Mere Rhetoric: Obama: "I'm Not Saying Israel Should Have To Take Risks For Peace, But..."

Oh, he said it:

Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama said Tuesday that America needs to ask Israel to help change the status quo in its conflict with the Palestinians, the only candidate at a National Jewish Democratic Council conference to suggest that there is any onus on the Jewish state when it comes to making peace with its neighbors. "The United States government and an Obama presidency cannot ask Israel to take risks with respect to its security," he told the crowd of Democratic activists and campaign contributors. "But it can ask Israel to say that it is still possible for us to allow more than just this status quo of fear, terror, division. That can't be our long-term aspiration."

Now this sounds decent - fear and terror are bad, but Israel's security is still paramount. Except that's not what's going on. To point out that fear and terror are bad is... well, it would rank as one of the most trivial statement in the history of human speech ("thank you Senator for reminding us that fear and terror are bad"). Since Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review - and since they don't really let people who can't tell the difference between significance and triviality do that - that's not what's going on.

"Israel shouldn't have to endanger itself for peace, but..." is Democratic throat-clearing. It's the Oslo equivalent of "of course we all support the truth, but..." It goes right before pressure on Israel to actually endanger its citizens to give the Palestinians another chance to show they're not genocidal. And everybody kind of knows what it means. So congratulations to the assembled Jewish Democrats for taking him to task for his nudge-nudge wink-wink promise to put pressure on Israel:

The audience applauded his words, which came in response to a question on how firm his backing for Israel was in light of the support he has received throughout his career from the Muslim American community.

Obama questioned the premise of the question, but we're not sure what the point is. You don't have to be swimming in Saudi oil money like Carter - if your policies are likely to have the same results, motive isn't really the issue.

Then again, maybe we're wrong. Maybe the crowd really needed to be told that fear and terror are bad, and that's all he was saying.

References:
* Obama to Israel: Status quo not working [JPost]
* Carter Should Not Be Accepting Boatloads Of Money From Radical Islamists [MR]

Previously:
* Why Don't Jewish Democrats Care That Their Party Hired A Radical Anti-Semitic Imam?
* Oh For Crying Out Loud. Democrats Now Actually Meeting With the Muslim Brotherhood. (UPDATED AND BUMPED- Hoyer Denies It. Kind Of. Except Not Really)
* Democrats Figure: If You Can't Go To the Muslim Brotherhood, Bring the Muslim Brotherhood To You