Just how much of a total asshole is Jesse Jackson Sr.?

He is not an idiot, consequently I interpret his gift to the McCain camp as a deliberate effort to undermine Obama. What a creep. This is the second time he has clearly indicated that he cannot stand Obama and wants to sabotage his campaign.

This is in regards to the Israel comments made by Jackson.

Link to the latest Jackson stunt: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/obama-camp-resp.html

A gift to the McCain camp? This is the first I'm hearing of this.

Sorry - I'll edit the OP.

it shouldn't be a pissing contest. Jesse helped pave the way. He should be PROUD instead of PISSED.

Sad that they have to resort to a story from the freaking NY Post.

It just seems very obvious that Jackson does not speak for Obama after nut-gate.

What now? Did he threaten to cut Obama's nuts off again?

His time has passed, and he's livid that Obama is doing what he could never do.

had a lot to overcome even within his own party.

It is a testament to the man and his unwaivering dedication to bring about the change this country needs that sets him not only apart, but above the fray from so many others. His campaign has been a model for taking politics back to the people without getting down in the mud that has been inspirational to a great many of us. His overwhelming desire to deliver change and run his campaign with dignity and class has been a refreshing and most welcome breath of fresh air.

GOBAMA

completely ridiculous.

It is no secret that this guy does NOT like Obama. I'm not going to get into it, but my Husband says that's a good thing. Jackson is nothing but an angry fellow who riles people up, and it's not endearing to moderates, conservatives, independents or even some Democrats. It's a good thing he doesn't like Obama, at least in my Husbands mind (he's more conservative but it voting straight Dem this year)

You all are falling into the blogosphere echo chamber trap!

A right wing columnist from the NY Post with a history of lying about Obama and others claimed Jackson said this - he conveniently inserted out-of-context sentence fragments as "support." Jackson has vehemently denied saying any such thing and no one - not a journalist (the World Economic Forum is swimming with them), not another attendee, not anybody has stepped forward to substantiate this guy's claim. The mainstream media hasn't touched it, probably because they know it's a crock.

Yet you and others are jumping all over it because it's floating all around the internet. But if you bothered to check the sources, you would see that they all trace back to this one guy with no credibility and a less-than-solid reporting job in his column.

You're all behaving like a bunch of suckers! A right wing nut claims a Democrat said something with absolutely no proof that it was said. The right wing blogosphere runs with it. A bunch of so-called liberals jump on it in Democratic chatrooms so that it gets enough legs that the Obama campaign has to comment on it (even though they say nothing about the comments or whether they think they were actually said, since obviously, they probably don't think they were but it no longer matters whether they were or not). Then the McCain campaign - with big grins on their faces - jumps all over it to trash both the Democrat AND Obama.

Nice work left wing blogosphere. The right wing nuts are SO much more effective when we help them get their message out.

I should have counted to ten.

does Obama have to defend anything any black man says? Does Jesse Jackson work on his campaign? This is a total red herring. McCain can keep flailing in the wind and give Obama more chances to repudiate Jesse. Its all to our benefit.

I predict McRat brings this up during the debate-- you know, link Barack to Jackson in the minds of tepid supporters.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/obama-camp-resp.html

UPDATE: The McCain campaign has jumped on these comments, with senior foreign policy advisor Randy Scheunemann saying, "According to a prominent Democratic supporter of Barack Obama, the 'Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades' will 'lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.' It should not surprise anyone that Obama’s supporters see what others, from the terrorist group Hamas to Iranian President Ahmadinejad, have seen: an Obama presidency would bring real change to America’s policy of support for Israel. Barack Obama has claimed that nobody has suffered more than the Palestinians, praised a former spokesman of a Palestinian terrorist group for reminding him of his own 'blind spots' and 'biases,' and told the New York Times that Hamas and Hezbollah have 'legitimate claims.' Barack Obama expressed support for Jerusalem being the undivided capital of Israel and switched his position 24 hours later in the face of criticism from Palestinians. Barack Obama has said it is a 'disgrace' that the United States has not met unconditionally with leaders committed to Israel’s destruction. Now, Barack Obama claims to be a strong supporter of Israel but his supporters -- here and abroad -- know better."

Sharpton at least says publicly that Obama's vision should be broader than what He and Jackson have focused on. He acknowledges that Obama needs to be President for *all Americans* and not necessarily have laser focus on just blacks.

Though being black myself, I do feel that he has reached out to us in ways other Presidents have not.

P.S. - By spokesman, I mean "advocate". I don't mean to imply that Sharpton has any official position in the Obama Campaign.

Them falling out probably wins him some votes.

There were a few threads on this last night and I pointed out that Jesse was having trouble adapting to his role as being out of touch of the mainstream of America and seeing his influence wither to a minimum.

I was jumped on by a few DU'ers who would rather see Obama lose than to dare question Rev. Jesse and his infinite wisdom.

I had no idea

It ain't fake. This is the second time Jackson has gone out of his way to fuck up Obama.

..."this, coming from the man who wanted to perform surgery on me? He doesn't speak for me."

There are a lot of Jews who are leery of Obama because they remember supporting Jackson in the 80s - reaching back into the days of the 60s civil rights marches and the freedom riders, which had a LOT of Jewish support - then felt betrayed by Jackson with his "Hymietown" remarks.

So now Jackson is putting up a clear delineation between him and Obama - saying, in effect, "I know you don't trust me, and I am different from him, so therefore, maybe you CAN trust him."

OTOH, maybe he's just an asshole.

oh noes!

to me, its jealousy.

American foreign policy has been centered around Israel for entirely too long, and it really needs to change in that regard. However I really have little hope that Obama will make that change. Being a US politician already makes him entirely too beholden to AIPAC and other groups that act on the behalf of Israel.

to have this debate and Jackson knows this.

Can't do it during his first term, he's going to be running for re-election. Can't do it during the second terms because he's a lame duck and can't get any legislation through. So we keep on kicking that can down the road like we have for the past sixty years, and on, and on, and nothing changes and nothing gets done. So when should we have this debate? Frankly I think an election year is the perfect time, air everything out and let the shit settle where it may. Sorry, but I'm sick and tired of tiptoeing around Israel and its issues.

Maybe you should find someone to talk to about your obsession.

I don't know what nerve I hit, but apparently I've hit one of yours. Excuse me for wanting a frank discussion about US/Israel relations, what's wrong with that? What are you implying?

You may be sick and tired of tiptoeing around Israel, and I might agree with you about that, but I am not willing to lose Florida over this, not now, not this time.

Obama, as have most Democratic presidents, will pursue a more balanced approach toward Israeli-Palestinian issues. What he can't do is make that a campaign issue.

Candidate X has to win, so we can't discuss during an election. Later, Candidate X has to get re-elected, so we can't have this discussion. Then candidate X is now a lame duck so it is useless to have this discussion, and by the by, this discussion will now hurt the up and comer, candidate Y, so we can't have this discussion. Rinse and repeat for the past sixty years and counting.

And I found this line a laugher, ". . .as have most Democratic presidents, will pursue a more balanced approach toward Israeli-Palestinian issues.":rofl: Sorry, but no president, Democratic or Republican, has ever pursued anything remotely close to a balanced approach in regards to Israel. Israel is apparently the third rail in foreign policy, and is never touched. Sorry, but that needs to change, Florida or no.

by me.

Please check your sources before using them to trash someone.

He's a right-wing Chalabi-clone who also wrote that nonsense accusing Obama of negotiating with Iraq to keep troops there until after the election.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

people can be based on one opinion piece from the New York Post.