RECENT POSTS
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Hamas Un-'Endorses' Obama
June 04, 2008 9:37 PM
Sen. Barack Obama's speech to AIPAC has convinced Hamas that he and Sen. John McCain are interchangeable. If the group had its druthers, neither one would win.
"Obama’s comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the U.S. administration’s foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict," Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza.
"The Democratic and Republican parties support totally the Israeli occupation at the expense of the interests and rights of Arabs and Palestinians," he said. "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."
Hamas had never actually endorsed Obama. In April, Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef told WABC radio that "we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will [win] the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance."
The campaign of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., at the time characterized this as an endorsement, and made hay out of the kind words.
But today it wasn't just the terrorists of Hamas expressing chagrin at Obama's speech.
Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas took issue with Obama's assertion that Jerusalem would remain the "undivided" capital of Israel.
"We reject these words," Abbas said. "Jerusalem is one of the files under negotiation. The entire world knows perfectly well that we will never accept a state without Jerusalem. That should be clear."
And Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat said that Obama's "remarks on Jerusalem cast doubt over the chances of peace...We reject the positions of Barack Obama because they are in contradiction with the traditional positions of the United States which considers that east Jerusalem is under occupation."
- jpt
June 4, 2008 in Obama, Barack | Permalink | Share | User Comments (169)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Obama criticized Hillary for her Senate Iran vote, which recognized Iran's military as a terrorist org during one of the debates. Of course, he himself was too busy campaigning to show up to vote. One might ask, if it was important enough to blast his opponent on, might it not have been important enough to do his elected duty to the people and vote himself on it?
You can't believe a word Obama says. Not a single word. He talks out of both sides of his mouth in order to align himself with the group he's addressing.
He was talking to a group of 60s civil rights workers when he claimed his parents met at Selma. He was addressing an anti-war rally when he gave his anti-war speech (on which he's hung his entire campaign). He told blue collar workers in Ohio he'd deep six NAFTA while his trade advisor told Canada that was just a political tack.
Rev. Wright knows him as well as anyone and I believe him when he tells us, "Obama is just a politician doing what politicians do."
The Republicans have the recordings of every original statement and every subsequent flip-flop. They'll be used to show Obama as either confused and inexperienced or as a lying politician. Either way, he loses with all but the kool-aid drinkers.
McCain '08!
Posted by: HoosierSue | Jun 5, 2008 10:21:13 AM
Obama just says what he knows they people in his audience wants to hear---he was talking before the Jewish community so naturally he said something different than he said last month. Next group of people he talks to will hear something different and new. The United States needs a man with character, that loves his country (doesn't just put the flag pin on because of objection).
Posted by: Anne | Jun 5, 2008 10:00:58 AM
This a good trick from abc to cover Obama unbiased support to Israel...How....by saying Hamas Un-'Endorses' him...good try Jake.
Obama bowed in the first exam in front of one of the lobbying machines in US and almost we will do the same in front of all lobbiests...his little expereince and inability to fight against these lobbiest will not give him and choice but to say and do what they want...
Obama you failed the fiesr exam...You are a false hope of channge
Posted by: MMH | Jun 5, 2008 9:36:24 AM
maryanne,
i am with you on sen. clinton should have been the nominee.
but if the public does not know,although it makes sense, how do you know the obam people made deals to pass bills?
also, that kind of thinking maybe for you,
but i think what has happened to sen. byrd is because he is old and in fraile health. and what has happened to sen.kennedy is unfortunate and very sad.
when we get into the payback mode for mortal people and saying god is paying back-well that is just not right.
and i believe much of the reading in the bible are symbolic and have more spiritual meaning that literal meaning for us earthlings. sen. clinton is the better of ALL of them for president.
and she IS the one we needed for these times. but with the help of the msm she was cheated and so were the american people.
but still sen.clinton is human, and i doubt (as with anyone) would be worthy of having god cause harm to people who were not supporting her. i don't think she is that type of person. obama' supporters can damn her to hell and wish all sorts of evil to happen to her, and say she is evil and all of the other things they have said about her.
But she is human just like the rest of us.
Sen. clinton IS the best for president.
and i am with her all the way until she ask me to vote for obama. because the same reasons i had for NOT supporting obama in the primaries, still whole true now.
Posted by: donewithpolitics | Jun 5, 2008 9:34:14 AM
Quite a change from what Obama said a few weeks ago-Iran is tiny and no threat. How far would that get him with Jewish voters?
Obama is going to have to back down on a lot of things he said just to get elected. This will make him look weak, inexperienced,flip-flopper.
Can't wait to read the tell-all book about Obama.
He is distancing himself from and a lot of shady associates that may get tired of being trashed (Resko,Ayers,Wright,
Farrakhan).
Looks like many people are willing to take this from Obama just to get him elected. If he becomes president will they continue to take it?
The starry-eyed people that thought Obama was a different politician better brace themselves for a hard fall.
