Russert Amplifies "Anti-Israel" Smear Campaign Against Obama

[Purveyor]

The Nation -- In her 2000 race for the US Senate, Hillary Clinton was repeatedly smeared for a 1999 trip to Ramallah, where she kissed Palestinian First Lady Suha Arafat and listened as Arafat denounced Israel. Pictures of "the kiss" were repeatedly slapped across the cover of the New York Post, in TV ads and invoked by the campaigns of Rudy Giuliani and Rick Lazio. The flap almost derailed Clinton's campaign.

This time around, Barack Obama has been a victim of an even dirtier smear campaign, with conservative Jews and conservative Christians, rival campaign operatives and fringe conspiracy theorists in the gutter press, like Free Republic, WorldNetDaily and NewsMax, circulating blatantly false emails and articles portraying Obama as a radical Black Israel-hating, terrorist-loving Muslim.

In last night's Democratic debate, Tim Russert amplified the smear campaign by asking Obama about his "endorsement" by Louis Farrakhan, which Obama didn't ask for and who he has repeatedly denounced.

"I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments," Obama said last night. But Russert wouldn't let the issue die, repeatedly pressing Obama to "reject" Farrakhan. Russert then invoked Obama's pastor and asked, "What do you do to assure Jewish-Americans that, whether it's Farrakhan's support or the activities of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, your pastor, you are consistent with issues regarding Israel and not in any way suggesting that Farrakhan epitomizes greatness?"

Obama never suggested any such thing. "Tim, I have some of the strongest support from the Jewish community in my hometown of Chicago and in this presidential campaign," Obama said. "And the reason that I have such strong support is because they know that not only would I not tolerate anti-Semitism in any form, but also because of the fact that what I want to do is rebuild what I consider to be a historic relationship between the African-American community and the Jewish community."

---eoe---

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080227/cm_thenation/45291517

[joeybee12]

1. Nice to see BO doesn't answer the question...

...just pointing out that that's what a politician does, and some of you people don't seem to get that.

[Emit]

2. Not sure I follow

what?

[Usrename]

9. What don't you get?

Obama is a terrorist out to destroy Israel. Didn't you get the memo?

Do I need a :sarcasm: thingy here?

[Emit]

10. lol!

Well I got that memo.

[writes3000]

3. He Denounced Farrakhan.

I don't think anyone listening thought that Obama was saying Farrakhan "epitomizes greatness." He had answered the question before it had been asked.

[JimGinPA]

4. Anyone Doubting Fat Timmy's RW Agenda Should Wake Up

He makes me want to rip my hair out.


:mad:

[tyne]

5. Bring it on!

Get it all out. Give him practice.

[ProSense]

6. "Enter Hillary Clinton."

A promise no Jewish liberal can ignore

After watching the debate this evening, I added some new remarks about it with parts of the feature I wrote Tuesday for the print edition.

<...>

I keep reminding myself of these numbers as I think about the constant noise made by people who are now trying to portray Senator Barak Obama as a Muslim. One has to conclude: If religious fluidity is such an American routine - then Obama's personal biography is even more representative of the American experience than anyone could have imagined.

<...>

Tim Russert started the debate by pressing Obama on the endorsement he got from the anti-Semitic African-American leader Louis Farrakhan. Obama said: "I have been very clear in my denunciations of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments. I did not solicit this support."

Enter Hillary Clinton.

If anyone had any doubt that Hillary's campaign is trying to score points against Obama in the Jewish community - today she gave us the proof, publicly. "You asked specifically if he (Obama) would reject it (the endorsement) and there's a difference between denouncing and rejecting", she argued. Meaning - Obama is merely denouncing Farrakhan instead of rejecting the endorsement.

What was she trying to say - that Obama is somewhat anti-Semitic? Let's assume she was just thinking that Obama was playing politics and is trying not to offend Farrakhan's supporters while he denounces his views.

In any case, in this exchange Obama got the upper hand: "If the word 'reject' Senator Clinton feels is stronger than the word 'denounce', then I'm happy to concede the point and I would reject and denounce (Farrakhan)" he said.

Obama spoke about this same issue a few days ago as he was meeting a group of Jewish activists in Cleveland. Some who attended the event and do not belong to his camp said he was very convincing. "At his best," one of them said. But in the debate he was even better and was able to score again on the same topic, elaborating on something of great importance to Jewish liberals.

