Ten years ago, Barack Obama went to a lecture by Edward Said, the prominent Palestinian intellectual. Should that be page one news now? The LA Times thinks so – they ran a story on their front page on Thursday on the event, headlined "Campaign '08: Allies of Palestinians see a friend on Obama."

Obama's attendance at that speech is news today, of course, because of the Jewish vote. The Times made that clear when it quoted Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who expressed "concern" about Obama's "presence at an Arab American event with a Said."

Said, who was University Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University before his death in 2003, is identified by Times reporter Peter Wallsten as "a leading intellectual in the Palestinian movement." It would be more accurate to call him "a Palestinian and a leading American intellectual." The author of more than a dozen books, his 1978 book "Orientalism" became the founding work of the new field of cultural studies, and is now assigned at hundreds of colleges and universities and has been translated into more than 30 languages.

Said also published political essays in The Nation and elsewhere. He was a fierce critic of Israel's occupation of the West Bank, but also an outspoken secularist who opposed both the doctrine and the tactics of Hamas. In his later years he was also a critic Yasser Arafat's leadership of the PLO.

And what did Edward Said say in that speech ten years ago that Barack Obama heard? He "called for a nonviolent campaign" – note "nonviolent" – against Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

That this would be considered page one news today is a sign of just how low American politics – and political reporting – has fallen.

And there's more: Edward Said was not the only Palestinian intellectual Obama had contact with in Chicago! He was friends with Rashid Khalidi, a distinguished professor at the University of Chicago. Khalidi and his wife held a fundraiser for Obama in 2000 when he ran for the House; when Khalidi left Chicago for a chair at Columbia University in 2003, the Obamas went to his going-away party.

Here reporter Peter Wallsten scored a journalistic coup of sorts: he got hold of a videotape of the going-away party. On the tape he found "a young Palestinian American [who] recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians."

And Obama was at the party where the poem was read! -- page one news for the LA Times.

Who exactly is Rashid Khalidi? Small world: he now holds the Edward Said Chair in Arab Studies at Columbia University, and he's the author of The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood. The Times piece calls him "highly visible" – that can't be good. It does report that "he is seen as a moderate in Palestinian circles, having decried suicide bombings against civilians as a ‘war crime' and criticized the conduct of Hamas." That, however, is buried in the story in paragraph 30.

Times reporter Wallsten called Rashid Khalidi, and found out he had been "out of touch" with Obama "in recent years." Khalidi "added that he strongly disagrees with Obama's current views on Israel, and often disagreed with him during their talks over the years." (Obama says he is a "stalwart" supporter of Israel and its security needs, and opposes any US dialogue with Hamas.)

Khalidi added that, because of Obama's "family ties to Kenya and Indonesia, he would be more understanding of the Palestinian experience than typical American politicians."

A Palestinian says Obama "would be more understanding": here's another story for page one.

(For another take on this story, see Ari Berman at TheNation.com)

Comments (50)

1. This obvious AIPAC nonsense that one must be ANTI-Palestinian to support Israel is shameful!

   Such thinking does absolutely nothing to resolve the conflict, and keeps the Palestinians in a perpetual refugee status, leading to instability in the Middle East and more unnecessary wars.

   Posted by Metteyya at 04/10/2008 @ 5:16pm

2. "Ten years ago, Barack Obama went to a lecture by Edward Said, the prominent Palestinian intellectual. Should that be page one news now? "

   Should Bush college drinking have been an issue 35 years after it happened?

   Good for the goose...?

   Frankly, neither is important unless the behavior or substance at the time has NOT changed.

   Posted by JOMAMMA at 04/10/2008 @ 6:32pm

3. This of course, in the minds of thinking people, would go under the "good" category. It is "good" to have a president with an open mind to the struggles of ALL nations in the middle east, and not blindly continue irrational support of Israel. Like Metteya said, forcing people to be anti-everyone else to show any support to Israel fuels the fires of an already terrible situation.

   Posted by davefoley0 at 04/10/2008 @ 6:33pm

4. said's second book 'culture and imperialism' is a wonderful read.....

   that obama knew him is good news. said was an extraordinary writer, thinker....

