Think what you will of Ralph Nader (here's the Lebanese-American in his good-looking days) ... I think we can all agree that what he had to say on Meet the Press about Obama's flip-flopping on the Palestine issue is spot-on:
"But Senator Obama is a person of substance. He's also the first liberal evangelist in a long time. He's run a brilliant tactical campaign. But his better instincts and his knowledge have been censored by himself. And I give you the example, the Palestinian-Israeli issue, which is a real off the table issue for the candidates. So don't touch that, even though it's central to our security and to, to the situation in the Middle East. He was pro-Palestinian when he was in Illinois before he ran for the state Senate, during he ran--during the state Senate. Now he's, he's supporting the Israeli destruction of the tiny section called Gaza with a million and a half people. He doesn't have any sympathy for a civilian death ratio of about 300-to-1; 300 Palestinians to one Israeli. He's not taking a leadership position in supporting the Israeli peace movement, which represents former Cabinet ministers, people in the Knesset, former generals, former security officials, in addition to mayors and leading intellectuals. One would think he would at least say, "Let's have a hearing for the Israeli peace movement in the Congress," so we don't just have a monotone support of the Israeli government's attitude toward the Palestinians and their illegal occupation of Palestine."
Compare this to Obama's policy papers on the Mid-East conflict, which conspicuously make no mention of the word "Palestine", or even "Palestinian Territories". The section is merely called "On Israel", as if that was the be-all-and-end-all of the electorate's interest in the Middle East.
This morning, I was excited to see that the news-program Democracy Now! interviewed professor Samantha Power of Harvard University (who has a good chance of being appointed Secretary of State in the event of an Obama presidency). I was looking forward to a more substantive discussion of Obama's Mid-East positions. But again, the word "Palestine" was conspicuously absent. I really think it's odd that a journalist of Amy Goodman's caliber and aggression would not seize this opportunity to nail the Obama campaign on one of its most glaring about-faces.
See here, for the transcript and video.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Nader, Obama, and... Can I get a "Palestine" up in here?!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Did you watch the Feb 22nd part of the interview? She's cool and all, but she got all defensive with Jeremy Scahill. It was kind of cool though. Jeremy Scahill is awesome, but he is a little dark and dreary. OK, OK, the world is about to be taken over by murderously well-funded mercenaries. We GET it.
I haven't seen today's part of the interview. Amy Goodman is annoying sometimes. Like when she is fawning all over Willie Nelson or something. It gets... uncomfortable.
Anyway, nice post. Thanks.
yeah, i'm so glad to see Scahill's development, i remember back in the day when he was still an amateur at Democracy Now. Amy Goodman has been like a mom to me, so even in her embarrassing moments, I still cannot help but love her. It's funny, now that I watch her videos rather than just listen to her voice, I see that she is permanently wearing this half-smirk which contrasts so sharply with her serious tone. I love her barely shielded irony when she asks questions of right-wing guests.
I know what you mean about the Mom thing, and the smirk. It's adorable. Also, did you see how proud she was of Jeremy Scahill about the Polk award? That was cute. I also like that she gives people time to talk, usually, even when they end up contradicting her when she didn't expect it, such as her attempts to lionize Benazir Bhutto prior to a having a guest explain how corrupt she had actually been.
The same goes for Juan Gonzalez when he bumbles or something in an interview. It used to annoy me a little, but now it's endearing. I have seen him getting better, though.
The #1 thing I am grateful to DN! for is that after I was able to convince some family members to start watching it, I've seen their politics do a 180. Information can do wonders for people who think "liberal" is a dirty word.
If Obama even mentions slight support for palestine or palestinians you can kiss his campaign goodbye. We need to understand this.
Yes I don't think this is how politics should be and no there should not be a stigma, but when was the last time someone made it into office after not supporting Israel? The negative attacks from all sides would be never ending. I can only hope that If I vote for Obama and he wins he will take a more even handed approach to the situation. Voting for Hillary or the "right" will bring nothing new, except maybe more war and genocide
You're right edmund, but how long will we have to keep thinking that way? Why must pro-Palestinians constantly shelve their desire to elect a candidate who reflects them, in the interest of electability? Until we have our own powerful lobby, I guess. Obama's pandering on the Israel issue departs from his usual even-handed approach to most issues, his willingness to dialogue. He has said he'll sit in the room with any leader, but I don't think that applies to Hamas or Hezbollah, considering his policy papers. I know exactly why Obama had his about-face but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be criticized (at least he might realize he has an unsatisfied Arab-American constituency, and act accordingly).
