At this point, Senator John Fetterman (D – Pennsylvania) may be the last remaining voice of reason in his party.  

As November’s critical midterm elections approach, Fetterman’s party continues its grotesque lurch toward the anti-Semitic socialist left, shadowing American college campuses and Europe’s left.  

The Trump Administration forcefully interrupted universities’ institutional movement in that direction, but what if a Democrat replaces Trump in 2029?  Few – if any – Fettermans offering unapologetic sobriety and rationality remain.  

Which brings us to former Chicago Mayor and Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.  

In a transparent effort to occupy what remains of the “moderate” lane in Democrats’ inceptive 2028 presidential contest, Emanuel traveled to Israel this month to castigate it for alleged strategic, diplomatic and moral failures.  

What Emanuel delivered, however, was not moderation.  

He instead offered a tiresome “me too” rendition of his party’s increasingly anti-Israel talking points, repackaged as “tough love” toward a democratic ally still confronting enemies relentlessly committed to its destruction.  

Emanuel declared that the American-Israeli alliance cannot “survive as it has been” and requires “significant changes and a new direction.”  He proceeded to accuse Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of leading Israel into a “dead end,” faulted Israel for its Gaza operations and settlement policies and contemplated ending America’s special military assistance while imposing sanctions connected to West Bank settlements.  

The U.S.-Israeli alliance, however, hasn’t arrived at a crossroads because Israel suddenly behaved improperly.  Rather, our current state of affairs occurred primarily because Emanuel’s party has steadily and tragically changed.  

Gallup, for instance, reported in 2023 that Democrats sympathized more with Palestinians than Israelis for the first time, 49% to 38%.  By 2025, Gallup found that longstanding sympathy for Israel had fallen further.  Separately, Pew now reports that 80% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents hold an unfavorable view of Israel, compared with 53% in 2022.  Pew also found Democrats in 2025 evenly divided in their views of the Israeli people themselves, whereas 70% viewed Palestinians favorably.  

Emanuel characterized that erosion within his party as evidence that Israel must somehow change.  Leaders and “moderates,” however, should correct public misperceptions, not parrot and enable them.  

After all, Israel did not initiate the conflict.  On October 7, 2023, Hamas breached Israel, ghoulishly slaughtered 1,200 people and cruelly abducted 254 hostages.  It killed in homes, military facilities and a music festival, and inflicted wanton sexual violence and other atrocities.  

Emanuel, however, burdened Israel with restoring the alliance, rather than the sudden political movement increasingly unwilling to distinguish imperfect Israeli operations – which military operations are perfect? – from Hamas barbarism.  

Emanuel also lectured Israel about allegedly failing to convert military victories into strategic gains, but his amateurish judgment is premature at best.  

To wit, Hamas’s military capacity was severely degraded, Hezbollah’s leadership and arsenal suffered devastating blows and Iran’s ability to project regional chaos is crippled.  The strategic outcome won’t be measured according to Emanuel party’s presidential primary dynamics.  

Nor is Emanuel’s proposed “23-state solution” — incorporating Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab League — some Solomonic breakthrough.  Israel already demonstrated its willingness to pursue regional normalization through the Abraham Accords, and the principal obstacle remains Palestinian rejectionism, terrorism and the refusal of governing factions to accept a permanent Jewish state.  Israel’s failure to adopt Emanuel’s diplomatic slogan is irrelevant.  

Meanwhile, we must all collectively work to banish the grotesque accusation that Israel is committing “genocide.”  

A war with grievous but unavoidable civilian casualties – typically due to Hamas tactics – isn’t “genocide.”  Genocide requires intent to destroy, in whole or substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.  

With that in mind, Israel possesses overwhelming military superiority, including nuclear weaponry, and could almost instantly wipe out its surrounding enemies if it so desired.  But it does not.  To the contrary, Israel employs ground tactics, evacuation notices and other measures incompatible with an extermination campaign.  That doesn’t mean Israel stands beyond criticism.  It does mean, however, that tragic civilian deaths in dense urban warfare doesn’t equate to genocidal intent.  

In contrast, Hamas deliberately attacked civilians, took infants and elderly people hostage and openly celebrated mass murder.  

Israel’s enemies would instantly eliminate it if they could, but they can’t.  Israel could eliminate its enemies if they desire, but they don’t.  Therein lies the difference.  

Accordingly, Emanuel missed his opportunity to echo Senator Fetterman’s moral clarity.  Instead, he echoed figures such as Representative Ilhan Omar and served up tropes masquerading as foreign-policy analysis.  

At this rate, how long until outright and undisguised hostility toward Israel becomes not a bug within Democratic politics, but a feature?  How long before candidates discover that ritual denunciation of the Jewish state is not merely tolerated, but affirmatively required?  

Rahm Emanuel probably perceives that danger internally.  Unfortunately, instead of confronting it, he traveled all the way to Israel to encourage it.