I am finding the controversy over Jews and Obama quite baffling. In the first place, his trusted campaign advisor, David Axelrod, is a Jew from Chicago who has been with him since his days on the streets of Chicago.

In the second place, leaders of major Jewish organizations such as the ADL, the OU, B'nai B'rith, etc., all of them have come out and said they do not believe Obama is anti-semitic.

In the third place, has anyone ever stopped to think how a black person comes to power in 21st century America? Obama cannot completely distance himself from Calypso Screwy because he stepped over the backs of people like him to get to the place where he is today. So funny -- when America finally gets a candidate who embodies the hope of the American dream, we still are not ready to embrace it. What are Jews so afraid of? Unless Jews accept and understand a candidate like Senator Obama, they are doomed to the wrath of future Calypso Screwy's and the Rev. Al. Someone has to be the breakout example. If Obama is elected, it will pave the way for future generations to come together as real Americans rather than turn to hate groups such as Nation of Islam.

Finally, the administrative director of the OU, a Jew, knew Obama personally at Harvard and played pick-up basketball with him back in the day. Having known him personally, he definitively states he is not anti-semitic. When will Jews listen to their own people rather than the politics of hate?

Russert's question was not out of line. I was very glad he asked it. It is the question journalists should have asked Obama at the very beginning of the campaign. It is the question and answer Jews needed to hear. Splitting hairs on whether "denounciation" and "rejection" mean the same thing will breed further hate and divisiveness. Obama is a uniter, not a divider. I take him at his word when he says the Nation of Islam is not a group he supports.

...that's all she wrote...

Russert asked, Clinton augmented, Obama answered. That's it, end of story. What would you have him do, call for a group 'rejection/repudiation/denunciation'? He clearly stated that he didn't ask for an endorsement nor did he welcome it and when pushed on it gave them what they wanted.

He's right -- he cannot tell Farrakhan what to say or even how to say it, no matter how politically inconvenient it may be for Farrakhan to do so.

However, by continuing to blow this up and into the forefront of the press frenzy by claiming that he somehow was 'weasely' on it is just playing to the folks who want a reason to hate. There are already enough of those just based on Obama's race alone without handing a few more out to whoever might be open to it.

The most significant statement in the whole debate exchange over this was where Obama acknowledged the rift between two groups who have traditionally been allies and a desire to bridge the gap, which I'm guessing is not something you are interested in, given your attention to this and your applause for Taylor Marsh, who is the Democratic equivalent of Ann Coulter, in my opinion.

By stirring up the pot, what you are saying is that it's more convenient to continue the grudge match than to build bridges, which is exactly what the GOP would like to see inside the Democratic party.

No matter who the nominee is at the end of this marathon, arguing that Barack Obama is anti-semitic will come back to bite the Democratic party in the ass, big time.

karoli (odd time signatures)

...but here goes:

Part of what I admire about Barack Obama is his willingness to bring everyone to the table. He'll attempt diplomacy with hostile nations. He will make it VERY CLEAR he did not ask for a Nation of Islam endorsement yet reminds us all that no one in this country is censored.

Turning this into some trumped up anti-semitism on Obama's behalf is just insane. And frankly I find it irresponsible.

Coulter is backing Hillary-does that make Hillary pro-Coulter? Or anti-sane, nonhatespeechfemalepoliticalpundit for that matter? She's getting republican votes because of it too-is she having it both ways?

Bleh.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

I also like this Bob Cesca post on the matter:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/i-have-some-questions-for_b_8874...

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

Of all the shit to spend 10 minutes on, we are getting caught up in this. Are you kidding me. People are losing their homes, Katrina surviviors are like folks without a country and what the fuck would they care about Louis Farrakhan and his support of Obama. Please, this level of distraction is ridiculous. If Jews are cool with where Obama is in regards to this non-issue then why the hell are people trying to spin it into a bigger issue. Come on. Hillary ought to be ashamed for being so desperate to do anything, say anything. This isn't what women are about. We can't win by any means necessary. And Anne Coulter needs a job so of course she has to say anything, do anything...to stay relevant. Otherwise who would talk to her, who would listen. MSNBC did a poor job and they missed an opportunity to get to some issues. But that wasn't their agenda...it wasn't a real debate, but a set-up for a "cock-fight" to the death.

(SIGH)

Love,
Babz
www.lovebabz.blogspot.com Personal
www.lovebabz08.wordpress.com Political

What is it that Obama is being asked to reject?

Farrakhan, who has no political standing anymore in the African American community,did not endorse Obama.

There is no relationship between the Obama campaign and the Nation of Islam, as far as I am aware.

Further, I wonder why no one has ever asked anyone endorsed by the Washington Times over the years whether they reject that newspaper's endorsement, since its principal backer, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, has collaborated with Min. Farrakhan on more than one occasion.

As NYU journalism professor Pamela Newkirk explained in her book, Within the Veil: Black Journalists, White Media, coverage of Min. Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam by the mainstream press has been notoriously poor, especially when compared to others with objectionable ideas, such as Charles Murray. The reasons behind that are complex, but I'd love to have that conversation. For now, I will leave you with the wisdom of Amy Alexander, writing for The Nation:

"...Being based in Chicago, Obama is probably keenly sensitive to the true standing of Farrakhan -- that of a symbolic figurehead, a bow-tied, bespectacled id for black Americans who cannot afford to say out loud what they often think about race relations in America. Also, as a 46 year-old black man who lived through the Black Power era and its aftermath, Obama is undoubtedly on to the insidious nature of the Farrakhan Litmus Test. He is not responsible for someone who decides to say publically that he is a "good guy," Obama pointed out, paraphrasing comments that Farrakhan made last weekend about the senator's candidacy.

"Obama's response to Russert's follow up led him to say that he embraces Israel as "an important ally" of the US, a necessary trajectory, I suppose, if he wants to not scare off Jews in America and abroad. The anti-Semitism so often attributed to Farrakhan is indeed a part of his past rhetoric, even though Farrakhan has gone on the record repeatedly in recent years to repudiate the twenty-year old comments that initially raised ire and fear among many. (Russert referred to the infamous "gutter religion" comment made by Farrakhan during Jesse Jackson's 1984 Democratic presidential campaign, an inclusion designed to trip up Obama.)

"Yet Russert conveniently omitted subsequent comments by Farrakhan in which he goes even farther than merely expressing regret for intemperate comments he'd made in the past: During a 1996 New Yorker interview with Harvard's Henry Louis Gates, Jr., Farrakhan said, 'Personally, I don't know what this argument has served. Jewish people are the world leaders, in my opinion. They are some of the most brilliant people on this planet.....And people hate them sometimes because of envy, and because the Jews succeed in spite of the hatred of their Gentile brethren, or anybody else's hatred. I admire that, as God is my witness....'"

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

20 debates is too much. Because now it seems we are digging for questions at the bottom of the barrell. And why? There are some perfectly good questions that could have been asked. My problem isn't with Hillary Clinton, I rather like her. My problem is the way inwhich we want to "Amercan Idol" everything...even our elections. I would have had more respect for MSNBC if they just let the Palyboy Bunnies ask the questions, I mean if you are going to go for entertainment over substance then why not go with Playboy Bunnies as moderators?

Love,
Babz

This has been an interesting post and comment thread for me. I've been npa until recently (so no attention to primaries, because I was in Fla.). Usually I just log into candidate's websites, see where they stand on what I care about, and vote. So this debate stuff and these political and campaigning issues - well, I'm still learning about them. The whole primary thing is kinda blowing my mind.

It's all quite interesting, but I'm definitely still figuring it out.

Liz Rizzo

I blog at Everyday Goddess.

Yes that is so right. See, this makes my point better....Playboy Bunnies could indeed moderate!

You cracked me up with that one! And yes those questions you raised could have certainly been asked...maybe at debate 45...aaargh!

Love,
Babz

That I just have to stir the pot! :)

Okay - here goes - because I came to this thought when discussing the topic of Obama's church and Rev. Wright a couple of weeks ago on a different blog.

What do you all think about this:

I imagine, though I could be wrong, but I think it's a fairly safe assumption, that many of us join groups or organizations of one type or another, at one time or another, because we are interested in what it's doing, we like the people, we want to learn more and so on. That is - there's a commonality.

But, once in a while, as time goes on, you may start to feel that, more and more, you and the group - a person in the group, like a leader, or the general tenor of the group - is diverging from you, or you from it.

Now, you may stick with it, ask about it, separate what you don't like anymore from what you do like and so on.

But - and I mean this with the absolute utmost sincerity: don't you think that at some point, in some instances, you may come to feel that the group - either the leader, other individuals or the direction of the group or something like that - and you simply do not share enough in common anymore and you find yourself always questioning it or whatever and you say, "You know, this just is not for me - I don't agree with it, it doesn't fulfill me, I don't like it's direction" - or some such thing.

