• A left-wing blogger quotes a congressional candidate as saying she’s being bullied by AIPAC types. The next day the candidate’s house burns down. Somebody call Mearsheimer & Walt (alternative punch line: Jimmy Carter has volunteered to rebuild the house).
• The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue that Barack Obama’s “fraudulent” faith-based initiative will be bad for the Catholics — and Orthodox Jews. The Orthodox Union isn’t so sure (though it has similar concerns).
• The state lobbyist heading up John McCain’s campaign in Palm Beach County is ‘Jewish with a capital J.’
• A writer in the Jerusalem Post explains how a nice Jewish boy ended up with the same name as “a nice political superstar who is named after his Muslim father and is himself a long time member of the ‘Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian’ Trinity United Church of Christ.”
• Ira Forman (National Jewish Democratic Council) in HuffPo: When it comes to Iran, McCain speaks loudly and carries a small stick.
• The NJDC may have picked a bad time to paint McCain as a flip-flopper.
• Obama courts Hollywood Jews.
• The L.A. Jewish Journal has a Podcast on the Iranian Jewish vote.

The Miami Herald reports that some American Muslim leaders say Barack Obama’s Web site aimed at countering rumors that he is a Muslim — fightthesmears.com — sends a negative message about their religion:

Vanessa Alikhan was at a Democratic ”unity party” when she overheard another guest indignantly refute the rumor that Barack Obama is Muslim, as if it were a racial slur. She later recounted the conversation to a friend.

”She told me that this is politics and that I should just deal with it,” said Alikhan, a Fort Lauderdale graphic artist who converted to Islam about five years ago. “To me this is the same as telling an African American or a Jewish person they should deal with discrimination because people aren’t ready to embrace them as a group.”

She and other American Muslims are speaking out, as the Obama campaign pushes back on widely e-mailed and patently false claims that he is tied to Islamic terrorists. The rumor could be particularly damaging in a must-win state like Florida, which has a large Jewish population.

Competing Op-Eds in the Palm Beach Post offer divergent views of Barack Obama’s record on Israel and Jewish-related issues.

Jewish congressman Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) defends Obama’s stance on Israel and slams email smears against the presumed Democratic nominee. He writes:

Rather than deal in facts, including Sen. Obama’s strong record on Israel, these e-mails and ads focus on guilt by association and are characterized by double standards…

Since taking office in 2005, Sen. Obama has an A-plus record on issues important to the American Jewish community. He has been a staunch supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and fought to ensure Israel’s security in the face of Palestinian terrorism, Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad rocket attacks, threats from Syria and a growing Iranian nuclear threat.

But like the vast majority of the American Jewish community, Sen. Obama believes that a comprehensive settlement - Israel and a peaceful Palestinian state living side-by-side - is the best way to ensure Israel’s security and guarantee that Israel will remain a Jewish state.

In Florida, Sen. Obama laid out the case why, under his presidency, the United States and our ally Israel would be more secure. He also described in stark terms the differences between the direction of America’s foreign policy under his leadership and that of John McCain, who has stridently declared that he will continue to carry out the same failed foreign policies - in Iraq, throughout the Middle East and elsewhere - of President Bush. Under Sen. McCain’s perverse logic, if the policy is broken, don’t fix it.

No one has been more resolute than Barack Obama in addressing the most serious security threat facing the U.S. and Israel - a nuclear Iran. He has stated emphatically that the world must work to stop Iran’s uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran, which he describes as a “radical theocracy,” from acquiring weapons. To that end, Sen. Obama introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, which would deny Tehran billions of dollars in energy revenues that are used to fuel its nuclear program and finance its terrorist network.

While not rejecting the use of force, Sen. Obama has taken a page from past presidents in calling for “strong diplomacy” with Iran.

Meanwhile, Matthew Brooks of the Republican Jewish Coalition offers a counterpoint. He writes:

Having served barely three years in the U.S. Senate - two of which he has spent running for president - Sen. Obama’s record is thin. Jewish voters need to evaluate his candidacy by asking additional questions: What role does he see for America in the Middle East? Will he be a friend to Israel? What are the influences that have shaped him? To whom does he turn for advice and guidance? And whom might he ask to serve in his administration?

Brooks finds Obama guilty by association: guilty for not firing national campaign co-chairman Gen. Merrill “Tony” McPeak (for saying U.S. Jews are the obstacle to Mideast peace), guilty for being supported by controversial Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi (whom Brooks calls a spokesman for the PLO, though Khalidi says he never served in that role), guilty for sitting in an audience while a young Palestinian-American recited a poem accusing Israel of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians.