Saffiyah, i agree completely on Amy and Juan, I didn't always respect Juan until I moved to New York and saw how many important stories he broke for the New York Daily News. He's getting better at public speaking.
I had the same thing happen with my family. We all used to listen to NPR until 9/11, when NPR jumped on the same bandwagon as everyone else. We found Amy's program and it was like the only refuge we had during that difficult time. My mom listens to this program and yells or cheers at the guests, or cries, or laughs. She goes around Egypt telling everyone about her favourite Jew, Amy Goodman.
Lol about your mother. I love it.
I agree that it is true about Obama and the need to play the political game. Of course he is better than neo-cons or neo-liberals, who would never consider representing all of their constituents, which includes those who disagree on I/P. But a truly inspired leader is able to help others understand his ideas. He has dropped this issue as so much political baggage out of fear, which would make it all the more difficult for him to "flip flop," even after elected. Maybe I'm really naive, but I think this country is on the verge to understanding how much it has been duped about Israel. Heck, the Israelis are starting to wake up to how much they've been duped.
http://www.mecaforpeace.org/article.php?id=239
American patronage of Israel is just not going to last forever, and I would like to see a politician who would recognize that. We don't have to compromise. I think what we need to do is help spread information, help enlighten people, be vocal, be obviously present. We can support him, as our best choice, but that is all the more reason to let him know we exist and would like him to hear from us.
I agree that the media would jump all over him, but we live in a different age now. The spread of information is just not the same as it was before, and we need to take advantage of that before they end net neutrality.
People start caring when it affects them, and the policies of war are starting to affect Americans (even the ones who are not dying or being turned into suicidal or self destructive sufferers of PTSD and their families), and if it spreads, it can only get worse. And the link between Israel and this suffering is very real and very important to point out to others. I'm not saying I want it to spread, but I would like people to start waking up to the reality of the situation.
Anyway, I hope that Ralph Nader being given air time will help ameliorate this situation for other politicians. Also, if you ever watch things like CSPAN when they let callers call in, Israel gets brought up often. Anyway, insha' allah. Let's not give up. We have the right and the duty to let politicians (and the media) know we exist.
You need to listen to John Kerry stumping for Barrack Obama, explaining the "start" of Shia'/Sunni conflict and the theories of martyrdom in Islam. Seriously.
http://www.cspan.org/Politics/Default.aspx
Click on "Sen. John Kerry Stumps for Obama in Texas," then right click the video and play in Real Player, and go to minute 27.
Seriously, these are our elected leaders? Really? OK, so Obama is not responsible for what the people campaigning for him are saying... but I wouldn't want someone campaigning for me, explaining about "Ali, [rdaa] the prophet Muhammad's [saaws] grandson, and HIS grandson Hussein [rdaa]..." ???? Hussein was also the first martyr in Islam. Did you know that? Forget that the first martyr of Islam was a woman [rdaa] and Hussein wasn't even born yet. There's so much ignorance! Do we have to support the ignorant?
this is all he says on his policy sheet about palestine
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Obama will make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a key diplomatic priority. He will make a sustained push – working with Israelis and Palestinians – to achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state in Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security.
hey saffiyah, i feel the same way about being on the verge, but I also think we have been on the verge for a really long time waiting for a tipping point that, like the messiah, probably won't come.
ally, do you mean that's all he says about Israel/Palestine or just Palestine? The policy paper I linked to has no "Israeli-Palestinian conflict" section, just the "On Israel" section.
I just hope that Obama is planning on having a much more even hand in this matter once elected. I think there is some chance actually but the question now is how best for us to promote this?
from raw story:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CNN_Hawkish_Israel_supporters_concerned_about_0226.html
last paragraph in the article:
A recent poll found that American Jews are less concerned with the defense of Israel than with many other issues. Only 6% said that support for Israel would be the most important issue in deciding how to vote in the presidential election. Far larger numbers named the economy and jobs, health care, the war in Iraq, or terrorism and national security.
nader was on meet the press, not 60 minutes. unless i am mistaken and he was on both (and i missed the 60 minutes interview).
Wazzup with your style sheet? Had to switch out of Firefox to IE to read your post.
Great post by the way. Thanks.
thanks :) i think the layout problems have been fixed now, thanks Will.
Post a Comment