Redstate

Posted at 3:51pm on Jun. 5, 2008 Obama might have lost his Hamas endorsement.

They didn't like Barry's AIPAC speech.

By Mark Kilmer

As predicted, Barack Obama's supporters are beginning to desert his campaign, Yeah, that would be nice, but I suppose he can do with these erstwhile Obama supporters:

In a statement following Obama's speech Wednesday to the pro-Israel group AIPAC, in which the Illinois senator called Israel's security "sacrosanct" and promised to support an "undivided" Jerusalem, a Hamas spokesman accused the Democrat of supporting the Israeli occupation.

"We consider the statements of Obama to be further evidence of the hostility of the American administration to Arabs and Muslims," said Sami Abu Zuhr, according to Reuters.

[ . . . ]
“Hamas does not differentiate between the two presidential candidates, Obama and McCain, because their policies regarding the Arab-Israel conflict are the same and are hostile to us, therefore we do have no preference and are not wishing for either of them to win,” Zuhri said.

Hamas had previously endorsed Obama on New York's WABC radio in April.

Read On…

Posted in 2008 | AIPAC | Hamas | Obama — Comments (11)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:49am on Jun. 5, 2008 Obama is not sure what he believes on Iran

By Erick

My preacher from back home in Louisiana once wrote a book entitled Be Sure What You Believe. Many people believe many things, but there is really only one truth.

In the case of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, there is only one truth. The organization is a terrorist organization. Objectively, they are a terrorist organization. The Revolutionary Guard functions as much to defend Iran through normal military means as it does to surreptitiously terrorize Israel, the United States, and other enemies of the Islamic Republic.

In October 2007, the United States Senate considered the Kyl-Lieberman legislation that would designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. The senior senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin, saw no way that the law could be used as "a pretense to launch an invasion of Iran." The junior senator, Barack Obama, thought otherwise, saying "[The] Bush administration could use the language in Lieberman-Kyl to justify an attack on Iran as a part of the ongoing war in Iraq." (H/t to Jim Geraghty)

Senator Joseph Lieberman, to alleviate all the concerns about a pretense for attack, removed language some senators objected to.

The legislation passed with 76 of 100 Senators supporting it. Barack Obama voted against it.

Yesterday, Barack Obama told AIPAC that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard should be a designated terrorist organization. This comes on the heels of polls showing Obama has a problem with Jewish voters. And it is no wonder. Less than a month ago, Obama said he did not think Iran was a threat. He only ran in the opposite direction after right-wing bloggers called him out.

And now again, once the McCain camp and righ-wing bloggers dinged Obama for his views on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Obama ran in the opposite direction to ingratiate himself to a group.

To quote Senator Obama himself, "Just words?"

It is apparent Senator Obama is not sure what he believes. If he is willing to cave so fast when the right-wing hits him, how much faster is he going to cave to Iran, China, and our other enemies?

Posted in 2008 | AIPAC | Barack Obama | Iran | Obamafiles — Comments (18)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 9:19am on Jun. 4, 2008 I wonder if anyone at AIPAC... [UPDATED and BUMPED.]

...will be asking Senator Obama a particular question. [Excuse me, *questions.*]

By Moe Lane

Oh, yes: he's meeting with them tomorrow. Anyway, just to check, Senator:

Do you consider the West Bank to be "occupied?" It's kind of an issue.

[UPDATE]: And while we're on the subject, like Ed Morrissey I'm curious about whether your speech to AIPAC is going to reflect this:

...or objective reality.

Moe Lane

PS: As per your video: two of the primary objections that the Iranian regime has towards us is that we're simply not killing enough Jews and homosexuals. Which one were you planning to look for a compromise on?

Posted in AIPAC | Barack Obama | Foreign Affairs | Israel — Comments (1)/ Email this page » / Read More »