According to a piece in today’s New York Times, Barack Obama may have been bending so far backwards to reassure voters that he’s not a closet Muslim that he has offended, well, Muslims. Obama has even kept Washington’s sole Muslim lawmaker, Keith Ellison, at arm’s length.

The Times reports:

While the senator has visited churches and synagogues, he has yet to appear at a single mosque. Muslim and Arab-American organizations have tried repeatedly to arrange meetings with Mr. Obama, but officials with those groups say their invitations — unlike those of their Jewish and Christian counterparts — have been ignored. Last week, two Muslim women wearing head scarves were barred by campaign volunteers from appearing behind Mr. Obama at a rally in Detroit.

In interviews, Muslim political and civic leaders said they understood that their support for Mr. Obama could be a problem for him at a time when some Americans are deeply suspicious of Muslims. Yet those leaders nonetheless expressed disappointment and even anger at the distance that Mr. Obama has kept from them.

“This is the ‘hope campaign,’ this is the ‘change campaign,’ ” said Mr. Ellison, Democrat of Minnesota. Muslims are frustrated, he added, that “they have not been fully engaged in it.”

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.
Read the rest

• Jake Tapper of ABC News debunks latest right-wing claim that Obama was raised as a Muslim.
• But, Tapper’s scoop was quickly overshadowed by this gem from Ben Smith of Politico: “Two Muslim women at Barack Obama’s rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women’s headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.” (If only the Obama campaign hadn’t offered such a strong apology, maybe the Democratic candidate could have improved his image with some conservative pundits.)
• Obama Mideast adviser Daniel Kurtzer says the candidate “misused” a codeword when he said Jerusalem should remain undivided — but insists the candidate is not naive.
• Fine, then it’s a flop flop, says the Republican Jewish Coalition.
• The National Jewish Democratic Council rounds up material about McCain aides who lobbied/traded with Iran.
• The Jewish Press, a pro-settlements New York-based Orthodox newspaper, notes that McCain’s position on Jerusalem is essentially the same as Obama’s — and raises some concerns about the Arizona senator.
• Writing in Salon, Walter Shapiro makes the case for the McCain-Lieberman ticket.
• Shmuel Rosner of Ha’aretz wonders how many Jews will be in the next Congress (lucky for him, in the Internet era, he can keep up with this stuff even after he moves back to Israel — because counting Jews in the Knesset just isn’t the same).

From Quinnipiac:

• Florida: Obama edges McCain 47 - 43 percent
• Ohio: Obama tops McCain 48 - 42 percent
• Pennsylvania: Obama leads McCain 52 - 40 percent

Click here for more details.

Malik Obama, a Kenyan and the Muslim half-brother of the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, says the Illinois will be good for the Jews.

And, following Barack Obama’s speech to AIPAC, other Arab voices are starting to agree (with regret).

Muammar Gadhafi didn’t like the speech — he says it shows “that he either ignores international politics and did not study the Middle East conflict or that it is a campaign lie.”

Nadia Hijab, a senior fellow in the D.C. office of the Institute for Palestine Studies, has a column in the Nation complaining about Obama’s AIPAC pitch and his tendency to steer “clear of the American Jewish left and center.”

George Bisharat, a professor of law at Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, argues in the San Francisco Chronicle that Obama “whiffed in his first major foreign policy speech as the Democratic candidate” by spouting pro-Israel orthodoxies.

James Zogby liked parts of the speech and still thinks Obama is better than John McCain, but he has some qualms.

And, as noted earlier, Hamas seems to have soured on Obama.

As Joe Lieberman campaigns for John McCain and steps up his criticisms of Barack Obama, he faces a growing wave of counterattacks from liberal commentators.

Jonathan Chait takes aim in the current issue of the New Republic:

There’s hardly any sense in which Lieberman is an independent figure. He’s become a cog in the Republican message machine. He may be independent from liberal bloggers, but the conservative equivalent–partisan shouters like Sean Hannity–are his treasured pals. Lieberman even continues to embrace lunatic preacher John Hagee–whose many daft ideas include his belief that the Holocaust fulfilled God’s will–even after John McCain repudiated him.

Lieberman explains that he calls himself an “independent Democrat” because the Democratic Party’s foreign policy ideals “exist in me today independent of the current Democratic Party, which has rejected them.” This is a wildly egocentric interpretation. Democrats started questioning the war because the war was going badly, while Lieberman remained–to borrow a phrase–in a spider hole of denial. Most supported him in his 2006 primary fight but then endorsed the party nominee when he lost, because that’s what political parties do.

And Josh Marshall of TalkingPointsMemo.com has posted a video commentary on the prospects of the Senate Democrats dumping Lieberman after November: