Skip to content

Obama, Jerusalem and A Change We Can (Really) Believe In

June 6, 2008

Okay .. so Konservo has pointed out that Obama’s advisor has clarified Obama’s position on his undived Jerusalem statement:

“But a campaign adviser clarified Thursday that Obama believes “Jerusalem is a final status issue, which means it has to be negotiated between the two parties” as part of “an agreement that they both can live with.”

“Two principles should apply to any outcome,” which the adviser gave as: “Jerusalem remains Israel’s capital and it’s not going to be divided by barbed wire and checkpoints as it was in 1948-1967.” source

So, now I can move on and be a content Obama supporter because unlike others, who will remain nameless 😉 – I see a candidate who really can bring about the change we need.  There was no reason to go back on the Jerusalem statement – sticking by it had it’s own benefits – and I’m just going to cut and paste a recent comment from my original post which explains:

Even if it was a slip up (which I don’t think it was) he’s not going to be making statements that he meant to say something else. Those who back him are making the “well, he’s got to be able to get there to make change” while McCain is not going to be making an issue of this because to do so is going to damage his credibility with the AIPAC crowd and the other folk that are waiting for Jesus to come back – okay maybe not the doctor up there but he’d probably divide up that crowd on the issue.

Obama managed four things with this yesterday:

1. He discredited McCain’s attacks on Obama’s diplomacy policy.

2. He showed his allegiance to Israel – above and beyond what even McCain and Bush have been touting.

3. He got Hamas to disown him – lol.

and the fourth is something he either didn’t consider or thought was sacrificable –

4. He lost some voters who otherwise were undecided – who liked what Obama stood for but now see him as just another politician.

but actually there is a fifth which possibly makes the number 4 point a wash

5. He gained some republican supporters.

 OBAMA 08!

5 Comments leave one →
  1. June 6, 2008 5:53 am

    But, again, those Republican supporters might not be as supportive as they were when it was just “Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of Israel.” Now, as the spokesperson clarified, it’s just that Jerusalem can not be divided with barbed wire and fences, however,

    From JPost above:

    He refused, however, to rule out other configurations, such as the city also serving as the capital of a Palestinian state or Palestinian sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods.

    How is Jerusalem going to

    1) Remain the capital of Israel

    2) Serve as a capital of a Palestinian state


    3) Remain undivided


    I think it’s pretty clear that the AIPAC didn’t think he was talking about “divided by barbed wire,” they most likely thought he meant that Jerusalem would be in the possession of Israel, in whole, undivided and not shared with a neighboring Palestinian state.

  2. June 6, 2008 6:41 am

    Do you have other sources on that barbed-wire statement? It’s the only one I’ve seen.

    I just found this article – it links to a few articles and sources:

    I’m sure AIPAC didn’t think he was talking about barbed wire – but quite honestly – I would rather this have been a fumble on words (ie. Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel and SHOULD (instead of must) remain undivided) and the statement be clarified – like, no – he didn’t really mean that than to have watched him let this go because no one was going to really press him on the issue.

    Really though – if you have more references to the barbed wire comment – i’d really like to see them.

  3. June 6, 2008 11:49 pm

    I’m having trouble finding more info about that barbed wire comment (although, those were the words of a campaign adviser, not Obama). However, while searching through the news I found words from Obama himself stating that Jerusalem is, actually, up for negotiations after all.


    Obama quickly backtracked yesterday in an interview with CNN.

    “Well, obviously, it’s going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues. And Jerusalem will be part of those negotiations,” Obama said when asked whether Palestinians had no future claim to the city.

    I guess he really was just being a politician this time. It wasn’t a slip up, but rather a cold, calculated attempt to pander to an interest group that back-fired in Obama’s face.

  4. June 8, 2008 12:48 am

    We are an Obama household too 🙂

    Yes We Can Win in 08

    Ya Haqq!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: