I probably spoke too soon in my last post. Or don't know what I'm talking about. Dan Fleshler of Realisticdove says there have always been enlightened voices in AIPAC, the question is how empowered they are… But here's the news. I just came out of a panel at which Bill Kristol stood up for Dan Quayle over and over again (didn't know he was running) and Ambassador Marc Ginsberg stood up for Obama. That is the great tension in this event, how people are going to respond when Obama shows up Wednesday morning. All the questioners, all the rank and file, at this event, hiss about Obama. He has no experience, he has never come out against radical Islam, he has scary advisers. That's what they say. Rev. Wright is his Middle East adviser…
AIPAC has been warning people to be civil to all its guests. I.E., don't embarrass Obama on national television by booing, and thereby giving AIPAC a bad name in the next White House. Folks, we have to work there!
Dan Senor, a Council on Foreign Relations welterweight, said the real question with Obama is Why all these people are drawn to him. Zbig Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter, etc. Good question. And the answer is what I've always said. We know he's on the left at heart. Period. We know he cares about Palestinian suffering, as Sue Dravis of Iowa established lo these many moons ago.
Then Senor said that Obama should have his "own Sister Souljah moment" and when he has wrapped up the nomination and Jimmy Carter endorses him, "perhaps he could reject the endorsement." Wild applause.
Ambassador Marc Ginsberg, who is just a little too smooth and his teeth a little too big and white for me–seems like a money guy–then said, "When you want to throw more red meat at the audience, I'll top you. Should Jimmy Carter endorse Obama, I would be the first one to want to see him reject that as well."
Wild applause. No: these people don't believe in Palestinian human rights…
