Obama's Kotel Note Exposed by Israeli Boy, the Media

Fwiw, the NY Post called in "handwriting expert" Arlene Leachman, who somehow made the determination that "when he wrote 'forgive me,' there
was 'too much space between forgive and me, so he probably doesn't feel
he needs to be forgiven.'"

I would love to be able to make those kinds of assertions and be taken semi-seriously -  anyone know where I can get a degree in handwriting studies?

Maariv, the newspaper that published the note, claims that the Obama campaign had released the contents of the note for publication prior to it's insertion into the Kotel.

---------------------------------

I blog at Jewlicious.com

...for publication prior to it's insertion into the Kotel." 

Aww.  How upright and transparent of them! 

First he gets blasted for being an eloquent speaker.

Then he has the nerve to be cheered admired by hundreds of thousands of Europeans--what a terrible sin.

And now, he's committed the tasteless, horrible sin of leaking someone's precious, highly personal prayer to the media--never mind that it's his own prayer.  (or maybe it wasn't leaked--maybe the prayer was meant to be private but the candidate ingeniously realized that anything left in a wall in a public square could end up in a newspaper somewhere--and thus wrote something that wouldn't embarrass him). 

Either way, get a life.  If you have a problem with Obama's policy prescriptions, that's fine--just say so.  If you're still bitter over Hillary losing her birthright nomination, at least admit it.  And if you think the Cheney/Bush presidency should continue for another 4 years in the form of McCain, then I'm glad to see your bunker gets internet service, because you obviously don't live in the real world.

But criticizing Obama for a prayer that may or may not have been leaked to the media shows some real pettiness.

-Z

You see, Maayan--in America we choose our leaders through a strange popularity contest called an "election" where one person needs to get more votes than anyone else (never mind the complication called the electoral college).

Now, it would be nice if every voter could sit down with a presidential candidate and get to know him or her personally, maybe having a really deep intellectual conversation about what the country needs.  But with 300 million people in the US that's impossible. 

So the candidates need to communicate with a whole lot of people (the "public", if you will) at once.  That takes something called "publicity." Publicity usually happens through this amorphous thing called the "media," which consists of a whole bunch of tubes and wires and things that can reach millions of people at once.  But the candidates don't control the media, so they need to do stuff to attract the attention of the people who do. 

In other words, they have to constantly pull "publicity stunts" to get people's attention.  It's called campaigning.  Every politician does it and needs to do it.  It's not always pretty but it's better than any other system for choosing leaders.

--Z

If you can't handle a bit of irony or sarcasm you obviously are hanging out on the wrong blog.   try www.disney.com for a place where no one will offend you.

You imply I'm belittling the importance of the Kotel when I said no such thing.  You throw around the term "publicity stunt" without ever specifying what is so wrong about a politician in a democratic process trying to get attention.  Your latest emotional post has lots of feigned offense at my use of language but no real response to my argument.  Try again.

--Z

Z,

You think logically, rationally and methodically.  I really enjoy reading what you have to say.  Keep up the good work.

I'd sooner believe Maariv was lying about the pre-release of the note to save face than think it was a publicity stunt: 1. Obama and his campaign (and any campaign for that matter) aren't that stupid... they know that even the slightest inkling of a publicity stunt involving the Kotel would be an unforgiveable insult; 2. Papers will do anything to get readers these days, even if it includes embarrassing themselves, thanks to the more interactive medium through which we are exchanging ideas right now.

As for campaigning, I think the days are long gone where simple publicity and attention = votes.  Such thinking would be labelled by today's campaign managers and political analysts as "naive."  It's all about the KIND of attention the candidates get.  Not just positive or negative attention, but informed vs uninformed attention, relevant vs extraneous.  A publicity stunt is meant to attract eyes, no matter what it relies on, but a campaign in a democratic republic is meant to inform voters of a politician's policy positions and his/her ability to fill the office contested.

Finally, I think any Obama supporter should feel as though they are doing a grave injustice to their own candidate and his campaign by fostering such divisiveness and negativity.  If there's one thing EVERYONE can agree on with regard to Obama's campaign, it's that it has strived very hard to stay positive and have consequentially succeeded. I would think twice about laying a load of "old-politics," uninformed bashing on a young voter while supporting a "new-era" young candidate.

