what gets me most is that a whole lot of people in this country really are pro-PLO, pro-Palestine, and very anti-Israel.
So, you know, why not be honest about that?
Just like Ayers is a communist who views education as the way to push his agenda and who thinks that Chevez is nifty.
Certainly not an unusual opinion in some quarters.
If these associations are meaningless, why do people on the left go ballistic when they are brought up? Because they aren't meaningless, and they damaging to Obama.
If they can't keep the information from you, they'll chastise you, or investigate you until you shut up about what you know.
The press will make us live under an authoritarian regime, even if Obama doesn't.
Doyle said...
So why not release a transcript?
My guess? Because that would qualify as "releasing" it.
2:57 PM
Why would Doyle say such a stupid thing? My guess? He is not capable of embarassment.
The real reason Romney didn't win was his slightly unconvincing conversion from a Massachusetts moderate Republican to a conservative. He went from pro-choice to pro-life & from approving illegal immigration and National Health Insurance to opposing them. As a result, a lot of conservatives never trusted him.
He was not a good sell in the South due to his his New England background, Mormonism & Corporate CEO look. As for Hutchinson, she's boring and is too Conservative & independent for McCain - she's also a Senator.
One reason Palin was picked is she has no record of disagreeing with "Big John".
alpha, what was Operation Desert Fox all about?
Good to know that you and Doyle agree that the tape would be bad for Obama.
Where did I agree to that?
No doubt you know what sort of pandering to the PLO, anti-Israel, crap is undoubtedly on it.
Yes Obama surely did a lot of pandering to the PLO because as we all know, if the're one lobby an American politician had best not piss off it's the Palestine Lobby.
ssh! Don't bring that up, jen! It forces them to consider that there might actually be differences between military action and terrorism! It undermines their moral equivalence arguments!
if the're one lobby an American politician had best not piss off it's the Palestine Lobby.
They run all the banks you know.
They run all the banks you know.
Khalidi is a terrorist name.
It undermines their moral equivalence arguments!
Nothing can undermine their moral equivalence arguments.
Yes Obama surely did a lot of pandering to the PLO because as we all know, if the're one lobby an American politician had best not piss off it's the Palestine Lobby.
So... why not release a tape (or just a transcript) of a wonderful pro-Israel event?
Gateway Pundit has proof that Khalidi was a PLO operative, not just a "college professor"
You guys have one line in an article 26 years old that you claim proves something. (Actually, I'm not convinced the quote is accurate and I'm not spending $4 to find out).
Don't you think if this Rashid Khalidi was an officer in the PLO there'd be more than that to go by than one part of sentence so long ago?
And, Gateway Pundit makes the intellectually bankrupt claim that thanking the PLO for granting access to their archives proves.... something?
I look up my name on Facebook a couple months back and got about 20 pages of hits back. I think this poor fellow under attack may not be thee only "Rashid Khalidi" in the world.
It certainly is not cause to bust out the tar and feathers.
Face it, Doyle (and AL, too)...
The norm for academia, for our intellectual betters, is to condemn Israel and sympathize with the poor, oppressed, Palestinians.
You KNOW what's on that tape.
Obama just does a really good job of seeming not to take sides about anything. Or better yet, being on your side, whatever it is. (Insisting that he's pro-gun and that the 2nd Amendment is an individual Right while still pleasing the gun-control lobby is just one example of this amazing ability.) But he can only do that when cameras aren't allowed.
The "cling to guns and religion" thing was video taken against the explicit "no recording" rule. Can't have record of him saying one thing to one group and something else to another.
You KNOW what's on that tape.
LOL. This is fun.
There is too much bickering back and forth.
It is Halloween. Boo!
It's Friday.
Let's celebrate.
I watched the movie Ed Gein last night.
Did you all know that my mom worked at Mendota Mental Health Hopsital? This was the hospital that he stayed at after he was caught.
My mom said he was very quiet and never caused any problems.
He died in 1984.
Psycho the movie was based off of part of his life as well as Silence of the Lambs.
I liked the part in the movie Ed Gein when he wore the women's body suit and danced around outside.
doyle, the thing that seems to elude you - and maybe it's because you're really young, I don't know - is that this stuff comes up because Obama has no record on which a voter can discern where he really stands. He has associated with a segment of left wing academia (and theology) that regards Israel as "racist". Then suddenly he became "pro-Israel" after he re-wrote his district in order to get more coin and appeal to educated white liberals in Chicago. Now it's not at all clear to a lot of people whether his views have "evolved", or if he is (as Wright has said) saying what is required to get elected. We have nothing to go on. Plenty of Jews believe he gets it, and plenty of Palestinians think he's bullshitting because of AIPAC. And that's a big problem.
