So Just Where Does Obama Stand In Regards To Israel? Updated

After years of cavorting with palestinian activists on Chicago's south side like Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi and Ali Abunimah, getting the endorsement of Hamas spokesman, Ahmed Yousef, and having as a Middle East advisor, Robert Malley, a known anti semite that has met with Hamas on numerous occasions, he is now trying to say he is a big supporter of Israel. Not to mention that his pastor has printed Hamas propaganda in the church bulletin or Nahdmi Auchi a Saddam Hussien sycophant. In a recent interview with Jeff Goldberg for "The Atlantic" Obama claims his friendship with a couple Jews hurt his early standing with his church and that because of those associations he is vindicated in his support for Israel but then shouldn't his other associates also be open for examination as he dismisses, Ayers, Dohrn, Rezko and the above mentioned?

The other irony in this whole process is that in my early political life in Chicago, one of the raps against me in the black community is that I was too close to the Jews. When I ran against Bobby Rush [for Congress], the perception was that I was Hyde Park, I’m University of Chicago, I’ve got all these Jewish friends. When I started organizing, the two fellow organizers in Chicago were Jews, and I was attacked for associating with them. So I’ve been in the foxhole with my Jewish friends, so when I find on the national level my commitment being questioned, it’s curious.

Philip Klein takes a deep look into just how big a hypocrite Barry O really is in a great piece for "The American Spectator".

THROUGHOUT THE CAMPAIGN, Obama and his staffers have dismissed any scrutiny of his views on Israel with a blend of outrage and sarcasm, as if his record of support for Israel is so extensive, so undeniable, that anybody who raises doubts about his actual views is launching an inquisition.

But as is the case with most issues, Obama is such a blank slate, and has such a thin public record, that voters are forced to parse his statements, sift through his past, and examine those he chooses to associate with to get a better sense of his underlying philosophy.

Obama has touted his foreign policy approach as a break from "conventional Washington thinking." As part of this approach, Obama has boasted of his willingness to engage in direct talks with our enemies, including Iran, without preconditions.

Iran has consistently been deemed the leading state sponsor of terrorism by the U.S. State Department, has vowed to annihilate Israel within the context of seeking nuclear weapons, and has helped finance Hamas. Why should it be beyond the pale to question the earnestness of Obama's vow not to negotiate with Hamas, when he has promised, as part of his sweeping program for change, to negotiate with its patron, which shares the same ultimate goal?

It's no secret that within elite liberal foreign policy circles, one of the primary laments is that the United States hinders peace in the Middle East by being too reflexively pro-Israel.

Well we all know Obama is an elite liberal steeped in left wing ivy league ideology that has sought out the most radical activists on the left most of his adult life as he even wrote about that fact in his memoir "Dreams From My Father". The Democrats are about to nominate a pretty boy effete marxist with a forked tongue or a Clinton and have backed themselves into a corner, at least we will be rid of the Clintons for a couple years. I do not think we will have to worry about an Obama/Clinton ticket as Michelle Obama will nix that as they do not want to be tied to the Clintons in any way, they would need a food taster on staff.
Update: Here is David Frum's take on the Obama/Goldberg interview.

(1) a condescending assumption that the so-called hawkish position on the Arab-Israeli dispute is "blind" and adopted by US politicians only because they seek political safety - there's no acknowledgement that the dovish position was ever tried or that it in fact produced a terrible war in 2000-2003;

(2) the attitude, common on the Democratic left, that real friendship to Israel consists in compelling Israeli governments to do things that most Israelis regard as dangerous;

(3) acceptance of the red herring that it is "settlements" that are the source of the Arab-Israeli dispute;

(4) enormous and unexplained confidence that he can solve a problem through his personal intervention.

*
I do not believe that Obama is in any sense hostile to Israel. I am certain that he would be honestly disgusted by anti-semitism in any form. But do I believe that he would be cavalier with Israel's security? That his belief that anything can be negotiated and that dialogue is always the answer exposes America's allies to risks? That his understanding of the origins and causes of the Arab-Israeli dispute is dangerously wrong? That he will "engage" Hamas and Hezbollah for exactly the same reasons that he will seek to "engage" Iran and Syria? Yes I do. He may consider himself Israel's friend. But he will be a dangerous friend - made all the more dangerous by the reluctance of many in the pro-Israel community to ask searching questions of this supremely evasive politician.