Obama on Energy Independence and Diplomacy April 23, 2008

New Perspectives Quarterly this quarter ran an interview with Barack Obama on topics such as energy independence, the Iraq War, and foreign relations. NPQ (and the Huffington Post)’s Beverly Davis conducted the interview which gives even more of a clear-cut view as to what the Obama administration would look like.

Regarding energy conservation and independence, Obama would like to see a “national low carbon fuel standard”, encourage “clean energy blends” for American automobiles, and establish a fuel economy standard of “just 40 miles per gallon” — all in order “to reduce…oil dependency.” While it could be argued that this alone could provide an economic stimulus for Americans who are slated to pay up to $5 a gallon for gas in some areas, this shows Barack Obama has made carbon footprints a priority, in line with the growing, green-ing opinion of much of the nation he was accused of being “out of touch” with.

Obama also called into question many of the executive orders which made Bush infamous. Among them are the virtual elimination of habeas corpus, which Bush attempted in both of his terms, giving the government the power to arrest citizens and try them as military combatants, and that “civilian courts cannot intervene to inquire into the legality of such arrests”. I had been wary of the fact that, for all the Democratic party speaks about, there has been very little talk about the future of these orders. Obama says on the topic:

A lot of the encroachments on civil liberties have been done not by legislation but through executive order, so one of the things I want to do is first of all have an attorney general that believes in protecting constitutional rights and the separation of powers and have him or her and the Justice Department engage in a thorough evaluation of our executive orders.

Restoring habeas corpus, closing Guantanamo, strengthening the role of the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court in reviewing wiretap requests — those are all areas where we can more rapidly roll back some of the more damaging aspects of President Bush’s approach.

Obama re-asserted that America must speak to its enemies and friends alike in the Middle East to achieve lasting stability in the region, and that he was disappointed with recent journalistic crackdowns in Russia.

Read the entire interview here.

In the urgency of now, America needs Barack Obama.

“Bitter-gate” No Problem for Obama April 16, 2008

It doesn’t matter what Mitt Romney said (”quite offensive…strange and elitist”), what Karl Rove said (”an elitist…he is arrogant”), what John McCain said (”a fundamental contradiction of what I believe America’s all about”), what network news said, what the pundits said (”[the Obamas] ooze a sense of entitlement”), or even what Hillary said (”elitist…out of touch”).

The “bitter-gate” controversy has not only not damaged Obama, but a new Gallup poll has already been released showing that Obama’s lead over Clinton has actually grown, and in the key “offended” demographics, absolutely no change in opinion has taken place, as the Kansas City Star’s Matt Schofield reports:

The political pundit class isn’t going to like this one, but a new Gallup Poll (released today) indicates that Barack Obama is actually at least as popular (if not a bit more popular) after the controversy about his comments that small town Pennsylvanians “cling” to religion and guns in tough economic times.

Hillary Clinton and John McCain have described the comments as condescending, and labeled the Democratic frontrunner an elitist.

The Gallup Poll, however, shows that while before the controversy began (April 8-10) he had a nine point lead among Democrats (51-42) a poll after the controversy shows him with an 11 point lead (51-40). …

In fact, they also polled the specific groups assumed to be most offended by the comments, and found that there had been little if any (no statistically significant) movement in their opinions of the campaign.

In addition, some are branding Hillary’s use of the word “elitist” a synonym for ‘uppity’ when viewed in American race-conscious context, something Obama himself rejected when a voter suggested it to him.

Vibe Magazine’s Mark Anthony Neal stressed this parallel between “uppity” and “elitist” (one Rolling Stone blogger called “arrogant” no more than a “code word” for “uppity”), noting the “irony that two of the wealthiest members of the Senate would describe a former community organizer as out of touch”, and pointing out that “in terms of instigating anti-Black racism and violence in this country, few things were more potent than the perception that black people, and black men in particular, did not know their place.”

I find myself inclined to, however, agree overall with Mary Mitchell from the Chicago Sun-Times on this one, though. These polarizing tactics are part of Hillary’s MO, and blowing this “bitter” statement up in media outlets is par for the course for the Clinton campaign. Hillary is just as divisive and polarizing now as she was accused of being at the beginning of this campaign in the minds of an increasing number of voters — and it is actions like this that testify to the “slice and dice” politics Obama accuses her of.

For the record, for anyone who’s still confused: no one’s bitter, no one’s sleeping while clutching Bibles and 12-gauges. Obama was speaking about an anecdotal psychographic, far from the “offensive” label Romney (of all people!) tried to affix to the only candidate preaching hope and positive change.

Hillary, the media, the Democratic campaign, and all concerned parties in America need to move on, for the sake of the greater good, and for the sake of us all.

Canada: Another Record-Setting Year For Anti-Semitism

Anti-Semitic incidents in Canada hit another record high in 2007, according to the League of Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada. The 2007 total of 1,042 incidents represented an 11.4% increase over the previous year, and was nearly double the 586 incidents reported in 2003: (more…)

Hillary: Trying to be the new Huckabee? April 13, 2008

Hillary, Hillary, Hillary.