My two favorite senators are Mary Landrieu and Olympia Snowe.
I think they are both cute.
They make me smile.
They are nice.
They work across the aisle.
They have nice hair.
They have pretty faces.
I hope Mary wins her re election.
They run all the banks you know.
Thanks, mcg. I needed a good laugh.
The bickering in here is worse than my kids' trying to decide which dvd to watch, and just as productive. No one is ever going to convince AL or Doyle of anything, so why bother trying?
Khalidi worked for the PLO, Juris sees racism everywhere, and the media is so far in the tank for Obama and so deep in denial about it that they won't even admit the tank exists. There is no one commenting on this blog who is undecided -- but go on, keep that vortex going. Knock yourselves out.
Titus: good for you, man. I'm glad you had a good time, and I'm sure you looked fabulous throughout.
Yeah, it's fun.
Fun to watch you repeat over and over that it can't be released, not because you know it shows a bunch of academics being sympathetic to Palestine, but for the "higher purpose" that someone gives a tape to a news agency because they don't want anyone to see it.
Usually this game is played with a spinner and a plastic sheet with colored circles on it.
Jen -
What seems to elude you, and maybe it's because you're a paranoid freak, I don't know, is that people aren't anti-semitic or "anti-Israel" just because they don't agree with the American or Israeli right.
Oh thanks doyle, a straw man for halloween. Shouldn't have.
The Republican attempt to peel away the Jewish vote has failed big time:
New Gallup poll shows 75% of U.S. Jews plan to vote Obama
Great question from Josh Marshall (a Jew):
Why are right-wing freaks now the self-appointed defenders of Jews, defending us from the candidates the overwhelming proportion of us Jews plan to vote for?
Hate on, you haters. You fail.
He did the Mash.
The Monster Mash
It caught on in a Flash
The Monster Mash.
Wa OUUUUUUUUU
Well it was the least I could do after this guilt-by-association-with-a-straw-man:
He has associated with a segment of left wing academia (and theology) that regards Israel as "racist".
Why are right-wing freaks now the self-appointed defenders of Jews, defending us from the candidates the overwhelming proportion of us Jews plan to vote for?
We're not defenders of the Jews so much as we're defenders of Israel. And do you know how those Americans who lived in Israel voted?
Okay, I have not paid my $4 for the June 8, 1982 article by Thomas Friedman, titled, ISRAELIS SEIZE CASTLE IN NORTHERN SWEEP; SYRIAN JETS AND GUNS JOIN LEBANON BATTLE
The name "Rashid Khalidi" shows up nowhere in the article.
"Wafa" does show up but without any individual's name associated with it.
Liars.
"On the western front, 25 miles south of Beirut, Israeli armored units and infantrymen, supported by air strikes and naval bombardment, were reported by Lebanese television and Wafa, the press agency of the Palestine Liberation Organization,"
"The Israeli push on Sidon, Wafa said, followed a landing by an undetermined number of Israeli troops and tanks late Sunday night at the mouth of the Awwali River north of the city. "
"...aided by a third group of Israeli troops coming from the east, Wafa said. "
"...still engaged in rocket, machine-gun and artillery exchanges with Palestinian guerrillas, Wafa said. "
"A communique issued Monday evening by Wafa, said that more than 45,000 Israeli troops had been thrown into the invasion and 400 of them had been killed since the attack began Sunday. In addition, Wafa said the guerrillas had knocked out about 45 Israeli tanks and an equal number of armored personnel carriers. It did not disclose Palestinian losses. "
"Wafa said that a fierce firefight was raging overnight on the outskirts of Sidon...."
"Wafa has stopped mentioning them in its communiques. "
"According to Wafa, the guerrillas have pulled back ..."
Here is the link to the story so you Republicans can see how you have been so easily duped.
Oops...
I have "now" paid....
Mistype.
MM,
I fully support your view about incumbents.
Most of us also agree that Lott should not have gotten a pass, however,
why is Obama different? Is it only because the press refuses to reveal what he said?
Can't we infer that what he said was at least embarassing, if not disqualifyig?
You are a scientist. You recognize that there are quite a number of medical and sub-atomic experiments where you never actually "See" what it is that you are using sensors to measure, yet even then, you can determine the nature of the thing being studied.
Many of us, think we have determined the nature of Obama's remarks by studying the LAT's defense of them
Last summer, Obama showed up at a meeting of Israeli news editors and a few people high in their government - to answer questions. By himself. The Jerusalem Post said he did spectacularly well, showing a good understanding of the issues and awareness of the perspectives of not just Israel, but the Palestinians and other Arab parties.
