This is one of the most sane and concise statements about how this country should be thinking about its policy towards Israel that I have ever seen from any Presidential candidate from any party. And boy was I thrilled to hear it from Obama, that candidate whom I already favored.
"I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud ap-proach to Israel, then you're anti-Israel, and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel," leading Democratic presidential contender Illinois Senator Barack Obama said Sunday.
"If we cannot have an honest dialogue about how do we achieve these goals, then we're not going to make progress," he said.
He also criticized the notion that anyone who asks tough questions about advancing the peace process or tries to secure Israel by anyway other than "just crushing the opposition" is being "soft or anti-Israel."
Wow. That was an incredibly refreshing statement on Israel especially to hear coming from a major Presidential contender. This also appears to be another area within foreign policy where Obama differs from Hillary in a real/serious/substansive/whatever sorta way.
Update: this unhelpful/gotcha politics/irrelevant exchange happened during last night's debate in relation to something or another about Louis Farrakahn:
Referring to Farrakhan as "Minister Farrakhan," Obama hedged about whether he would reject his support. Finally, after Clinton interjected that she would reject any such support, Obama conceded: "If the word 'reject' Sen. Clinton feels is stronger than the word 'denounce,' then I'm happy to concede the point, and I would reject and denounce."
STATE BLOGS