First she got played out by Tim Russert on NBC’s Meet the Press, where she was shown, vis-a-vis her campaign platform, to have flipflopped on a number of issues, most notably the Iraq War where, despite her claims to the contrary, she voted to fund the war numerous times.

But now, in her desire to paint herself as different from Obama, after Obama’s remarks about “small-town voters” being “bitter”, she’s reinvented herself — and now she’s a gun-totin’ hunter. ABCNews reports:

Sen. Hillary Clinton continued her critique of Sen. Barack Obama’s comments about small town America today, and used it to connect herself with the voters her opponent may have alienated.

Speaking about how Americans value their Second Amendment rights and enjoy hunting prompted Clinton to tell a story about her own hunting experience.

“You know my dad took me out behind the cottage my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl,” she said. “You know some people have continued to teach their children and their grandchildren. It’s part of culture, it’s part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s part of who they are. not because they are bitter”

When did the R in Hillary R. Clinton begin to stand for “rifle”? From Bill Ruthhart at the Indianapolis Star:

“I grew up in a church-going family, a family that believed in the importance of living out and expressing our faith. The people of faith I know don’t ‘cling’ to religion because they are bitter. People embrace faith not because they are materially poor, but because they are spiritually rich.”

While her comments about Obama headlined her Indianapolis visit, Clinton also touted her plan to create a “new generation” of defense manufacturing jobs…

The New York Times’ Julie Bosman said Hillary described herself as a “pro-gun churchgoer”.

CBS News’ Fernando Suarez:

“I am the granddaughter of a factory worker,” Clinton said. “My grandfather went to work at the age of 11, before there were child labor laws, and worked in the lace mills in Scranton, Pennsylvania.”

She added, “I grew up in the Midwest, born in Chicago, raised outside of that great city, and I was raised with Midwestern values and an unshakable faith in America and its promise.”

So now she’s avidly pro-gun, church-going Hillary with “Midwestern values” and “lives out” the “faith of her…grandparents” and wants to create a “new generation” of “defense manufacturing jobs”?

Not sounding very much like a Democrat.

While Obama “could have spoken better” about small-town voters, Obama was not referring to the millions of hardworking Americans who form the backbone of the American working class, he was talking about those who deviate from our social norms and turn to hate. “Clinging to guns and…religion” or “antipathy” does not happen to the average American hopefully; this is the reaction of a certain portion of the population.

Clinton called his remarks demeaning and her supporters handed out stickers saying “I’m not bitter” while Obama apologized, saying, “If I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that.”

While Obama undoubtedly could have used a better choice of words — is Obama’s misspeaking a reason for Hillary to completely rebrand herself? Is she trying to out-rightwing the right wing? Is she trying to be the new Huckabee, positioning herself as the choice of churchgoing traditional voters? To do that, she will put herself at odds with most of the Democratic party — and even if Obama (G-d forbid) doesn’t get the nomination, she will have to somehow appeal to all of us who supported Obama because we do want change.

Or maybe she wants the election to go to the GOP?

McCain Spiritual Advisor: “Islam Must be Destroyed” April 8, 2008

John McCain’s controversial Hagee endorsement may soon prove itself to be small potatoes. When Pastor John Hagee endorsed McCain back in February, McCain chose to fall into silence as his reaction to his sought-after evangelical nod, being taken by surprise by the ire raised from Catholic and other groups at Hagee’s inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed, Hagee’s hardline stance on Israel, insisting on a 100% Jewish return to the West Bank and saying that giving part of Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority was tantamount to turning it over to the Taliban, moved the American Reform Jewish movement head Eric Yoffie to call him an “extremist” whose organization was harmful for Israel and whose views spelled disaster for the Holy Land.

Some Israeli politicians were quick to defend Hagee, with one prominent Israeli rabbi saying that the rapprochement between Christians and Jews was “one of the miracles of the 20th century.”

But Hagee, for all his abrasiveness, has nothing on Rod Parsley, McCain’s “spiritual guide”.

The president of the Chicago Theological Seminary, Rev. Dr. Susan Thistlethwaite, writes in the Washington Post’s On Faith that one must be extremely wary of this man, and precisely what it is that he stands for:

John McCain should immediately renounce Rod Parsley not only for his astounding hate mongering against Islam, but also for his extreme views on a range of issues including his denunciation of separation of church and state….In his writings, Parsley has called upon Christians to actively confront the “false religion” of Islam with the aim of destroying it. He urges his readers to realize that a confrontation between Christianity and Islam is unavoidable: “We find now we have no choice. The time has come.”