McCain showed up later. The Post reported that McCain was more into talking about his character and making statements of support. When asked specifics, he leaned on Sen Joe Lieberman, who had come along to the meeting. The meeting participants thought McCain wasn't too impressive, was very vague..
Part of the explaination for that meeting is that Obama has studied the ME as an undergrad, then not only had fabulously wealthy Jewish mentors like the Crowns and Klutzniks prominent in Israel affairs helping his and his wife's careers(Klutznik Sr. headed the World Jewish Federation), but he also had long contact with Rashid Khalidi and other ME scholars to get the other side of ME affairs, and learn how the Muslim countries work outside the Israel controversy.
That seems to position Obama very well.
And Rashid Khalidi happens to be one of America's leading ME scholars, educated at Yale and Oxford..significant scholarly publications, with texts of his standard in most ME Studies Programs. And Khalili's Institute got grant money from both Republicans (including McCain) and Democrats. He is an American, born in New York to a Palestinian Muslim UN diplomat and a Lebanese Christian mom. He attended Christian-denominated schools, is a secularist.
He is pro-Palestinian.
Obama also has friends and associates with views 180 out from him, active Zionists or pro-Israel.
Like his other displays of moving comfortably between people of different ideologies, he has top ME scholars he has known for years on both sides.
That is a strength to me, not a weakness.
And perhaps a reason he has 60% of the vote of Arab-Americans and 74% of the Jewish vote. And is favored by 75% of Israelis.
As for McCain and Palin - they seem to be using their last days of campaigning in a stupid game of guilt by association - given the Jewish support of Obama is rock-solid. Even stupider when you consider what Palin calls "a terrorist" was getting grant money from John McCain and has been at the White House and Camp David for policy summits attended by Cheney and Bush, as well as meetings with Clinton in the 90s.
Stupider still given voters want to know who is the best person to fix things - and McCain and Palin blew 2 weeks tying to pump up the "Obama-Ayers" tie.
And know that people don't care, because it didn't do anything to affect McCains drop in the polls.
Now he goes from an actual radical bad guy to one of the country's best scholars - supported by top people from both Parties? Idiots!
The Republicans that brainstormed up this guilt-by-association witch hunt fell into lockstep with the Zionists that have demanded for years that anyone who rejects their vision be branded a terrorist. That any act of resistance against the occupier is terrorism, and any act or speech demanding justice for those whose lands and property and relatives lives taken with no compensation are terrorists.
It's a crock when you consider how ludicrous similar demands on the American public would be to "choose the good guys" in any number of long-lived disputes abroad and be like the Zionists and collectively brand anyone who opposes them "terrorists, terrorist sympathizers".
Irish independence vs. the Brits.
Sikh autonomy vs. Hindu dominance.
Greeks vs. Turk land claims.
Basque and Catalan independence vs. Spain.
Flemish vs. Walloons.
Tamil rights vs. Singhalese on Sri Lanka.
Taiwan vs. China.
And many other long-running disputes.
Now, if the Zionist logic is applied, we would have to choose, say, between the Greek and Turk claims...and if we went with the Turks - then all the 3 million Greek Americans and their backers would be terrorists or terrorist sympathizers..even...NEO-NAZIS!! WORSE THAN HITLER!!!
Support the Brits? Well then if you are a candidate, then you are supposed to condemn - the "other side" - those suds quaffing Irish-American paddy-types singing "Danny Boy".
Its a stupid and ethnically destructive smear game McCain and Palin got caught up in as another way to show their endless devotion to Sacred Israel, the country that is somehow our "Special Friend" - the 51st State and such to it's boosters.
George Washington, TDR, and Wilson all had strong things to say about leaving foreign disputes behind if they conflicted with being American and putting America 1st. No dual loyalties, no dual citizenships without strict scrutiny. And put muscle into the 3 men's statements by deporting people that wouldn't agree to put American interests 1st.
Kahlidi himself perhaps had the best response when asked about Palin denouncing him. "I have no comment, just waiting for this idiot wind to blow away".
Bob Dylan would have been proud.
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth,
Blowing down the backroads headin south.
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth,
Youre an idiot, babe.
Its a wonder that you still know how to breathe.
Suck on it, AlphaLiberal.
Come on. If Friedman didn't say it, then why are so many people, including Khalidi himself, saying Friedman erred when he did so?
AlphaLiberal: I think you might be off by a day. Check June 9, 1982.
