Soccer Dad

Obama's gaffe?

Susan Estrich faults Sen Obama for his inexperience.

Sure, he said that Israel is an important ally, but his clarification of his "poor Palestinians" comment only left him further in the hole. His point, he emphasized, was that no one had suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failures in Palestinian leadership.

That’s not exactly how I see it, or how many Jewish Americans see it. I don’t think suffering is a contest in which special recognition goes to those who have paid the highest price. The right answer is that there has been plenty of suffering on both sides.

The Palestinians may be suffering more in the sense that their standard of living is lower, but whose fault is that? Talk to any Israeli family who has lost a friend or family member to Palestinian terror –- and that means any family in Israel –- and, believe me, they won't cede the prize for the most suffering to the Palestinians.

And they will point out, rightly, I think, that it is the Palestinians and not the Jews who have chosen these terrible leaders and remained loyal to them. Doesn't that count for something?

She argues that by mishandling the answer Sen Obama may hurt himself in the future.

Mere Rhetoric, though, sees his answer as indicative of a bigger problem.

The debate about whether the US should keep supporting Israel turns on whether it's worth the trouble of pissing off Islamists in a post-Cold War, post spheres-of-influence age. While Israel may have been worth the trouble in the past, the emerging realist-Democratic alignment is that times have changed. The Althouse transcript is certainly more consistent with the general tone that Obama's been striking. It'd be nice to get this nailed down so we can know which side Obama is on - or, at the very least, which side he's paying lip service to.

Barack Obama