Whoever Richardson's foreign policy handler is, he failed miserably:

We're willing to be charitable and file this under "he just didn't know any better". It's the same as what we said about Dean when he dropped that "the US should be even-handed" comment during the election (an incident that Rosner also compares to this gaffe) - no one had ever bothered telling him that "even handed" is nudge-nudge wink-wink anti-Israel among people who talk about the Middle East. So we're not taking this as an admission Richardson actually wants one of the most anti-Israel American diplomats in recent history to run the the peace process.

What we will say, however, is that this is evidence that you can go through a fairly extensive career in Democratic politics without ever having to know anything about Israeli considerations or the Israeli point of view. And you can do all this while insisting that your nuanced and sophisticated understanding of the Middle East entitles you to declare that you're going to become more involved in the Middle East, because you know what will fix things.

It's the combination of presumed knowledge, juxtaposed with a blind spot regarding Israeli interest, driven by an insistence that policy should be implemented based on what you think you know - that's what bothers us about the Democratic approach to the Middle East.

References:
* Richardson uses the B-word [Ha'aretz]

Previously:
* Why Don't Jewish Democrats Care That Their Party Hired A Radical Anti-Semitic Imam?
* More Leaks Point To Democrats Holding Talks With Hamas Terrorists
* Sen. Clinton Takes Temporary Hardline Stance Against Iran... At AIPAC Meeting