Our two candidates were right in the way they treated the Middle East topic.

[madfloridian]

They had to say what they said. Josh Marshall is right. He said it was "Russert's Lowest Moment (and that's saying a lot)". Here is what he said.

Russert's lowest point

I discussed this in the live debate blog. But I think it's worth going back and watching Russert's run of shame here. I would say it was borderline to bring up the issue of Farrakhan at all. But perhaps since it's getting some media play you bring it up just for the record, for Obama to address.

That's not what Russert did. He launches into it, gets into a parsing issue over word choices, then tries to find reasons to read into the record some of Farrakhan's vilest quotes after Obama has just said he denounces all of them. Then he launches into a bizarre series of logical fallacies that had Obama needing to assure Jews that he didn't believe that Farrakhan "epitomizes greatness".

As a Jew and perhaps more importantly simply as a sentient being I found it disgusting. It was a nationwide, televised, MSM version of one of those noxious Obama smear emails.

They both were firm and left no wiggle room on where they stand. They learned well from 2003. Howard Dean was the example of what a candidate must NEVER say in public on this topic.

From CNN 2003.

Dean defends Middle East remarks

Dean was forced to defend himself from vicious attacks when he said we should be "evenhanded."

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Under fire for saying that the United States should be even-handed in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, 2004 Democratic presidential front-runner Howard Dean Wednesday said he would not abandon the long-standing policy of strong U.S. support for Israel.

The former Vermont governor said criticism of his remarks by presidential rival Sen. Joseph Lieberman was a "despicable" attempt to divide the Democratic Party, which has long enjoyed the support of many Jewish voters.

He did add a very important comment, which he later got criticized for as well.

"We do have a special relationship with Israel. We would defend Israel if necessary. I think that is well-known," he told CNN. "However, we are also the only country capable of bringing peace to the Middle East, and when we sit at the negotiating table, we do have to have the trust of both sides or we will never succeed."

You do not hear words like that spoken anymore, not since Howard Dean received this letter from the House Democrats. It speaks for itself.

September 10, 2003

The Honorable Howard Dean
P.O. Box 1228
Burlington, VT 05402

Dear Governor Dean:

We are writing to respond to your comments on the Middle East at a recent
campaign event and in Tuesday's candidate debate and explain why we believe
it is wrong to say the U.S. should "not take sides" in the
Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

American foreign policy has been - and must continue to be - based on
unequivocal support for Israel's right to exist and to be free from terror.
The Palestinians have at best been ambivalent about their willingness to
accept Israel's existence and from Yasir Arafat on down they have promoted
or acquiesced in the use of terrorism as a tactic in their struggle. It is
unacceptable for the U.S. to be "evenhanded" on these fundamental issues.

All of us want a genuine peace process to succeed, and all of us accept the
legitimacy of a Palestinian state once the Palestinian leadership and people
recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and not only renounce
the use of violence but at last take action to dismantle the terrorist
infrastructure inside the Palestinian Authority. Time and time again, the
Israeli people have shown their willingness to take risks for peace. But
they will only do so with the knowledge that U.S. support for Israel will
not waver.

It is important for America to help facilitate a peaceful resolution of the
conflict, but in playing this role we must be true to our values and make
sure that all parties clearly understand our policies. This is not a time to
be sending mixed messages; on the contrary, in these difficult times we must
reaffirm our unyielding commitment to Israel's survival and raise our voices
against all forms of terrorism and incitement.

Sincerely,

Howard L. Berman
Nancy Pelosi
Robert Matsui
Steny Hoyer
Martin Frost
Nita Lowey
Tom Lantos
Edward Markey
Chet Edwards
Ben Cardin
Steve Rothman
Steve Israel
Gary Ackerman
Barney Frank
Rahn Emanuel
Adam Smith
Anthony Weiner
Chris Bell
Adam Schiff
Hilda Solis
Robert Menendez
Shelley Berkley
Robert Andrews
Joseph Crowley
Jose Serrano
John Larson
Ellen Tauscher
Dennis Cardoza
Patrick Kennedy
Linda Sanchez
Harold Ford Jr.
Brad Sherman
C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger
Alcee Hastings

http://www.house.gov/berman/letter_new.html

So our two great candidates answered the way they had to do. I firmly believe though that inside both of them is a desire to use fairness in the Middle East.

It is a good thing, though, that they did not say it out loud.