You think there's nothing wrong with Obama getting publicity but you think going to the Kotel is somehow the wrong way. As far as I can tell, Obama did the following:

1. He went to the Kotel.

2. He wrote a little prayer on a sheet of paper to stick between the cracks, something generally expected of visitors to the wall. The prayer itself was no work of literary genius I think we all can agree it was not the least bit offensive.

3. He may or may not have released parts of his own prayer to the media.

So how is any of this wrong? Seems to me Obama is following the age-old custom of "when in Rome..." As a visitor to Israel he politely performed a ritual typical to Israeli culture. Would you prefer he didn't visit the wall? (I can imagine the headlines: Jew-hating nutcase cristian/muslim presidential candidate visits Israel but doesn't have time for the Kotel).

Alternatively, should he visit the Kotel but NOT do the the things people usually do at the Kotel. i.e.: should he also not wear a yarmulke?

Also, I never insulted your naiveness (whatever that means) or character, except to say you're overly sensitive, which you practically admit to by saying you're pissed. Unless your smiley face indicates you get the joke and are capable of chuckling at it, in which case I'm glad you have a sense of humor.

--Z

Z,

It’s bad enough that some politician vigorously reject certain realities at the expense of losing all credibility, but it is a complete insult when someone launches an unsupportable attack on another individual.  I guess the lack of accountability and logic places certain boundaries on ones thinking and some just can't help but be emotional before they are rationale.  Looking forward to reading more of your thoughts and insights.

You're right that I did not address the student removing the note from the wall.  And I agree it's indefensible to take someone else's note that way.  

But I don't see why it matters if the Obama campaign released Obama's own prayer to the media.  The reason the student's act is indefensible is because one's personal prayers should not be invaded by others.  But this isn't a birthday wish where you lose all credit by revealing it's contents.  It's Obama's prayer, and it seems to me if he wants to share it with the world that's his business.

--Z

I can tell you he just lost more Jewish votes for that one

Mayaan, I really, really doubt it. I'd think the number of Jews likely to be decisively exercised over this could fit into the combined office space of the Substandard and Commentary, and are probably already employed at one or the other.

But in any event, it looks like, as I could have told you last week, the story about Obama leaking his prayer is complete bullshit. Charge withdrawn? Next time one of the pile-ons happens, my advice to everyone is to think long and hard whether, if the story concerned someone you admired, your instinct would be to assume some sinister ulterior motive and cash things out from there. Because, in almost every instance of these Obama pseudo-controversies, it's taken at most a week for the charge against him to turn out to be fabrications with a microscopic anchor in reality if any. This is a pity in part because there are some really good reasons to criticize him, which have been quite thoroughly been drowned out by scurrilous bullshit.

What is it about this candidate that drives people to be so -- how do I put this tactfully? -- pre-emptively suspicious about his every move? Clearly, each new item of bullshit that gets exposed for what it is nonetheless sticks just enough in the public consciousness to make people more disposed to believe the next one to come along, but that can't be the ultimate motive force.

Srsly, read Dreams From My Father. It'll set things in perspective.

Z,  

Your absolutely correct when saying the student's act is indefensible.  It is like reading someone's diary, violating someones privacy or imposing yourself on someone who doesn't suspect.  I wouldn't be the least surprised if Obama's camp was prepared to react to a worst case senario related to the contents of his note to God.  I suspect they were waiting to respond in the event of such a violation.  I have empthay for anyone who feels they are entitled to cross the boundaries of something so sacred.  It is always a pleasure to read your thoughts and insights.

Ell

I think Obama's preparation for the note leaking was simply writing a rather plain-vanilla note with absolutely nothing controversial in it.  

--Z

Obama is one of two candidates for Most Powerful Man in the World.  There are six BILLION humans on earth.  12 to 14 million are Jews... 0.2 per cent!  In the US, it's slightly better, 5 million among 300 million, 1.6 per cent, down from six per cent in 1940.  His support is disproportionately from young people.  Jews are the oldest group in America because most boomer men wouldn't date, let alone marry, Jewish women.

Those Jews who did marry other |Jews and have kids were disproportionately right wing.

Jews fit a profile of people not likely to support Obama.

So does he not show up, the way the Pubs haven't shown up at African-American events for many years?  NO, he comes and visits and prays.  A kid grabs his unremarkable prayer and pubishes it, ruining the comic fun people were having speculating.

The American right wing, both Jews and non-Jews, drag out every lie they can imagine, credible or not to state against him. They know they are loyal only to their ideology, and not to the USA, so when somebody disagrees, they cry, "Traitor" since they know they themselves are traitors.  

