A Philly fund-raiser throws support to Obama
By Lisa Hostein on Jun 23, 2008 in Barack Obama, Featured, Presidential Race |
Jewish attorneys raising money for Democratic presidential candidates is hardly news. Nor is it all that unusual for them to switch allegiances once their favorite is out of the game. Still, not so long ago, at least one of Hillary Clinton’s most ardent supporters and fund-raisers had some major questions about Barack Obama, particularly on issues of concern to the Jewish community.
But now Philadelphia attorney Mark Aronchick is making those money pitches for the presumptive nominee. He tells JTA that after some initial concerns about some of Obama’s advisers, he did “due diligence” on Obama’s positions on Israel and social justice issues. And he was awed at the senator’s recent AIPAC speech.
“Obama gave one of the best speeches I have ever heard at an AIPAC gathering.”
The senator explained his positions in a way that demonstrated his commitment, Aronchick said, without pandering to the pro-Israel crowd. Aronchick cited Obama’s detailed position about negotiating with Iran, his commitment to maintaining Israel’s qualitative edge and his understanding that Israel needs to make decisions about Jerusalem and other negotiations with the Palestinians.
“He made me realize that there is an enormous opportunity here,” Aronchick said. “I’m crazy about Hillary Clinton and think she would have been the most remarkable president in my lifetime.
But I’m totally there with Sen. Obama now.”
More on Aronchick and his Zen-like take on the presidential contest after the jump.
The Philadelphia Inquirer profiled Aronchick and another local Jewish attorney, Alan Kessler, pointing out the differences in their level of enthusiasm for the presumed Democratic nominee:
Aronchick, 59, a yoga devotee, sees the transition through a Zen lens.
“Negative energy, despondency and despair are a completely unproductive waste of time,” he says in his office at Hangley, Aronchick, Segal & Pudlin. Twenty-seven floors above Logan Circle, it commands a stunning view of the city.
“Everybody needs to take a big, deep, yogic cleansing breath. Settle down, look at what’s great going on around you, then get rolling. I’m a big believer in forward movement and disengaging from negative emotions.
“The hard part is seeing a person who would have been one of the most remarkable presidents we ever had, not get it. She would have been a better president than her husband, and he was a good president.”
Aronchick continues: “Fortunately, we have a really good guy to go work for. . . . That doesn’t mean I’ve eliminated disappointment or wistful thinking. That probably will always be there.”
Alan Kessler, 57, also on Clinton’s finance committee and a partner at Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, needs a serious break before backing a new pony.
“I think some of us are just fatigued,” he says. “We essentially went to war with Hillary Clinton. . . . After doing this so passionately for so long, it’s a matter of catching your breath….
To get there this time, Kessler stresses the party before the person in his pitch. He focuses on such issues as choice, and the importance of having a Democrat appoint justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Everybody knows I think Hillary would make a much better president. How can I go back and say Obama can do that? If they ask, I can say she will always be . . . better, but she’s not the nominee. I’m not trying to pull the wool over anybody’s eyes.”
Aronchick meanwhile, says he’s commited to getting the word out in the Jewish community. And he “deplores” the attempt to make Israel a wedge issue. He cited former Pa. Sen. Rick Santorum’s recent op-ed.
“I can’t imagine a mainstream thinker about the Middle East who would want anything else or need any more proof about his bone fide commitment to Israel,” he said of Obama.
I think that Mr.Aronchick should look beyond party politics …if he is sincerely looking out for and committed to the security of the Untied States and Israel, he will be voting and making “money pitches” for Senator McCain.
Debbie | Jun 23, 2008 | Reply
Obama’s speech to AIPAC was good but Hillary’s was better. Then the next day Obama claimed he “misspoke” at AIPAC and virtually did a flip-flop with respect to Jerusalem. Obama cannot be trusted. This is not his first instance of flip-flopping. He does it on domestic issues as well as foreign policy. The man is a hypocrite. It shames me no end that the Democratic party has as its standard bearer a deceitful, conniving Chicago style politicain who is so untrustworthy.
pg | Jun 23, 2008 | Reply
We, the proud citizens of the US, need Senator Obama to lead us out of the quagmire of the Bush regime and into a 21st century safer and more prosperous for our children and grandchildren. I am a fervent senior citizen Asian American feminist supporter of the Obama campaign. McSame’s symptoms of dementia and senility are recognizable to anyone who’s had experience with relatives over 70. He wants to pass certain “beers… that is, bills”, just like he wants now to drill, drill, drill and bomb, bomb. bomb. Whether Democrat or Republican, we need to put our country’s security first, and that means saving the US from a President close to senility.
shirlin | Jun 23, 2008 | Reply
One cannot vote nor financially support Senator Obama as he changes his position as often as one changes a babies diapers.
Archie
Archie | Jun 23, 2008 | Reply
Re: “Whether Democrat or Republican, we need to put our country’s security first, and that means saving the US from a President close to senility.”
Thanks for the comment, I am sure it will go over well with the over-70 demographic that tends to vote in large numbers along with another Obama who wrote that McCain is an “old man” who should “pay a well deserved visit to the undertaker.” I will use your comment accordingly in other blogs to make sure the over-70 demographic knows just what kind of people gravitate to Obama.
God BLESS (that’s BLESS, not curse) America, McCain 2008.
Bill Levinson | Jun 23, 2008 | Reply
obama will be good for the blacks, but not for the USA or the Jews=he knows who he is-he just does not want us to know
al davis | Jun 24, 2008 | Reply
Bill Levinson is a racist, an Islamophobe, and a supporter of Jewish terrorist organizations. His word counts for nothing.
Frank N. Bean | Jun 24, 2008 | Reply
“Frank N. Bean” is a liar and an anonymous coward who would not dare sign his real name to what he says. Google on “Obama” and “Internet thugs,” by the way–perhaps this individual’s function is to intimidate Obama’s opponents.
Bill Levinson | Jun 24, 2008 | Reply
“obama will be good for the blacks, but not for the USA or the Jews=he knows who he is-he just does not want us to know” - Al Davis
Nope, wrong on all counts. You spout old fashioned racism. Obama is the greatest reason for hope that this country has seen in a long time. He’s a friend of Jews and a friend of Israel and he’ll be a friend whether you like him or not. I’m a proud supporter of Barack Obama.
Bruce P. | Jun 25, 2008 | Reply
Re: “You spout old fashioned racism.” It is Obama who chose to make this election about race. In “Dreams From My Father,” he openly supports Black Nationalism–his only problem with it is its lack of effectiveness as opposed to whether it is right or wrong. He talks about his “racial identity,” which is characteristic of RACISM.
Obama also accepted an endorsement from Michael Pfleger, who said “There were a whole lot of white people crying” (over Hillary Clinton’s defeat). The people with whom the Obamas have attended church for 20 years applauded this racist remark, with many of them standing.
Yes, it’s about race–by Obama’s choice, given his propensity to surround himself not only with racists (Wright, Moss, Sharpton, Farrakhan) but also anti-Semites (Sharpton, MoveOn) and anti-Catholic bigots (Farrakhan, MoveOn). I name Farrakhan because Obama had to be asked three times, on national TV, before he would “reject” Farrakhan’s endorsement.
Obama: don’t pose arm in arm with Al “white interloper” Sharpton and then, when I won’t vote for you, call ME a racist.
Bill Levinson | Jun 25, 2008 | Reply
Obama tried to avoid talking about race as much as possible. It was exclusively people like YOU who made the election about race by choosing to tarnish him for his associations with the Black community and its leadership.
Talking about one’s “racial identity” does not make one a RACIST. Consistently assailing others because of their racial identity does.
Frank N. Bean | Jun 27, 2008 | Reply
Re: “choosing to tarnish him for his associations with the Black community and its leadership.”
Yes, just like I would “tarnish” a white candidate for his associations with the White (Supremacist) community and its leadership like David Duke and Tom Metzger. In fact, I joined the National Jewish Democratic Council (like a broken clock, it’s right twice a day) in condemning Ron Paul’s refusal to reject the support of, and a donation from, the Stormfront White Nationalist Community. I also told the Ron Paul campaign what I thought of this, and that I would work for his defeat in the Republican primary.
Everything the Obamas do is about racial identity politics, whether it’s Obama’s “Dreams From My Father” or Michelle Obama’s thesis. She did NOT say the U.S. was founded on racism and violence (an urban legend) but she did say her primary obligation was to the Black community. This is on page 2 of the pdf copy, by the way.
Bill Levinson | Jun 29, 2008 | Reply
As a Jew, is your primary obligation to the Jewish community? Clearly, because all your attacks against Obama center around Jewish fears. You show that you’re willing to put Jewish interests over the interests of the rest of America, which would benefit from removing the GOP from power.
Yet it’s not okay for a Black person then to feel themselves obligated to the Black community? So you’re a hypocrite. But we knew that already.
Saying that Obama is hyperfocused on race is like saying Jews are hyperfocused on the Holocaust. Discrimination and reacting to that discrimination is part of his experience as a Black man.
John McCain “hates the gooks” and will for the rest of his life. That makes him racist against Asians. But he had an experience that people seem to think justifies his hatred. Would you condemn McCain for using racial epithets against people who aren’t even connected to the ones who imprisoned and tortured him? I doubt it.
Barack Obama uses no such epithets, promotes a multicultural outlook, and favors diversity and tolerance. Saying that he supports strengthening the Black community, however, has lead you to condemn him as a racist. Maybe it’s simply that you’re a racist and you’re scared of the notion of Black people realizing their power as individuals and as a community.
Frank N. Bean | Jun 30, 2008 | Reply
Frank N. Bean wrote, “As a Jew, is your primary obligation to the Jewish community?” No, my primary obligation is to the United States.
“You show that you’re willing to put Jewish interests over the interests of the rest of America.” No, I am putting my country’s interests over those of George Soros and the various foreign countries that are backing Obama.
“John McCain “hates the gooks” and will for the rest of his life.” So would you, if they had tortured you for five years. “Gook,” by the way, refers to an Asian enemy as opposed to Asians in general (to judge from the context in which it was used–it was never applied to an allied Asian soldier like a South Vietnamese or South Korean). The individuals to whom McCain applies this name were indeed those who tortured him.
“Saying that he supports strengthening the Black community, however, has lead you to condemn him as a racist.” No, surrounding himself with racists means he enables and empowers racists.
Bill Levinson | Jul 1, 2008 | Reply