Here's the query link. The great thing is you don't need to buy the article to see the quote---it's right there in the excerpt!
OK, I'm done for now. Gotta get ready for Halloween. But in the spirit of good will I share a link that should be fun for partisans of either stripe.
Kiss my ass, mcg.
I went and looked under the day you guys cite. So, okay, your mob cited the wrong day. My bad?
And, I'll repeat my earlier question all of you have ignored:
If Professor Khalid was an officer of the PLO or WAFA, why is this the only shred of evidence to support that claim?
The Republican attempt to peel away the Jewish vote has failed big time:
I don't know what it means but it's very interesting that you'd frame this as an attempt to peel away the Jewish vote. Is it always about identity groups?
People who think that way are going to vote Democrat.
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
But all this means is that if you judge justly, then you will be judged justly.
If you extend mercy, you will have mercy extended to you.
It doesn't mean don't just at all. We make a judgement every time we do anything of import.
Thanks for the link, mcg. It was funny.
But, also...
That the pair-up is Obama/Palin.
Again.
:-)
Gosh, nothing makes Cedarford's little tadger stiffer than a good old fashioned Jew hater, whether he's black like Reverend Wright or Arab like Khalidi. You can guarantee that this information about Obama's association with Khalidi will blow away all of Cedarford's previous tripe about Obama being a puppet of the Pritzker's and all those other nefarious Chicago Jews. Cedarford is now down on his knees for Obama! See, Obama really is a chameleon who makes everyone think he agrees with them! For some, Obama is the secular liberal Jew's best friend. For Cedarford, there's a Hitler moustache and a copy of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion tucked in Obama's shadowy soul.
Sorta like the ones who leaked the divorce records of Ryan that allowed Bambi to become a senator. No problem with releasing them in toto after that. Why is there a problem with releasing this tape in toto since we already have been told a little of what is on it. Both cases the info was not to be released. It was and in toto against the Republican. Why not this part as well.
I went and looked under the day you guys cite. So, okay, your mob cited the wrong day. My bad?
Yes. Your bad for jumping to the conclusion it was made up out of whole cloth. Perhaps someone gave you the wrong date, but the folks I've seen had it right. Again, if it wasn't there, why is Khalidi himself saying Mr. Friedman was wrong for saying it?
If Professor Khalid was an officer of the PLO or WAFA, why is this the only shred of evidence to support that claim?
Because it's not. Check the Martin Kramer link I previously posted, for instance; he's been following Khalidi for years, well before the presidential campaign.
Obama has chosen to associate closely (20 yrs in the church, donating money, serving on boards, etc.) with people who have done and said things he claims now to find morally repugnant. Asking for information about those relationships and trying to discern where he stands on issues of race, economics, education, etc. is 100% legit in a Presidential race.
I'm not going to be played by people who want me to feel "ashamed of myself" for having the temerity to wonder if a politicians campaign promises line up with past statements and actions. That is what the press is for, and they have been a disaster.
Palladian, translated:
"Suck, suck, slurp...
umm, one second, Lucious..have to type..Don't worry, its not like I'm on my knees paying you by the hour..."
(and in conclusion)For Cedarford, there's a Hitler moustache and a copy of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion tucked in Obama's shadowy soul
"Ha! Great stuff, huh, Lucious? Mmmmmph! Suck, slurp, suck, suck. Gulp, gulp.."
Why are right-wing freaks now the self-appointed defenders of Jews, defending us from the candidates the overwhelming proportion of us Jews plan to vote for?
Most Jews, like most Americans in general, get their information from the Obama-fellating mainstream news media. It is hardly a surprise that they're planning to support him.
The relevant question is, would they still support him as strongly if they thought he was sympathetic to the PLO? Of course they wouldn't.
Can I wait until Obama gets elected to take out a mortgage and then stop paying on it, or should I take one out now?
Dang, wish I'd bought that Ram Hemi instead of the Neon.
Scripture coming from Ann Althouse...a law professor. Reminds me of when Satan and Jesus were on the pinnacle of the temple.
The thing with Obama is his ability to "reassure" people with completely incompatible agendas. Khalidi holds the Clinton administration far more responsible for the current status of Palestinians than Bush, on the basis that far more settlements were created during the 90's. He never bought into Clinton's peace process at all. Meanwhile, Obama's ME advisor is none other than Dennis Ross, who gave a glowing appraisal of him recently in Haaretz.