   Posted by darladoon at 04/10/2008 @ 6:35pm

5. Should Bush college drinking have been an issue 35 years after it happened?

   bush was a seriously heavy drinker, so it is at least somewhat relevant. and it wasn't "35 years after it happened". bush himself admitted that he abused alcohol until 1986. a history of alcohol abuse is wholly relevant when judging a president.

   Posted by darladoon at 04/10/2008 @ 6:44pm

6. now, if someone hangs out with hip, arab intellectuals, especially one who wrote numerous amazing books and poems? said was a consummate professional of the very highest order.

   Posted by darladoon at 04/10/2008 @ 6:46pm

7. The Sununu family was neighbor to the Said family in pre-war Jerusalem. His brother lived in the Muslim section of Beirut during the civil war. Not once in John Sununu's (the father) career in the Reagan Administration was his Palestinian origin presented as an argument against him. I do not recall it ever having been mentioned. There was no question of divided loyalty. That's as it should be. And all Obama did was go to a lecture by one of the great men of American Letters.

   I'll bet there's a photograph somewhere of John McCain shaking John Sununu's hand.

   Good grief, what have we come to?

   Posted by JFHill at 04/10/2008 @ 6:48pm

8. See how easy it is to assassinate peoples' reputation in today's society, motivated by fear rather than thoughtfulness. does Israel want Iraq?

   Posted by julien38 at 04/10/2008 @ 7:19pm

9. "And Obama was at the party where the poem was read!"

   Hey, now...wait a minute. The LAST time a poem was read to a candidate...

   there was "sniper fire"!

   So that poetry stuff can be pretty dangerous!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 7:55pm

10. BTW, HAPPY of course needs "more stuff to come out" on Obama, because Grampy Old Man can't win on the issues (and Her Nibs is still hoping for the "one thing" she can take to the Supers and force them to give her the nomination)....

    but Obama doesn't need to smear McCain and shouldn't.

    He merely needs to point out McCain's "maverickness".....illegal immigration....campaign finance reform.....the 2002 tax cuts....affirmative action.....CEO salaries....stem-cell research....

    and let the chips fall where they may!

    Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 7:58pm

11. Wherever you see Abe Foxman you see the Israel Lobby targeting someone.

    Posted by Zero at 04/10/2008 @ 8:27pm

12. And the Times' report is not about some anti-Obama bias on its part, but instead is more reflective of the degree to which objective ultra-nationalist Israel boosters in the US have a major and grotesquely outsized impact on broadcast and print news media. He who is in contact with Palestinian Americans or opponents of Israeli Apartheid need be very afraid.

    Posted by Zero at 04/10/2008 @ 8:31pm

13. Happy: the ad says "Meet Single Arabs" not "This (hot) single Arab wants to meet you!" Calm yourself already.

    Posted by Zero at 04/10/2008 @ 8:34pm

14. At least alcohol is legal & revenue-producing to Gov't!

    sniffing glue is legal, too.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/10/2008 @ 9:19pm

15. Posted by HAPPY2 04/10/2008 @ 9:25pm

    Why should he? First, McCain BOUND to start screwing over the conservative base on SOME issue....can't keep making YOU guys happy and still try to win over the Indies and Moderates. Then it'll be LVLIB types screaming about how "He's doing it again! He's selling us out!" ...as with McCain-Feingold or McCain-Kennedy...

    and Obama saying nothing....letting your buddy Rush and his youthful ward Sean Hannity do the talking for him!

    Posted by Mask at 04/10/2008 @ 10:39pm

16. He maintained Western scholars were not in the position, by temperament and background, to analyze and judge Arab culture. Their scholarship was without empathy and hence bigoted and illegitimate

    i would just love to see some evidence of this claim. seriously. show us some proof.

    But Obama was far less linked to Said, who supported a two state solution, than to Professor Khalidi who rejects a two state solution and does not believe Israel should exist

    there is not only no evidence of this, but even if there were, it doesn't necessarily mean that obama supports khalidi's position on a two state solution.

    said never maintained that white people cannot adequately observe the "orient". he maintained that they did not adequately observe the "orient". i don't think there was any doubt about this claim to begin with, but said still managed to expand our understanding of the limitations of predominantly western depictions of "oriental" people and culture.

    how else does the united states justify expansion into iraq without some centuries-old, eurocentric, cultural elitism underpinning it?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 12:58am

17. how do the american media largely and effectively marginalize arab or muslim or persian points of view on matters like iraq, palestine, afghanistan, etc?

    why do americans even debate the success of the Glorius Surge without first asking whether iraqis even want us there? 83% want us out.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 01:01am

18. on pg 31 of said's 'culture and imperialism' he states,

    it is inadmissable.....to build analyses of historical experience around exclusions, exclusions that stipulate, for instance, that only women can understand feminine experience, only Jews can understand jewish suffering, only formerly colonial subjects can understand colonial experience....

    said was clearly to opposed to essentialism, in general. so your claim that western historians couldn't adequately observe 'oriental' culture because they were western or white is false on its face.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 01:14am

19. the reason why white and western historians didn't adequately observe the orient is because they were likely informed by a power dynamic in which the powerful (the west) exert control over the weak (the orient) via a type of historical and literary subjugation.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 01:16am

20. one need look no farther than our own mainstream media to see how arabs, and arabic culture, are characterized and represented.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 01:17am

21. Should Bush college drinking have been an issue 35 years after it happened?

    Good for the goose...?

    Frankly, neither is important unless the behavior or substance at the time has NOT changed.

    Posted by JOMAMMA 04/10/2008 @ 6:32pm | ignore this person

    yet you drag Ted Kennedy's accident into the conversation every chance you get.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/11/2008 @ 08:18am

22. yet you drag Ted Kennedy's accident into the conversation every chance you get.

    Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 04/11/2008 @ 08:18am

    Accident?

    Yes, but not for drinking, but for murder....leaving the scene, not reporting..cromes all that if you comited, you would still be in jail.

    ..as far as anyone knows, ol' Teddy still pounds down a few at Happy Hour, or brfore and after..

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 04/11/2008 @ 08:51am

23. This is misleading attack by the L.A. Times: Obama was a law professor. Professors go to lectures. This is what we are expected to do and this is our orientation, i.e., to learn from a wide range of intellectuals whether we agree with their politics or not. I have read Said's Orientalism and his Culture and Imperialism as a graduate student. This says little about my politic beliefs, only that I am interested in the intersection of race, culture and the imbalance of power among nations. (I would have had to read Said, even if I did not want to. He was a giant in my field.) I can't say that I have a well-grounded, articulate opinion about the MidEast, but I *did* go to a memorial for Said. Because he was a brilliant intellectual...not because he was Palestinian!

    Posted by phddoc at 04/11/2008 @ 09:04am

24. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/11/2008 @ 08:51am | ignore this person

    Ted did not murder anyone. he was not able to save the girl.he left the scene.

    you are a lying fool.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/11/2008 @ 09:15am

25. involuntary homicide.

    this is of curse nonsense. it was an accident. the car was under water. he got out. she didn't. where would he have gotten help and what could they have done? it was a remote location. humans cannot survive for more than a few minutes submerged.

    in any case, my argument is that it was NOT murder, as that lying so and so has claimed.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/11/2008 @ 1:00pm

26. This kind of policing is depraved and inhuman. Obama can't even express sympathy for human suffering without being attacked, because the people involved just so happen to be seen as the enemy of another people. The hard-right Israeli Lobby seem like they can countenance only one answer -- the enemy is the enemy and must be exterminated like what happened to the Amalekites, Philistines, and other indigenous inhabitants of Canaan that came before.

    Just like Wright cannot mention the unmentional fact of US imperialism, exceptionalism, slavery, and genocide, so Obama has to pander and hide his human feelings. We are living in desperate times indeed.

    Posted by silfani at 04/11/2008 @ 3:59pm

27. Can a politician who supports Israel attend a party and praise and honor a Palestinian spokesman who believes Israel should not exist?

    yes.

    besides, did obama praise a two state solution, or did khalidi?

    mark, you presumption is always

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 5:59pm

28. and just because khalidi rejects a two state solution does not necessarily mean that he believes israel should not exist.

    you need to rethink that line of reasoning, among others.

    and PLEASE stop using BOLD writing, it's really, really annoying.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 6:01pm

29. I would be interested to know if anyone else sees my posts all in boldface.

    Posted by MARKCANYON 04/11/2008 @ 7:05pm

    of course they are, you swineseed-swilling fuckwit.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/11/2008 @ 7:37pm

30. Sure he can attend that party and praise the guest of honor, but he cannot then expect to be regarded as a responsible politician who is serious in his opinions.

    says who?

    If I say the Jews are not justified in living, and you befriend me and praise me, while telling the world, you disagree with me on the Jews, what does that say about you?

    but this is not the type of relationship that obama and khalidi have. i would advise you to pursue another line of reasoning.

    Just reading my post and the LA Times article would have told you that it is Obama who claims to support a two state solution, and Khalidi who does not

    this is precisely why obama's admiration of khalidi does not include khalidi's rejection of a two state solution. again, i suggest you pursue a new line of reasoning.

    markcanyon is a terribly weak logician.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 7:54pm

31. DARLADOON "Sure he can attend that party and praise the guest of honor, but he cannot then expect to be regarded as a responsible politician who is serious in his opinions." By this reasoning, every American anti-abortion politician who attends a function for a pro-abortion politician is no longer a responsible politician. That's absurd.

    Being anti-Israel is not being ant-Jewish. The implications of the contrary position seems to say that without a particular piece of real estate, Jews cease to exist. I know this is a major tenant of Zionism; but it flies in the face of logic. Did Jews not exist and have 'friends' prior to 1947? Or before the mythical events of the Bible?

    What you really imply is that the Bible is the word of God, and in it God designates Master Races and sub-races, and to deny this is to be an irresponsible politician. Envisioning a single state on the land of Israel/Palestine is not inherently anti-Jewish, or anti-Israeli, for that matter.

    It just means one has the wild imagination that two 'peoples' can live together in mutual respect for each other. Can you imagine the implications of Jews, Muslims, Christians, Budhists, agnostics, making an example to the world by working together to create a truly humanitarian state on the land with many names and many claims.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/11/2008 @ 11:40pm

32. bluecedars, i'm not sure why you've addressed your response to me.....i'm not the one who said those words......

    Posted by darladoon at 04/11/2008 @ 11:56pm

33. DARLADOON- my mistake. I meant to address MARKCANYON. I do stand by what I posted.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/11/2008 @ 11:59pm

34. There's clearly one thing Barack Obama doesn't understand: the nature of evil. That's why he continues to coddle evil men in both his personal life and his politics

    can any reasonable person not feel utterly baffled by the above statement?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/12/2008 @ 12:21am

35. I believe only the Lefties see your posts "all in boldface"......with steam rising over their screens....LOL!!!

    happy, can you explain why only Lefties protest israeli aggression?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/12/2008 @ 12:23am

36. MARKCANYON wow, the ad hominem attack. I guess to suggest that the Bible is just another book and Jews are just people is "...at sea in the matter of logic." and "...swept down by tons of stupidity." How can one refute such carefully reasoned arguments. I must be of an inferior race.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/12/2008 @ 02:18am

37. It seems to me to matter little whether or not Obama has merely an intellectual interest in the Jewish-Arab, Palestinian issue or is or is not an overt supporter of the Palestinian cause. His history in this respect has the potential to be used with devastating effect against him in the presidential election, should he be his party's nominee.

    A harbinger of that sort of attack is found in this National Review article which ties his links to the Palestinian cause and black liberation theology in a strategy that would sell pretty convincingly to many Americans:

    http://tinyurl.com/632sru

    Posted by harvey 79 at 04/12/2008 @ 08:01am

38. MARKCANYON - My mistake; I assumed you were a half-wit, able to discern irony. You are obviously a nit-wit, and understand nothing but violence and simple, declarative statements. I'll make it simple for you:

    I believe in one race - human. The other racial divisions are human constructs to facilitate exclusion, exploitation and slavery.

    You obviously believe in two races: The Master Jew, and all other inferiors.

    It's fine for you to believe you are made by a sky-god as a paragon for all 'Others' to bow to; just don't expect me to believe it.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/12/2008 @ 2:40pm

39. darladoon = 3

    markcanyon = 0

    Posted by darladoon at 04/12/2008 @ 3:37pm

40. As for issue at hand,

    Posted by HAPPY2 04/12/2008 @ 6:11pm

    what drivel.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/12/2008 @ 7:04pm

41. Posted by FDR42 04/12/2008 @ 5:00pm | ignore this person

    in this context, how genuine is our democracy?

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/12/2008 @ 10:58pm

42. to markcanyon, simply saying someone is "from the Left" is an argument.

    an incredibly weak argument, but nonetheless, markcanyon's argument.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/13/2008 @ 02:44am

43. Posted by DARLADOON 04/13/2008 @ 02:44am

    DARLA, kiddo, again as I've noted to so many that engage that little creep....he's a LITERAL neo-Nazi.

    Who said the Holocaust was "one bright moment in history".....don't you think you're wasting time debating such a person???

    Posted by Mask at 04/13/2008 @ 2:21pm

44. FDR42 How about the interesting phenomenon of those Evangelical Christians who seem to be pro-Israeli but ant-Jewish, in the sense that they want the Biblical Israel to be restored so Jesus can come and either convert or smite all of the Jews (and everyone else!)?

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/13/2008 @ 4:14pm

45. FDR42

    Yes, but what about the Israeli politicians and American Jewish groups that embrace these guys and honor them. How cynical is that?

    It put's Obama's (semi-) embrace of Palestinian rights in a little different perspective.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/13/2008 @ 5:44pm

46. Posted by FDR42 04/13/2008 @ 6:06pm

    Either way, it seems to me an ideology of separation and 'Us against Them' and perpetual conflict. Which, of course, can be said of all organized religions.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/13/2008 @ 6:16pm

47. One thing worth making explicit is that the story is not idiotic only because the event was so long ago, but because it's racist. He attended a lecture by an intellectual. If I were studying racism in America and I attended a KKK lecture of some sort, I don't think I should have to offer any explanation other than I thought it was important to go to understand a viewpoint that I disagree with. I'm not familiar with Said, but from this article it doesn't appear there's anything in particular wrong with his views, only his ethnicity. And it's just terrible that accusing Obama as a Muslim and Palestine "sympathizer" (why being empathetic to the plight of all beings is looked down upon beats me) is tantamount to an insult in our current political climate. It's absolutely terrible.

    Posted by Nick Ziegler at 04/13/2008 @ 6:34pm

48. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/13/2008 @ 9:12pm Another poster, BLUECEDARS has pointed out that that is like a politician who supports the right to life,

    Dayamn, MC, you are shameless! I made that point to show how absurd your position is.

    I don't know that I agree that Obama 'speaks from both sides of his mouth', but I'll concede for the argument.

    Which politician DOESN'T speak through 'both sides...' etc? Hillary Clinton? John Mcain? GEORGE BUSH? JOE LEIBERMAN? Hey, how about your paymasters at AIPAC or the cynical Israel politicians? you know, the one's that FDR42 and I was talking about that show up on The 700 club praising the Evangelicals that are working for the Jews ultimate destruction? How's that for both sides of the mouth? Intellectual consistency is not your strong suit. Apparently, honesty and reason takes a place somewhere behind consistency.

    Posted by blueCedars at 04/13/2008 @ 11:31pm

49. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/14/2008 @ 01:55am

    time to buy yourself a house in gaza.

    worm.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/14/2008 @ 10:15am

50. mark, sorry to have called you a "worm". i'll let that old dude from stratford speak:

    "A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are toss'd with."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/14/2008 @ 10:22am