McCain08 Hillary2012
Posted by: cindy in nc | Jun 5, 2008 9:33:13 AM
TO BE A GOOD DEMOCRAT OR TO BE A GOOD AMERICAN---John McCain is not the same as George Bush; in fact a few years ago he was going to leave the Republican party. The democrats will control Congress so there is no need to worry about Roe v Wade or ultra conservative justices being appointed to the Supreme Court. Iraq-nobody will be able to pull out all the troops within 16 months; we will have a presence there just like we do in other foreign countries. We need to earn the respect back of the American people and world leaders by electing the right person to be the President of the United States; he/she should have demonstrated good judgment, honesty, and integrity---. Hillary 2012 now McCain---Country first, then party.
Posted by: not fooled 08 | Jun 5, 2008 9:10:04 AM
with sen. clinton now off the scene.
after eight years of george "the moron"
bush.
we are now witness to the further
dummying down of the presidency.
mccain and obama trying to set their better turf to talk to the american people.
i prefer the townhall style, not because mccain thinks he is best at it.
but because they both need to be put on the spot by random questions from the audience, without the middle man moderator.
the LAST thing we need to hear from obama IS ANOTHER SPEECH-and we don't need a speech from mccain either.
it would have been good for the country to have a president who could speak well in ANY forum-and that would have been sen. clinton.
both of these candidates claim they are forward thinking-but what they and their kind and the msm need and want
is to get back to politician style pre bill clinton. who were boring and now very good with making it plain to people. just all around average.
i will watch neither unless nader can be included, because if obama gets the lincoln/douglass style-we will just hear another set of long speeches.
obama can say a whole lot of nothing better than anybody.
but i most favor the townhall style,
because at least the voters get a chance to participate.
Posted by: donewithpolitics | Jun 5, 2008 9:00:56 AM
Billy Bob:
Over the past month, McCain is coming into the spotlight too. Listening carefully to what each candidate is saying, and how they are adapting their stance on the issues, McCain is looking more and more like the 'Flip-Flopper'.
This isn't the 2004 campaign. Obama is a much stronger candidate than Kerry, so the slur tactics of Karl Rove aren't going to work this season.
Perhaps you may want to adapt your own attack, to avoid having McCain become labeled as a 'Flip-Flopper'. But then, that would make you a flip-flopper too, wouldn't it.
A change we can BELIEVE in!
Obama in '08!
Posted by: Alfred | Jun 5, 2008 8:51:13 AM
Have you ever noticed that the Republican supporters never seem to say what their candidate is FOR; but instead make statements that are either half-truths or blatant lies about their opponent? And the scary part is, it appears they believe their own distortions!
John McCain is now claiming HE is the candidate for CHANGE, but change to what? McCain voted 95% of the time WITH George Bush; so is he proposing a 5% change? In 2000, McCain was running as a 'maverick', but has really 'changed' in the past 8 years.
Lets see, what is McCain FOR? Continuation of the tax relief to the top 2% most wealthy, while turning his back on the plight of the average worker.
Continuation of tax relief to the oil companies under the premise of 'exploration'.
Continuation of an unjust war intended to force democracy on another country whether they wanted it or not.
Continuation of an economic policy leading to the loss of homes to predatory mortgage lenders (with the help of Phil Gramm).
Continuation of 'No Child Left Behind', designed to reward the ivy league schools and withhold money from the struggling children.
Continuation of the outflow of better paying manufacturing jobs from the US, while claiming job increases in the service sector (minimum wage jobs).
Strange. That doesn't sound like 'change' to me, it sounds like CONTINUATION of the Bush failures.
Obama in '08.
Posted by: Marie | Jun 5, 2008 8:43:03 AM
HILLARY, PLEASE RUN INDEPENDENT. YOU WILL WIN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE IF YOU DO. OBAMA HAS A LOT MORE BAGGAGE. EVER SINCE THE BREAKOUT IN MARCH, YOU'VE BEEN WINNING STATES MORE THAN OBAMA DID AND MOSTLY LANDSLIDES BECAUSE THEY DON'T TRUST OBAMA. I DON'T THINK OBAMA WILL CHOOSE YOU AS VICE-PRESIDENT BECAUSE HE'S LETTING THE DNC DECIDE AGAIN. REMEMBER, DNC GANGED UP ON YOU AND THEY WILL DO THE SAME THING LIKE JIMMY CARTER DID.
Posted by: neil1785 | Jun 5, 2008 8:24:45 AM
McCain cannot pay for the war with the current budget. Pork-spending is not enough.
More debt, higher gas prices, no plans for the health care fiasco. That is what you get with McCain. He's a multi-millionaire, with 8 homes, completely out of touch with today's America. He is stuck in the 60's.
McCain uses Hamas against Obama, now that Hamas has said they are the same - what's he gonna do? Its ridiculous. Every American President is going to be instantly hated because of the mess W has got us in.
Posted by: CJ | Jun 5, 2008 7:55:43 AM
This was a statement paid for by the Obama camp. How many suckers believe it?
On another note, Obama said today about the Rezko trial, "This is not the Tony Rezko I knew." Didn't Obama say the same thing about Rev. Wright?