Just recently we were all watching The Jewish Americans series on PBS, in which the story of Jewish involvement in the civil rights movement was front and center - and the part describing how the bond between black Americans and Jewish Americans was breaking was almost puzzling.

Obama, talking about Farrakhan - and about anti-Semitism among African-Americans, which he also denounced in his speech on Martin Luther King Day - touched a sensitive nerve when he was talking about one possibility that's inherent to his candidacy: he has the chance to restore the alliance between blacks and Jews.

This will not necessarily get Obama the votes of every Jewish liberal in this country. But it is also one promise that no American liberal Jew can simply ignore.

link

[JimGinPA]

7. Nice Post nt

[Recursion]

8. Part of the problem is that America needs to come to terms with the fact...

...that accepting that Israel has to let the Palestinians form a viable state is not "anti-semitism".

[PurityOfEssence]

12. And if it doesn't?

Should we be proud to lose elections on principle?

Fair or not, you're referring to a powerful and embattled people who have been an important part of America since before there was a United States. In fact, much of the necessary financing for the Revolution was secured by Haym Salomon (who also supported many of our founding fathers, including Madison for their personal needs) and at the Toaro Synagogue in Newport, RI, you can still see the yarmulke that George Washington wore when he attended a service there.

Israel's a big problem, but ignoring reality is no way to win elections.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

11. It is not the Farrakhan test it is the Jewish Test. ..............

Obama's Farrakhan Test

By Richard Cohen



Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.

Maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For most Americans, though, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler -- "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road." His history is a rancid stew of lies.

It's important to state right off that nothing in Obama's record suggests he harbors anti-Semitic views or agrees with Wright when it comes to Farrakhan. Instead, as Obama's top campaign aide, David Axelrod, points out, Obama often has said that he and his minister sometimes disagree. Farrakhan, Axelrod told me, is one of those instances.

Fine. But where I differ with Axelrod and, I assume, Obama is that praise for an anti-Semitic demagogue is not a minor difference or an intrachurch issue. The Obama camp takes the view that its candidate, now that he has been told about the award, is under no obligation to speak out on the Farrakhan matter. It was not Obama's church that made the award but a magazine. This is a distinction without much of a difference. And given who the parishioner is, the obligation to speak out is all the greater. He could be the next American president. Where is his sense of outrage?

Any praise of Farrakhan heightens the prestige of the leader of the Nation of Islam. For good reasons and bad, he is already admired in portions of the black community, sometimes for his efforts to rehabilitate criminals. His anti-Semitism is either not considered relevant or is shared, particularly his false insistence that Jews have played an inordinate role in victimizing African Americans.

In this, Farrakhan stands history on its head. It was Jews who disproportionately marched for civil rights and, in Mississippi, died for that cause. Farrakhan and, in effect, Wright, despoil the graves of Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman and, of course, their black colleague James Chaney.

I can even see how someone, maybe even Obama, could dismiss Farrakhan as a pest, a silly man pushing a silly cause that poses no real threat to the Jewish community. Still, history tells us that anti-Semitism is not to be trifled with. It is a botulism of the mind.

The Obama and Clinton campaigns are involved in a tasteless tussle over the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. What is clear from rereading King's celebrated "I Have a Dream" speech of Aug. 28, 1963, is how inclusive that dream was -- "all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, 'Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!' "

This, though, is not Farrakhan's dream. He has vilified whites and singled out Jews to blame for crimes large and small, either committed by others as well or not at all. (A dominant role in the slave trade, for instance.) He has talked of Jewish conspiracies to set a media line for the whole nation. He has reviled Jews in a manner that brings Hitler to mind.

And yet Wright heaped praise on Farrakhan. According to Trumpet, he applauded his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation." He praised "his integrity and honesty." He called him "an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose." These are the words of a man who prayed with Obama just before the Illinois senator announced his run for the presidency. Will he pray with him just before his inaugural?

I don't for a moment think that Obama shares Wright's views on Farrakhan. But the rap on Obama is that he is a fog of a man. We know little about him, and, for all my admiration of him, I wonder about his mettle. The New York Times recently reported on Obama's penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting "present" when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, "present" will not do.

--------------------

I guess he passed.