Obama: Carter shouldn’t meet with Hamas

posted at 7:19 pm on April 10, 2008 by Allahpundit

Like one of our commenters said in the Headlines item, if they’re good enough for the church bulletin they should be good enough for Jimmy Carter.

“Senator Obama does not agree with President Carter’s decision to go forward with this meeting because he does not support negotiations with Hamas until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements,” a spokesman for the Obama campaign said. “As President, Obama will negotiate directly with the head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas.”

Does Obama lose face if Carter ignores him? He’s the most powerful Democrat in the country now; as the frontrunner for the nomination, in theory he should have enough cachet to bring him into line. I’m guessing no since Jimbo shed his earthly Democratic form last year when he became an Elder™, thus making him answerable only to God. The fact that no one’s sure how sincere Obama’s support for Israel is also works in his favor here. Doubtless his Palestinian fans are reading this statement as having been issued with a wink and a nudge, crafted to preserve his electability by pandering to Israel’s Democratic supporters but in no sense heartfelt and unlikely to be taken as such by Carter.

Re-read the statement, though. Until now I always thought his objection to Hamas was purely technical: He’ll meet with any head of state, and since they’re not the head of the Palestinian state, they get no meeting. Now he’s added some substantive conditions — all of which, incidentally, apply equally to Iran, whom he is willing to meet with. Why the disparate treatment? And why, as John Bolton asks below, does he think he’s going to talk Iran into giving up on nukes when five years of meeting with the Europeans haven’t achieved that? Is it just his own wicked awesome Messiah mojo that’s going to light up Ahmadinejad’s eyes? “Hey, Mahmoud? I’m the Mahdi.”

Update: What a tool.

Obama explained his position on March 3rd in San Antonio as well.

When questioned by ABC’s David Wright if Hamas fell into the category of meeting with adversaries, Obama said no, “It does not include Hamas, they are not heads of state and they don’t recognize Israel. You can’t negotiate with somebody who doesn’t recognize the right of the country to exist. So I understand why Israel doesn’t meet with Hamas.”

Bush meets with nations that don’t recognize Israel — the Saudis, first and foremost — but at least he’s not proposing that recognition as a litmus test which he then proceeds to violate. Does Obama know that Iran doesn’t recognize them either? If so, why does that disqualify Hamas from meeting with him but not Ahmadinejad?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Jeremiah Wright is gonna have to have a lil’ talk with Barack.

THE CHOSEN ONE on April 10, 2008 at 7:22 PM

“… he does not support negotiations with Hamas until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist …”

So, that means never?

Tony737 on April 10, 2008 at 7:26 PM

“As President, Obama will negotiate directly with the head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas.”

I imagine that line is causing a few giggles over in Gazastan.

What exactly is he planning to negotiate? What terms would he set out? What would be the success criteria of the negotiations?

These are all questions Obama (and Bush tbh) cannot answer.

Ares on April 10, 2008 at 7:29 PM

Sometimes naiviete’ is dangerous and we are well into the danger zone here.

John Bolton.

Buy Danish on April 10, 2008 at 7:29 PM

Senator Obama does not agree with President Carter’s decision to go forward with this meeting because he does not support negotiations with Hamas until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements,”

The emerging Palestinian plan to destroy Israel is to demand a one-state solution. For acceptance of Israel’s right to exist, they will demand that Israel grant citizenship to all residents of the West Bank and Gaza.

That is why a specific U.S. and Israeli requirement is recognition of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.

aunursa on April 10, 2008 at 7:38 PM

Obama: Carter shouldn’t meet with Hamas

I think this has more to do with jealousy, Barack wants to be surrenderer in chief or maybe thats chief surrenderer.

Or at least Carter shouldn’t step on Barack’s surrenderer cred.

Speakup on April 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM

So, that means never?

That means “make me President first and then I’ll tell you what I think”.

gabriel sutherland on April 10, 2008 at 7:40 PM

Bush meets with nations that don’t recognize Israel — the Saudis, first and foremost — but at least he’s not proposing that recognition as a litmus test which he then proceeds to violate.

The Saudi government does not overtly attack Israel. (Although Saudi elements no doubt finance Palestinian terror groups.)

aunursa on April 10, 2008 at 7:42 PM

Obambi should talk to terrorists, much more effective when he does it. Fasten seat belts.

tarpon on April 10, 2008 at 7:44 PM

Somebody help me out here? Aren’t “they” the de facto head of the “state” of Gaza????

Gaza is a territory — not an independent state. The residents of Gaza are not citizens of any nation.

aunursa on April 10, 2008 at 7:44 PM

Hamas has a majority of the PA parliamentary seats. Fatah still controls the Presidency of the PA.

gabriel sutherland on April 10, 2008 at 7:48 PM

They should make him stay a month in Zimbabwe. Carter is such a fool.

crosspatch on April 10, 2008 at 7:49 PM

might be a sign Obama is worried for losing some of the Jewish Vote the Dems count on.

jp on April 10, 2008 at 7:50 PM

So does he hate the Jews or just sorta, kinda dislike them?

SouthernGent on April 10, 2008 at 7:50 PM

Does Obama know that Iran doesn’t recognize them either? If so, why does that disqualify Hamas from meeting with him but not Ahmadinejad?

I hope to God they nominate Obama.

Vizzini on April 10, 2008 at 7:54 PM

Rather than criticizing the American and Israeli governments for their stance towards Hamas, perhaps Jimmy Carter ought to focus his efforts on how to rid the world of the murderous despot in Zimbabwe whom he helped create.

RushBaby on April 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM

So does he hate the Jews or just sorta, kinda dislike them?

Carter or Obama? Carter hates the Jews. Obama hates them but would like to have their votes anyway.

RedWinged Blackbird on April 10, 2008 at 7:55 PM

Carter hates the Jews.

No he doesn’t. He just doesn’t like Jews as much as he likes Petrodollar philanthropy funding.

Jimmy Carter is the accidental prime minister for OPEC. I say accidental because I doubt he knows this is what he’s being used to do.

gabriel sutherland on April 10, 2008 at 8:03 PM

Jimmy Carter is the accidental prime minister for OPEC. I say accidental because I doubt he knows this is what he’s being used to do.

Bullshit.

RedWinged Blackbird on April 10, 2008 at 8:06 PM

John Bolton is a stud.

I wonder if Carter and Bolton got in the same room, would there be a massive explosion. Not matter and anti-matter, idiot and anti-idiot.

BOLTON FOR PRESIDENT!

misterpeasea on April 10, 2008 at 8:07 PM

Doubtless his Palestinian fans are reading this statement as having been issued with a wink and a nudge, crafted to preserve his electability by pandering to Israel’s Democratic supporters but in no sense heartfelt and unlikely to be taken as such by Carter.

Yep, it’s just like his anti-NAFTA position. (Pssst, hey Canada, all that anti-NAFTA talk is just for the rube voters. Once I con the gullible idiots into voting for me, it’ll be business as usual. Not to worry).

AZCoyote on April 10, 2008 at 8:07 PM

First this:

“Senator Obama does not agree with President Carter’s decision to go forward with this meeting because he does not support negotiations with Hamas until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements.”

Then this:

“Obama said its clear what terms will be required in order to legitimatize talks: “a reorganization of Israel, a renunciation of violence and making sure that prior agreements are respected.”

We’re going to “reorganize” a sovereign state? I thought Obama objected to all that — like, say, in Iraq, where we just should have butted out and let Saddam do his thing, right?

Oh, that’s right — it’s Israel, so never mind.

Yes — he’s a tool.

Nichevo on April 10, 2008 at 8:19 PM

Bullshit.

He’s an old man you know.

gabriel sutherland on April 10, 2008 at 8:20 PM

If you read that LA Times article today about Obama and Rashid Khalidi then you’ll see that folks like Hussein Ibish are fairly confident that Obama will talk to terrorists.

gabriel sutherland on April 10, 2008 at 8:21 PM

Obama: Carter shouldn’t meet with Hamas

I think this has more to do with jealousy, Barack wants to be surrenderer in chief or maybe thats chief surrenderer.

Or at least Carter shouldn’t step on Barack’s surrenderer cred.

Speakup on April 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM

Exactly.

You took my thought, or you wrote it before me, should I say.

But I’d put it in other words:

Hussein wants to have an exclusive meeting with his brothers the Muslim terrorists.

Indy Conservative on April 10, 2008 at 9:17 PM

Does Obama lose face if Carter ignores him?

No; the big loser here is Carter.

When Jimmy Carter met with Kim Jung Il, it was with Clinton’s blessing. That’s why Clinton rubber-stamped the agreement to finance North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

This time, Carter was hoping Bush would ignore him and let him act as “unofficial ambasador” like Jesse Jackson did. But no, the Bush’s punking him. I haven’t heard yet, but I assume Hillary has nixed this too. This means that EVERYONE is telling Carter not to go. This makes him an so useless that Hamas can’t get a propaganda boost out of being seen with him – and that’s saying an awful lot.

So now he’s stuck. What’s he going to do, back down and not go after this huge buildup? Either way he’s going to make a fool of himself.

logis on April 10, 2008 at 9:22 PM

To be fair, Bush was holding hands with the Saudis.

SouthernGent on April 10, 2008 at 9:36 PM

I just saw on Hannity & Colmes, Alan Colmes and Pat Caddell talking tripe about “speaking with our opponents”. I guess they would have negotiated with the S.S. Ralph Reed and Sean Hannity did a good job rebutting them.

Hilts on April 10, 2008 at 9:45 PM

Watch Hamas throw Carter a bone here with some bogus concession Jimmy can tout at the end of the meeting so that he and those sympathetic in the media can tout this as an important meeting, in the same way they did Jimmy’s “breakthtough” deal with Kim Il Sung just before he dropped dead in 1994 (the different here being Israel is unlikely to stay quiet about questioning anything James Earl Carter says or does in the Middle East, unlike the way South Korea treated his trip to North Korea 14 years ago).

Then the ball’s back in Obama’s court to either take what Hamas tells Jimmy with the grain of salt, or to actually treat this as some sort of major agreement, which would please many of his far left supporters but would create dozens of potential land mines for the general election race against McCain.

jon1979 on April 10, 2008 at 9:46 PM

Either way he’s going to make a fool of himself.

logis on April 10, 2008 at 9:22 PM

…so what else is new?

91Veteran on April 10, 2008 at 10:02 PM

I thought Obama said he wanted to talk to Dinnerjacket
from Iran,now he says Carter shouldn’t talk to Hamas!

Now I’m perplexed,Obama which is it!

Obama is it good to talk to Terrorists,
or bad to talk to Terrorists,please
clarify!

canopfor on April 10, 2008 at 10:58 PM

Either way [Jimmy Carter]’s going to make a fool of himself.
logis on April 10, 2008 at 9:22 PM

…so what else is new?
91Veteran on April 10, 2008 at 10:02 PM

This time, when he makes a fool of himself, he’s not going to win the Nobel Prize for it.

logis on April 10, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Obama just wants to be the first US President to capitulate to Hamas in person. Carter couldn’t do it while he was in office–he was too busy playing the unseen benevolent godfather of the radical Islamic movement.

Thanks for the jihad, Jimmah! You brought us the Ayatollah who got this snowball rolling.

mojojojo on April 11, 2008 at 1:35 AM

The really funny thing is that the Israelis and just about everyone else will meet with Hamas from time to time (the CIA does). Still… certain folk would harp away no matter what Obama’s answer to the question was.

lexhamfox on April 11, 2008 at 4:28 AM

This time, when he makes a fool of himself, he’s not going to win the Nobel Prize for it.

logis on April 10, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Actually, I think he’s doing this to try and clinch a second NPP. Nothing impresses the Nobel folks quite like an ex-POTUS who hates The U.S. AND pals around with terroists.

SuperCool on April 11, 2008 at 6:39 AM

This time, when he makes a fool of himself, he’s not going to win the Nobel Prize for it.

logis on April 10, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Don’t bet the house on that. Nobel Prize became a joke many years ago.

Wade on April 11, 2008 at 8:54 AM

The only reason I clicked on the video was to see the beautiful Martha MacCallum.

RMCS_USN on April 11, 2008 at 11:51 AM

Obama: Carter shouldn’t meet with Hamas

That’s my job old man.

RobCon on April 11, 2008 at 1:13 PM