Like Kerry, Obama was far from my first choice in the Dem field.  I would have far preferred Richardson, Biden, or Dodd, and from a second tier, H. Clinton.  But I will Respect BOTH Obama and McCain in my remarks, and I remain glad he bothers to try to appeal to our rapidly shrinking ethnic group.

Frankly, I find Helen Jupiter's opening remark about what to do with a prayer paper inserted into the Kotel far more offensive than anything EITHER Obama OR the Yeshiva student did at the Kotel.  

Israeli fashion designer Doron Braunshtein (AKA Apollo Braun) is very proud of his new T-shirt and hoodie (hooded sweat shirt) creations.  He must be, because they're selling for up to $250 a pop-and fanatical so called jewish haters of Obama are bying them like hotcakes.  The reason the casual shirts are so popular?  Simple-they have words like "Who Killed Obama? and "Jews Against Obama" emblazed on them.

 Barack Obama is despised by most so called jews in the U.S.A and overseas, and the outrageous sentiment expressed on Braunshteins's shirts seems to prevail.  But why? Why do so called jews hate the Illinois Senator so much? After all, surveys show that the vast majority of American resident so called jews favour the liberal wing of the Democrat Party, and Obama, if anything, is a liberal Democrat.

 Instead of Obama, so called jews plan to vote enmasse for John McCain, Republican.  McCain they trust as an "Israel First" advocate.  They know that McCain is also a liberal; most important, McCain will always do what's best for the phantom land Israel.  Currently, the so called jews want the U.S. to bomb their Moslem enemy, Iran, into oblivion.  And McCain is chomping at the bit to do exactly that!

 Gentile bloodshed, after all, is a Zionist speciality, and with a President McCain in the White House, the so called jews figure that Iran's 70million innocents will end up like hapless victims of a 2009 chainsaw massacre.

 Pandering to the so called jewish lobby, which Obama seeks to appease his so called jewish haters.  He even journeyed to a recent AIPAC (the powerful so called jewish lobby) convention to pander and to lick the Illuminist's boots.  But according to an article in the so called jewish online publication www.ynet.com, the Zionist zealots say that his displays of support for the phantom Israel are "insincere".  They demand assurances from Obama that he's an ardent Israeli first man who will always be their obedient so called jewish 'Watchdog and Golem".

 According to Haaretz.com, the top news site for so called jews around the world, the so called jews are "obsessively occupied" with Obama.  They fear that Obama, once in office, will not loyally perform as their warmongering lap dog.  Also, they suspect he will not permit the so called jewish billionaires on Wall Street to continue their outrageously sinister price fixing of oil, food, and other commodities.  Most of all, the so called jews despise Obama because he can't be depended on to put Israel's interest ahead of America's.

As Shirley Weitzman, a wealthy so called jew living in so called jewish dominated Boynton Beach, Florida, explains, "The people here, liberal people, will not vote for Obama because of his attitude toward Israel.  They're going to vote for McCain". (International Herald Tribune, May 22, 2008).

 Justin Raimondo (www.antiwar.com), writes, "Poor Obama. No matter how often he tries to placate the Israel lobby, he just can't grovel enough".

The question is, 'Will Obama End Up In A Casket?

The Zionists' fear and loathing of Obama is so intense that it's a distinct possibility that a President Obama, like President John F. Kennedy before him, will end up in a flower-covered casket.  In Michael Collins Piper's intriguing book, 'Dirty Secrets', he establishes that the Israel Mossad, collaborating with the FBI and CIA, murdered John F. Kennedy.  The so called jews were angry at President Kennedy because he had ordered Israel's Marxist Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, to give up his country's nuclear bombs.  John F. Kennedy also favoured an even hand in the Palestinian matter, and that, too, infuriated the so called jews.  After John F. Kennedy's murder, his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, totally capitulated to all Zionist demands.

It's no wonder, then, that the surviving Kennedy clan - Teddy, Caroline, Robert Jnr., et al-so fervently back Obama for President.  Just as fervently, the so called jews oppose Obama. 

It seems that the 'note in the wall' is perhaps a significant indication that Obama needs to watch his back because it definitely has the six-pointed red star target painted on it.

FLASH ALERT!: At press-time, it was being reported that Obama's campaign jet had been forced to make an emergency landing in St. Louis.  The pilot reported "uncontrollability" problems.  News media said the FAA was investigating the causes of the mishap.  Was this incident a "red flag" warning to Senator Obama?

sounds very shagedellic