Posted by: Ralphine | Jun 5, 2008 7:52:10 AM
Iguess he will have to get by with the endorsements of Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and ahkmadinanutjob.
Fidel Castro, who wrote in a column for Cuba’s Granma newspaper Monday that Obama is “the most progressive candidate to the U.S. presidency.”
Dont trust Obama with the safety and security of your family
Posted by: Dean O | Jun 5, 2008 7:45:49 AM
America is backing thieves, Palestinians in Gaza has every right to go back to their land. those 4 million immigrants are occupiers in Israel.
Posted by: Truth rider | Jun 5, 2008 7:37:46 AM
(snort) This is the first time I ever even read or heard of Hamas ever did 'endorse' Obama. See how some things can be really be taken out of context? Gee, Obama or McCain would not ever support Hamas anyway, so this so-called news would not affect the prez race at all.
Go back into the hole, Hamas. Your words are nothing.
Posted by: GWP | Jun 5, 2008 7:25:04 AM
tony,
You are so right. Based on the "standards" of some these blogger/voters, the only person worthy of being President of the "United" States would be someone who doesn't know a single one of us. People don't typically "vet" everyone they know or come in contact with. That is just unrealistic.
Leadership and willingness to hear the people is what made Obama the candidate of change. I can't wait 'til he wins the GE.
Obama '08!
PLUS:
The voters in Montana had the last word. Obama won Montana with a 16% margin over Clinton!
Montana
-----------------------
Obama: 102,373 57%
Clinton 74,792 41%
Yes We Can
Obama '08!
Obama '08!
Posted by: Hope For Change | Jun 5, 2008 7:24:17 AM
I don't care if some foreign power / terrorist "endorses" our potential presidents or not. THIS IS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, not the UNITED NATIONS! This is MY COUNTRY, not THEIRS!!!
I'm very tired of other countries playing in our presidential races (and yes, feeding money to support candidates IN OUR COUNTRY)!!!!
Don't get me wrong, I am VERY unbiased and believe in living with, understanding, and respecting other cultures, but when it comes to who runs MY country - that's my opinion.
I RESENT ABC NEWS for publicizing FOREIGN ENDORSEMENTS of our presidential candidates - that's JUST WRONG!!!!!!
Posted by: Jim | Jun 5, 2008 7:23:04 AM
The power of clairvoyance on Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton’s touted soon-to-come concession will be inconclusive and a cliffhanger. She still strongly believes in clairvoyance which as recently as the beginning of May reconfirmed she would get the nomination. Not all in her inner camp believed this, Bill included. The pressure by her staff to give up after North Carolina and Indiana was resisted solely because of this strong faith in clairvoyance. The RFK and June reference was not a misspeak, but had been discussed and rumored within the inner circle. It has been assured to her again and again that something catastrophic will happen towards the mid of June, and she would get the nomination. However, the pressure in the recent days has become too intense, but she is bidding for time, and still strongly believes in waiting till towards mid June as she was assured. Hence, even when she stages a mock concession this weekend, it will go thus: I am suspending my campaign to support BHO, but wish to retain the right to hold onto my delegates and votes, and enjoy the necessary visibility to continue to promote my agenda on health care, economy, ending the war, and the environment. Do not be mistaken, she still believes strongly that the nomination will be hers. If the DNC and her increasingly dissenting inner circle do not prevail on her to make an unconditional concession, she will hold onto this believe, and will try to force things to happen by herself at some point before August. She is herself becoming increasingly impatient against the advice that she remains calm and patient till all is fulfilled. I am one who no longer shares this belief.
Posted by: Jan | Jun 5, 2008 7:03:30 AM
I think it is a bit naive of John McCain to expect the media to walk away from the general election especially this one. In addition, I have no beef with McCain but does he honestly think his OPPENENT is going to try to help him, because John McCain is NOT an effective communicator, like say Regan? I have to give Obama and Hillary credit for debating more times than I have ever heard of, and they didn't say who was allowed to view, or act like the American people actually buy into the fact that they are just two regular Joe's just a having a good debate about politic, um this debate is for the highest position in the land. I will say as someone who used to be more conservative, and being from California I am actually tired of hearing McCain just talk about Iraq. I want him to talk about Immagration, and I want him to rally the base regarding this issue. I want him to say "that fence is going UP NOW and that the Republican party is AGIANIST ILLEGAL IMMAGRATION no if ands or buts about it." I want him to say clearly "I am pro-life and will appoint those judges that will support LIFE." Sure people may hate Bush now, but at least we KNEW where he stood on the issues. The DEM base is fired up, don't believe the hype..they are ready to go. My church, won't even endorse McCain because of the way he threw Hagee under the bus. Is McCain...the real UNKNOWN?
Posted by: Andy | Jun 5, 2008 5:27:21 AM
Obama's outlook now on talking to Iran is the same as Bush's outlook. So now Obama changes in order to try and win the Jewish vote. It want be long until he tries to win rural America but I think he will never win that block of voters after what he said about them. Obama is offering change alright. He will now change Bush's ideas into his own.
Posted by: s4bo | Jun 5, 2008 5:16:28 AM
Post a comment


