WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Joseph Lieberman said Tuesday he was willing to meet Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader who has been criticized for anti-Semitic remarks and has questioned the Democratic vice presidential nominee’s loyalty.

Lieberman [said]..in an interview he respected Farrakhan and was open to meeting with him to promote reconciliation in the United States.

[Lieberman]… came under fire from Farrakhan in August, when … the controversial black leader …questioned whether Lieberman, an Orthodox Jew, might be more loyal to Israel to the United States.

Asked if he was willing to meet Farrakhan, Lieberman told the radio network: “I am very open to that.”

“Minister Farrakhan has said a few things, including earlier in the campaign, that I thought were just not informed but, you know, I have respect for him and I have respect for the Muslim community generally,” Lieberman said.

“I’d be open to sitting and talking to Minister Farrakhan. It hasn’t sort of come together yet but I look forward to it,” he added. “This is a time to try to knit the country together more and to make us, as (Vice President) Al Gore always says, the more perfect union that our founders dreamed of.”

Lieberman said he would like to meet before the “Million Family March” Farrakhan is organizing in Washington on Oct. 16, the fifth anniversary of the Million Man March aimed at empowering black men.

Farrakhan has often been criticized for his strident rhetoric, which includes calling whites “devils,” referring to Jewish, Arab and Asian businessmen in black communities as “bloodsuckers” and denouncing the pope as “the anti-Christ.”

Lieberman said he admired Farrakhan for his efforts to register voters ahead of the Nov. 7 election…Asked if he would like to meet before the “Million Family March,” Lieberman said: “I’d like to do that. I think that’s a great idea.

“I look at anything that anybody does to get people to register and to vote (as) really at the heart of what the democracy is about,” he added. “So I admire what Minister Farrakhan is doing there.”

He also said he was not bothered by any criticism he gets for such a meeting, saying his wife Hadassah often jokes about his stubbornness when he decides to do something.

“She says … Joe listens but he gets stubborn when he decides he wants to do something, he does it,” Lieberman said. “That’s the way I feel about this. By my nature I’m an optimist and I’m a bridge builder and that’s what this is all about.”

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/26/campaign.lieberman.farrakhan.reut/index.html

Lieberman Respects Farrakhan: No Story?-After Eight Days, Most of the Press Still Missing, Despite Question to Clinton, Fox’s Grilling of Daley

On September 27, eight days ago, the first press reports revealed that Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Lieberman said he would be willing to meet with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has called Judaism, Lieberman’s faith, a “gutter religion.”

In an interview with April Ryan of the American Urban Radio Networks, Lieberman said, “Look, Minister Farrakhan said a few things earlier in the campaign that were just not informed. But I have respect for him, and I have respect for the Muslim community generally.”

Where’s the furor? The story first came on Wednesday from the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Jodi Enda and hit the Knight-Ridder national wire. USA Today mentioned it. Ryan questioned President Clinton about it in a briefing aired live on CNN. Clinton seemed surprised: “I didn’t understand. What did you say about Joe Lieberman and Louis Farrakhan?” When Ryan explained that “Joe Lieberman told me yesterday” that he would meet with Farrakhan, Clinton only said, “Well, if anybody has got the standing to do it, he certainly does.”

That night, Ryan appeared on Fox’s O’Reilly Factor. Host Bill O’Reilly asked if she challenged Lieberman on his statement. She said yes: “He said, but it’s time for us to come together. And he’s trying to win. That’s basically what it is. He wants to win an election and the African-American vote is crucial.”

Last Thursday, the story was picked up by UPI and the Associated Press in the tenth paragraph of a story on the upcoming “Million Family March.” On Friday, the Anti-Defamation League, whose earlier criticism of Lieberman for religious talk on the stump drew all-network coverage, warned Lieberman would be “legitimizing a bigot.”

It hit television on Sunday. On NBC’s Meet the Press, Tim Russert asked Rick Lazio if he’d meet with Farrakhan. (He said no.) On Fox News Sunday, Tony Snow asked Gore campaign chairman Bill Daley about Lieberman. “Does he do that with the Vice President’s blessing?” Daley said no, “Joe makes those decisions on his own. He obviously doesn’t have to get approval from Al Gore to have meetings.”

On Monday, AP reported its first full story on Lieberman’s remarks, based on criticism from RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson. On Tuesday, Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen wrote about it, concluding, “It would be hard now for Lieberman to repudiate Farrakhan, but it would be harder still for us to respect someone who will not.”

But now, eight days in, let’s list who is still missing on this story: The New York Times. The Los Angeles Times. The Washington Post news pages. Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report. CBS. CNN’s newscasts. NBC’s newscasts. ABC arrived this morning. Are the media being tough on both sides? Can a press corps that celebrated Lieberman’s faith now ignore it? —Tim Graham

http://www.mediaresearch.org/realitycheck/2000/20001005.asp

It appears to me that there is DEFINITELY a double standard. If you speak against whites, Jews or anyone else who has a substantially fairer skin tone, then its considered a hate crime. But, if you speak against African Americans, Latinos or any of the darker people of the world, then its protected by freedom of speech.

I just don’t get it.

“Be it Mike Huckabee’s visit to Anti-Catholic Cornerstone Church, John McCain’s “gook” gaffe, Fred Thompson’s relationship with former senator (and Macaca Master) George Allen or Ron Paul’s racist and ranting Paulisms, there are many denouncements and explanations to be made, though only Obama pays the price.

The attention that Warpublicans have paid to Obama’s church and its leader Jeremiah Wright, and the concerted effort to connect Louis Farrakhan to the Obama campaign, reeks of a double standard and political intrigue, if not a low-grade racism, intended or not.”

Nor has he, despite having visited Johns Hopkins University, made any comment on the Lancet articles.

The Obama campaign has now released statements denouncing Vick and O.J. Remarkably, however, the candidate remains silent on “Cop Killer,” the recent rap song by “Iced Tea” that calls for the murder of police officers.

Not as a favor to them, but as a favor to himself. Cohen is one of the hacks drooling at the prospect of a second Clinton administration, knowing that they can recycle all of the sh*t which wasn’t even fit to print the first time.

Who wouldn’t like a shot at 4-8 years of xeroxing your old work and getting paid big bucks for it?

I think Cohen is a joke, as is the Washington Post. And it’s not just the lying propagandist f#@ks on the editorial pages either, unfortunately. We need to discount almost everything they say, at least when it comes to foreign policy and the Middle East.

I don’t really know why people were so sure that the media was treating Hillary unfairly a week or two ago. Hillary is their candidate. She’s made the right hawk noises. Of course, the press can’t resist the catty little digs at her, but she’s still their candidate.