So, you see - when I first heard about the Rev. Wright and this situation of Farrakhan and the magazine and Obama goes to Rev. Wright's church and so on, I wanted to analyze it in the frame of what I just described: as a Jew, I go to a synagogue headed by a rabbi who does not believe in the ordination of gays as rabbis. I understand why, he has been very very open about it (his sister is gay and he is very close with her and they do disagree on this, but I think it's why he will always be open to talking about his position) but still, I disagree with him.

Now, I love this rabbi - I really do. and I disagree with him - I really do.

Should I leave the synagogue? Am I supporting his refusal to not support the ordination of gays as rabbis?

See - I think that there is a threshold somewhere of behavior - who sets that threshold, I'm not sure. Maybe we each do it for ourselves and we then restrain from judging others.

But when I read about Obama's situation, my first thought was, well, how many other things does he disagree with Rev. Wright on? Is it a couple of things, or is a whole mess of things? Because frankly, people who follow someone lock, stock and barrel scare me. I expect that we each follow some people or admire some people, but that they very well may have flaws or things with which we disagree.

Is the Farrakhan support by Rev. Wright something that is so heinous that we should think everyone would stop following Rev. Wright? That sounds a little unrealistic to me, and, as so many of you have pointed out, absolutely unnecessary, given Farrakhan's diminished influence and impact.

I would only say, in the end, that the point at which Obama or ANYONE would decide to leave any group - place of worship or otherwise - is the point at which the core beliefs or interests that were once shared are no longer shared.

Otherwise - who am I to say?

Thanks for letting me go on - I'm not even sure if it made sense!! lol

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

I keep coming back to Taylor Marsh's point: "you don't go anywhere near Farrakhan." and Obama did go near him, in a way.

And some here have pointed out this is what they like about Obama- his fearlessness in not automatically denouncing and willingness to bring others to the table. This is the second major time Obama has challenged norms and not distanced himself sufficiently for the tastes of the media and the American public.

Obama didn't play the game. When it was about Chavez and Iran, I was ok with it. When it was about Farrakhan, I was not. This is probably about my own group identity (Jewish) more than anything....

and Jill, I think you know in your gut when your threshold has been passed.

That dissaudes us from doing this. 20 debates! Ridiculous questions. Scripted answers.

of course we judge candidates this way. we're human and our access to candidates' views is so controlled by media, consultants, etc.

Just as I hate seeing Hispanics and blacks lumped together as monolithic entities who are exactly the same in every thought, feeling, and expression, I cringe whenever I hear about "the Jews." "The Jews" no more agree on every single issue than "the blacks" or "the Hispanics." While I certainly am no fan of Farrakhan, I can also understand that Obama's response does not mean that he has anything against "the Jews" himself. And guess what? Israel is an important ally for a variety of reasons. Nothing wrong with saying that, either. If Obama mentioned that Britain was a crucial ally, would anyone think he was pandering to British-Americans to get their votes?

As for Tim Russert, I gave up on him in 2004. My expectations from mainstream media are so low at this point that I'm shocked when they ask any intelligent questions that relate to an actual issue.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS)& Other Rants

Yesterday, I discovered, through my Google Alerts of all things, that there is a blogger who lives one town over from me in a city called Beachwood who had questions and reflections on this portion of the debate that we're discussing in this thread. I left a comment on her blog, she emailed me to tell me that she lives just one town over and voila - a new connection.

But in addition, I'd referred her to this thread and here she writes about how happy she was to find it:

Jill Zimon, Cleveland Blogger (Writes Like She Talks) offered me a metaphorical Advil this morning for my post debate headache in her comment to this post.

Thank you Jill - I followed your link to blogher and got some stress relief. The first few paragraphs of the post “Obama, Hillary and the Jews” was more of what I am hearing in the neighborhood, however, in a discussion thread to be commended on its civility, there is much important information. Check it out.

Thank you, BlogHer - A discussion thread to be commended on its civility! I couldn't say it any better. :)

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

For what it's worth, the author of a complimentary story on Min. Louis Farrakhan said that a description of him as someone who "truly epitomized greatness," said NBC's Tim Russert was wrong to attribute that compliment to Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Here is the text of her statement:

To whom it may concern:

I write to bring some journalistic clarity to what has become a widespread inaccuracy. My name is Rhoda McKinney Jones, managing editor of the Trumpet Newsmagazine, and the author of the Minister Louis Farrakhan article in our November/December issue.

Over the last few weeks, I have watched in disbelief as seasoned journalists and not-so-well-intentioned bloggers have attributed to Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor emeritus of Trinity United Church of Christ, the last three words of my first person, introductory piece on Minister Farrakhan.

Those words are now familiar to you, especially after Tuesday night’s debate and Tim Russert’s use of them—“truly epitomized greatness.” Dr. Wright, never said, wrote or uttered those words. Those words are mine and mine alone. Whether one agrees with my assessment is not the issue or the reason I was prompted to correct the record.

As a well-trained journalist, I know the most basic fact checking would have revealed the truth. Next time, when attempting to sully a presidential candidate by discrediting his church and its renowned, religious leader, let’s get the facts straight.

Rhoda McKinney Jones

Managing Editor

Trumpet Newsmagazine

Graduate of Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and Spelman College

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

1
AN ODE

MY VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

THREE WAYS TO SEE ME

JANE WOULD UNDERSTAND

Do you know who I am?
I am dignity
Finally my self esteem
Speaks of me
Sees me
To place me
Before thee

That you will spare me
The indignity that
Has happened in my past
Set before me
In your morbid light
That would set you
So above me

You think this does
Not happen now
Yet it does
Jane would know
You think it has changed since far ago

And know
Now I can realize
I can look down upon you
From the height of myself
As you once did me

AS
YOU YET KNOW THIS NOW
I WILL NOT BEAR THAT SHAME SHAME ON YOU

2
AN ODE
MY VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

For do you know who I am

I am Artemee’s and Robert’s
Dutiful granddaughter
This boatman and farmer and that constable
Salted in the rights of
Cuchulainn’s daughter
Raised in the dignity of the Mystic Carmen Sylva
Named for her raised for the pride of her
Raised beyond your slight of her
A Jew A Greek A Roumanian
Scandanavian French Scots Irish
The Roumania Greek Orthodox, Jew and Protestant
The spirituality that is as a thread woven through my life from her

You are forgetting who we are from her
You Anglicized past her
And I held my grace with her
I can not forget my common past
The greatness I felt in being Earl’s daughter

You think I can forget the dignity & passion
That drove those men to find their place in this harsh world and land
Jane would know
I so feel the self respect from her/them

Do you know your place?

Remember that

Do you know who I am?

I am Americas 2nd daughter
Not the pride of the DAR the seed of the revolution

I am the seed of the émigré’
Coming here to fill the vast empty spaces
Sheltered in those spaces by invitation

“Give me your tired, your poor
Your huddled masses yearning to breath free”

3
AN ODE
MY VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

I am the 2nd daughter 2nd generation 2nd wave of the future
Umbrellaed by the Thomas Jefferson and the Constitution
He so knowingly wrote
Knowing that émigré would not stop at Scots & English & Welsh Anglican
It would encase, enclose and enmesh all
All nations all races ALL GENDERS

So knowingly he embraced all of the freedoms
we would need to protect our
freedom and freedoms

ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL

And I and my sister Hillary Clinton stand under that light
Though you belittle us make us only slightly smaller
That slightly is enough for me to say

Do you know who I am

I am America’s daughter
Granddaughter
Daughter
Niece
Niece
Sister
Aunt
Mother

grandfather Quarter Master Sargent Zenofor Hortopan WWI
daughter Sargent Earl Melvin Johnston WWII
uncle Petty Officer Walter Swick WWII
uncle Petty Officer Guy Robert Johnston WWII
brother Lance Corporal John Zenofor Englemann Vietnamese War
nephew Airman Ben Englemann Civil duty
son Lance Corporal Christopher Marc Lenehan Desert Storm

4
AN ODE
MY VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

Do you know who I am

A woman

Hillary’s sister

Jane would understand

The cradle at
Whose breast
We nurtured
This nation

I NEED HILLARY

SHE KNOWS MOST

What this nation needs

WHAT WE NEED

DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM

A WOMAN

A SINGLE 2ND GENERATION MOTHER

WHO RAISED A CHILD ALONE IN AMERICA

HAASE JOHNSTON
MOON TWP.
PITTSBURGH, PA
This is written for Hillary Clinton and she may use it any way she chooses with my permission Virginia haase johnston