According to press reports, the leader of the movement - the senior pastor of a large church in suburban Columbus [Parsley] - casts the 2006 elections as an apocalyptic clash between ‘the forces of righteousness and the hordes of hell.’ The fear and loathing in his message is palpable: He denounces public schools that won’t teach creationism, require teachers to read the Bible in class, or allow children to pray. He rails against the ‘secular jihadists’ who have ‘hijacked’‘ America and prevent school kids from learning that Hitler was ‘an avid evolutionist.’

Parsley, according to the Rocky Mountain News’ Dave Kopel, believes that “one of G-d’s purposes in creating America was to fight a holy war against Islam”, and in Silent No More, says:

“I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.“

(more…)

Ask Moses? Ask Musa! April 7, 2008

I recently stumbled upon a novel website, designed to explain about the fundamentals of Judaism and Jewish identity to the Muslim and Arab World. AskMusa.org is a project of a group of “traditional, observant Jews” from various Jewish organizations and presents answers to questions on monotheism and Jewish belief as well as an essay which asks “Who are the Jews?” — contrasting “sons of apes and pigs” with “contributors to society”.

A site too long in coming — but a pleasant change of place.

Visit AskMusa.org.

Jews from Middle East Granted Refugee Status April 3, 2008

In what is being termed as a “dramatic shift” in US policy, Congress granted, for the first-time ever, refugee status for Jews from Muslim countries.

The bill (click here for the full text) was introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Joseph Crowley (D-NY), and Mike Ferguson (R-NJ) and declares that it would be “inappropriate and unjust for the United States to recognize rights for Palestinian refugees without recognizing equal rights for former Jewish, Christian, and other refugees from Arab countries”. Some 900,000 Jews were displaced from Muslim countries, with 850,000 Jews being expelled from “10 Arab countries” following Israel’s creation in 1948.

One of the main proponents of the legislation, the organization Justice for Jews from Arab Countries (JJAC), was quick to note that this is not about financial compensation or ulterior motive:

The organization’s executive director, Stanley Urman of West Orange, called the resolution “a historic milestone.”

“It may be the first fundamental change in U.S. Middle East policy,” said Urman in a separate interview with NJJN. “Previously virtually all U.S. focus on Middle Eastern refugees was exclusively on Palestinians. It may be the first fundamental change in U.S.-Middle East policy. This expresses the sense of Congress that Palestinians were not the only Middle East refugees.”

“This is not about compensation,” said Urman. Rather, the resolution will help ensure that “2,500 years of Jewish life in what is today the Arab world is not erased from history. The Jews are an indigenous people in the Middle East. In a peace process that seeks to resolve a half-century of conflict, these victims and their rights must also be resolved.”

Rep. Ros-Lehtinen told the Jewish Week that the legislation is “an attempt to redress a critical imbalance”:

“Discussions of Middle Eastern refugees inevitably focus exclusively…on the plight of those of Palestinian descent,” said Ros-Lehtinen. But Jewish refugees “lost their resources, their homes and their heritage sites, fleeing in the face of persecution, pogroms, revolutions and brutal dictatorships.”

(Ignoring Ms. Ros-Lehtinen’s omission of “Christian refugees”…) I applaud this legislation, and as Ehud Olmert has already said, this is US policy, not Israeli policy (unlike critics who imply that this is some flipside of the Palestinian claim to right of return). I hope that the US government stays true to its word and provides refuge and asylum for all victims of the wars in the Middle East.

And may there be an end to those wars, b’m'heira b’yameinu.

A Chat with Ayman Al-Zawahiri

The Washington Post today reposted the transcript of a webchat with Ayman Al-Zawahiri, one of the world’s most media-exposed terrorists, known for his being in cahoots with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda affiliates in Iraq and elsewhere.

In his chat session, al-Zawahiri is challenged by one person, who says he “challenges [al-Qaeda] to do that in Tel Aviv”, referring to the bombings in Algiers, which claimed the lives of up to 60 people. The organization blamed for the attack was the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), which according to the BBC is “now known as al-Qaeda in the Land of the Islamic Maghreb.”

Exasperated at the implication that “al-Qaeda has to do everything”, Mr. al-Zawahiri’s replied to his challenger by saying:

“Hasn’t the questioner heard that [al-Qaeda] struck the Jews in Jerba, Tunisia, and struck the Israeli tourists in Mombasa, Kenya, in their hotel, then fired two missiles at the El Al airliner carrying a number of them?”

The rest of the session is also notable, but this particular quote shows — to this man, killing Israeli tourists in their hotels in Kenya is a noble act. How are Israeli tourists “enemies of Islam”?

Unless he, of course, means to imply that all Jews are enemies of Islam — a case which, given the Qur’an’s speaking of “appointed festivals” for varying peoples of the world, seems to be textually flawed at best — in which case, he has effectively said the same thing as Hezbollah’s Nasrallah: every kippa-covered head is a target around the world.

Al-Zawahiri ends his chat by saying that even if Osama bin Laden is not ill as media has reported, he one day “must die”, but “All-h’s religion will remain until All-h inherits the earth.”

My main question is: why, to these people, is mass murder what All-h wants?