March 11, 2008, - 4:19 pm
Obama’s Endorsement of Anti-Semitic Bigot May Backfire in Pennsylvania
By Debbie Schlussel
I almost never agree with USA Today columnist DeWayne Wickham. Almost never. But this is one of those times where his column sheds some interesting light on Barack Hussein Obama, even if it wasn’t in the way he intended.
Apparently, Obama went out of his way to endorse a pan-Islamist, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel bigot and one of the most radical Members of Congress–Congressman Chaka Fattah (that his last name is the same as one of the manifestations of the PLO isn’t exactly a coincidence)– in the Democratic Primary for Mayor of Philadelphia, last year. Fattah, for example, was one of 62 Democrats voting against a House resolution in favor of Israel’s right to defend itself against Palestinian terrorism and also build a border fence to keep terrorists out.
But Obama’s endorsement of Fattah was a political miscalculation that is now biting him in the rear end in Pennsylvania:
Early in the 2007 mayoral campaign, Nutter was thought to be a long shot candidate in the five-man race for the Democratic Party’s nomination. But shortly before the primary, Nutter pulled ahead in the polls, overtaking his four opponents, including U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah, who was once the favorite.
Fattah was a close ally of John Street, the outgoing mayor whose administration was plagued by allegations of corruption and mismanagement. A federal corruption probe resulted in 12 indictments and the conviction of a former city treasurer. Though federal investigators were caught bugging Street’s City Hall office, no charges were ever brought against the mayor. Fattah compared the investigation of Street to a “crucifixion.”
Despite all this, Obama, who launched his presidential campaign in May 2007, quickly threw his support behind Fattah in the primary. Obama then sent an e-mail to Fattah’s supporters urging them to make financial contributions to the congressman’s flagging mayoral campaign, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Despite that appeal, Nutter finished first in the primary and went on to win in the November general election. The following month, Nutter endorsed Clinton.
“I met with both Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama last year, and I made my judgment based on their experience and policy ideas. I’m going to work very hard (to help her win the Pennsylvania primary). I’m not conceding any section of the city or any constituency” to Obama, Nutter told me. . . .
There seems to be little friendship between Philadelphia’s mayor and Obama, who took time in the midst of his busy presidential campaign to try to block Nutter’s path to City Hall.
It won’t be easy for Nutter to make good on his endorsement of Clinton. If what happened in other primaries is any indication, the vast majority of Philadelphia’s blacks – who make up nearly 46% of the city’s 1.4 million residents – will vote for Obama.
But if Nutter, the man in whom Philadelphians invested their hope for a better future, can deliver 20%-25% of the black voters in Pennsylvania’s largest city to Clinton, he might succeed where Obama failed in trying to influence the outcome of an important election in the Keystone State.
If you’re not already convinced of Obama’s pan-Islamist sentiments, his endorsement of Fattah–one of the most anti-Israel, extremist Members of Congress–should be a big hint.
Tags: Chaka Fattah, City Hall, Clinton, columnist, Congress, congressman, Debbie Schlussel, Democratic Party, Israel, John Street, long-shot candidate, Mayor, Nutter, Obama, one of the most radical Members, Palestine Liberation Organization, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Street's City Hall, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Treasurer, United States, USA Today
Obama is aware, however, that for most Democratic voters, and, unfortunately, maybe most voters, an empty rhetorical gesture will outweigh all these things. His latest PR gimmick is a meeting with Israeli Foreign Minister Livni, where he asserts that Israel has a right to defend itself, and that Iran must not develop nuclear weapons.
Not only does he have natural inclinations to weaken this country, but virtually no one is putting any pressure on him to change to pro-American positions. Since Hillary basiclaly agrees with him, her criticisms of him are substance over form, which is the name problem with those talk show hosts who say to vote for her instead of him so that criticisms of him will be made.
It remains to be seen whether McCain will put pressure on him, but I am not optomistic. With their present leadership, the Israelis certainly won’t pressure him, no other international leaders will. The only hope is for conservatives to call him on these things as is done on this blog, but in order to do that consistently means being that our comments must be driven not by which candidate is the best, but which political positions are the best; the candiate is a secondary question.
c f on March 11, 2008 at 5:11 pm