Barack Obama' speech to AIPAC on Wednesday was a hit. Contrary to predictions that the AIPAC crowd would receive Obama coldly, he was met with enthusiasm. A friend who was in the room said, "Obama was a huge hit. The college kids in particular went crazy. But all the people I saw seemed to want to be part of Obama's historic journey."

John McCain also scored with the AIPAC members. That is less newsworthy because McCain has not been the target of a vicious and libelous smear e-mail campaign within the Jewish community.

While the crowd inside the Washington Convention Center was pleased by Obama's speech, a lot of people outside the room were not. One phrase in particular was a turn-off for the critics. It was Obama's reference to Jerusalem as "the capital of Israel" which "must remain undivided." The statement was widely criticized as pandering, particularly by Dana Milbank in the Washington Post. Other critics said that Obama's position would doom Israeli-Palestinian negotiations because if the city is to remain undivided, there is nothing to negotiate about.

Read more »

This is the kind of scene that would not happen in Israel. Clayton Swisher from Al Jazeera English asks as impertinent question about the upcoming AIPAC trial and gets thrown out.

In Israel, the question would have produced a debate -- screaming, hollering and God knows what else. Here, the reporter is banned. Good journalism though. I wish Swisher was asking this kind of provocative question at the White House press room. We need less politeness by reporters (again, see Israel).

Meanwhile the lawyer representing the AIPAC guys asks in an op-ed in the Forward. Why haven't these guys received their constitutional due of a speedy trial. The case looks very flimsy. Try them or free them. Just letting them dangle in the wind seems indefensible.

RESPONSE FROM AIPAC AIPAC's spokes person, Josh Block, called to say that "There were some 463 reporters at Policy Conference, including over 25 from Arab TV channels alone and numerous others from outlets consdidered unfriendly to AIPAC, all of whom had equal access to cover events throughout the 3 days." He said that all reporters were told that "the opportunity to ask questions at the forums is reserved for delegates who pay and travel from across the country to attend the conference." The substance of the question was irrelevant. Block made clear that Al Jazeera English is a welcome participant at the conference.

It could have been a case of terrible timing. The first speech after claiming the nomination is delivered at AIPAC. Talk about your tough crowd.

But Obama won them over. He received standing ovations, cheers and even some tears (when he talked about the Holocaust and about slain Jewish civil rights workers, Michael Schwerner and Andy Goodman who were murdered in Mississippi with James Chaney in 1964).

Obama won AIPAC over without dropping his commitment to the two-state solution or engaging in the Palestinian bashing that is normal in that venue.

So how did he do it? It turns out the timing was perfect. Suddenly there is an awareness of the dimensions of Obama's accomplishment. And people want to be part of it. (The AIPAC crowd has a huge contingent of students who are not exactly enthusiastic about returning to the campus in September as McCain supporters).

A friend of mine walked out of the speech with this analysis. It is clear that AIPAC senses a huge shift in America and it wants to be on the right side of it."

Cool.

PS. I am not troubled by Obama's reference to maintaining an "undivided Jerusalem." That is what I favor. Unified city, two sovereignties i.e. shared. I love Jerusalem and the idea of walls going up to divide Jews and Arabs is anathema to me. Share it, don't split. I don't kbnow what Obama meant but I believe that his commitment to an undivided city is right.

The very next thing Obama has to do is to pick a VP. Now.

Traditionally, a candidate does not pick a running-mate until the convention. What else is there to make a convention exciting?

This year nothing is as remotely exciting as the nomination of Barack Obama. Only convincing FDR or JFK to join the ticket could make the Democratic convention more exciting.

The point to doing it now is to avoid being steamrolled into picking Clinton. He's not going to do it. Perhaps that was a possibility, and not a bad one, a few months ago. Now it is impossible for a dozen obvious reasons.

Read more »

Thank you, Max Blumenthal, for working the Hagee beat so the rest of us don't have to. So the guy who was AIPAC's keynoter last year and whose Christians United For Israel is hosting Joe Lieberman this year believes that the Anti-Christ is a Jewish gay guy. (Uh oh, I may know him).

This is crazy stuff but is also pure unadulterated old-fashioned anti-Semitism.

Read more »

It was nice waking up to today's New York Times to read a full-blown repudiation by its public editor (i.e. by the Times itself) on a libelous piece it ran by neocon Edward Luttwak on May 12. That piece argued that under Islamic law Obama was an apostate and that therefore would be the target of Muslim assassins. It was a crazy piece, and it was amazing to see it in the Times. (Why would they publish a piece by a neoconservative on Islamic theology? That's like publishing a piece by Pat Buchanan on Jewish dietary laws).

Anyway, it was all lies. And today the Times flatout admitted it in a long apologia.

The Luttwak hit job was part of the anti-Obama campaign that is emanating from the tiny right wing of the Jewish community. It's pretty intense. The haters are out in full force, exploiting racism and legitimate worries about Israel's security in an effort to elect McCain and preserve a neoconservative foreign policy.

Now they are going after David Bonior.

Read more »