Rahm Emanuel’s idolatrous and predictable oped in the Washington Post — Obama’s commitment to Israel — would not be worth commenting on were it not that the perpetual love affair between Americans Jews and the Democratic Party… for the first time ever… perhaps, maybe, perhaps… is approaching a break up.
As Alana Goodman aptly put it at Commentary’s Contentions blog: “You know Democrats are getting panicky about President Obama’s alienating the pro-Israel community when they drag out Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to defend the president’s statements.”
Goodman goes on to eviscerate the mayor’s argument:
Emanuel, unsurprisingly, misses the major point here. The problem with Obama’s speech was that he called for the 1967 borders as the starting point for negotiations, without reaffirming that Israel would absorb the Israeli-majority settlement blocs across the green line. He also didn’t reject the Palestinian right of return. In other words, he implied that the U.S. would take the Palestinian negotiating position on the issue, putting our ally Israel at a significant disadvantage.
I would say deliberately misses the point, rather than “unsurprisingly,” but no matter. Goodman then correctly wonders whether anyone is listening now that the Chicago mayor is no longer in the White House. Let’s hope not. They would be fools.
But, regardless of the answer, a larger question emerges, one with more ramifications. Who actually is Rahm Emanuel and why is he saying these things? More precisely, why is a putative Zionist, someone with deep family and personal ties to Israel, carrying water for Barack Obama on this matter?