It's not that I think Obama "supports the PLO" or the Weathermen, or anything else. It's a discomfort in the fact that he believes so fervently in the idea that everyone's views must have some merit. I'm sorry, I don't believe that. Some ideas are just demented and dangerous. BO speaks as if the Islamic fundamentalist threat can be sorted out through dialogue and mutual understanding, with a little police work thrown in. Khalidi says Hamas must be invited to negotiate with Israel without precondition. It's that whole idea that Ahmadinejad, or Hamas or whoever else has some legitimate view that deserves to be heard and understood. But they don't. So for me, it's Obama's idea of statecraft and his fundamental philosophy of how to use American power that worries me.
Despite Judis's mischaracterization of both issues, repetitive offending and chronic welfarism are not racist and therefore illegitimate topics just because some visible participants are black.
As for Obama, Ann, a man who follows the teaching of the biblical Jesus, does not sit at the feet of his "spiritual mentor" for twenty years soaking up the hate-filled Marxist racism of Black Liberation Theology. (Judge not, Jeremiah! Wright? Er, right?)
The issue isn't Khalidi's sentiments or past employment. The issue is whether the LA Times is covering Obama's tolerance for, or participation in, anti-Israel rhetoric. The context is the ongoing media coverup of Obama's controversial behavior.
Within that context, does anybody really believe the Times is concealing this tape because of a promise to some "source?"
As for Obama, Ann, a man who follows the teaching of the biblical Jesus, does not sit at the feet of his "spiritual mentor" for twenty years soaking up the hate-filled Marxist racism of Black Liberation Theology. (Judge not, Jeremiah! Wright? Er, right?)
Or at the least a man following Jesus doesn't sit there at Wright's feet without noticing what he says! I've got no real issue with someone who could say that he respects Rev. Wright but never-the-less has told him from time to time that motivating black parishioners is all well and good, but demonizing Israel or whites is not *helpful*. Did he never feel like he ought to defend his mother or grandparents? Why couldn't he chuckle and say, "Well, yes, he and I have argued those things from time to time." But no... not only didn't he discuss these issues with his mentor, he didn't *hear* them.
The tape, like the truth, will out, sooner or later.
Later, it damages a sitting President. A scandal early in his administration. A distraction that impairs his ability to function, even if only briefly.
It undermines trust in him among voters who see him in a lie - a big lie, too, one that causes an erstwhile ally to cool. Alone, that small nation does what any cornered animal would do.
BHO may win the battle, and as a result maybe carry the Presidency. But it will injure him. One suspects it will be the first of many revelations. Like Clinton, dogged by scandal the press tried to hush rather than vetting him.
And this lie will finish off the LA Times, among other old media, except among true believers. Gone. Some will find work directly for the administration, but not very many.
The cover-up compounds the crime. And as I said before, this video must be really really bad for Obama to have the left frothing and bitching so severely.
When they see it, they'll be able to ignore it, for awhile, but their Prince will have been exposed as a fraud, if even briefly. Not Camelot at all, but just plain old dirty Chicago.
Our own President Kwame Kilpatrick. Our own Mugabe or Mao. Not hope but a greased palm. Telling the truth a few months ago might have made this whole thing old news. Now it's a big deal, a lie assisted by the supposed watchdog.
Dunno, it just seems dumb, as well as dishonorable.
And finally Althouse proves herself to be an utter left wing hack with this post.
What I've concluded from this election is "guilt by association" doesn't work against Democrats, only Republicans. If McCain had a dinner with David Duke, you can be 2000% sure that the MSM, and AlphaLiberal would be all over it like flies in dung.
It was indeed the Los Angeles Times that fought the legal battle to have Jack and Jeri Ryan's divorce records unsealed when Ryan was running for Congress against Obama.
They had divorce records unsealed. Neither Jack nor Jeri Ryan wanted them unsealed. Obama and the LATs did.
Compare that to not showing or thoroughly describing a tape of a Presidential candidate at a party.
There is only one thing that makes those two actions consistent, that is that they both benefit Obama.
For those who wonder at the sudden surfeit of bible verses to underscore Ann’s posts, it seems out hostess is sensitive.
Is Ann Althouse a Religious Fanatic?
It was written tongue in cheek, and this is Ann responding.
Here's one for you: The event occurred and was taped. It went off so direly that someone foresaw the need for damage control, knowing it would have to get out. This soul took a copy of the tape to LAT and presented it with the condition that it not be used.
So,
The tape is in the media's hands
It cannot be used
??? PROFIT!!!!1!!eleve4!!!!
They have immunized themselves. The only out is for some LAT rebel to sneak a copy of the tape out to another media outlet, which will not happen. Yet.
Excuses given for refusing even a written or audio transcript cannot, of course, be attempted to be believed.
Post a Comment