To the editor: Max Boot says Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's statements that "Arab voters are coming out in droves" and that liberal organizations were "busing them" to the polls were just standard rhetoric. It's nothing to get too bothered about, since Israeli Arabs were likely to support Netanyahu's opponents. ("More 'daylight' between Netanyahu's Israel and the U.S. -- is that what Obama wants?," March 19)
But I wonder, if Mitt Romney had suggested that black voters were coming out in droves and were being bused out by liberals to vote for President Obama, as a way to get out the vote for Republicans, might not some get bothered?
To many, such statements sound racist. But according to Boot, it is just "rhetoric." I am glad he cleared that issue up.
Tom Bauer, Redondo Beach
To the editor: Fascinating. The White House is vocally upset and mistrusting of Netanyahu, a democratically elected leader, for his campaign rhetoric. On the other hand, it is forgiving and trusting of Iran enough to engage in nuclear talks.
Aside from the obvious blindness to Obama's own campaign rhetoric reversals (you can keep your health plan, for example), why is the White House so certain that Netanyahu can't be trusted at his word today, while it puts the world's trust and faith in the hope that within 10 years, Iran will become a rational, peaceful government?
It would be an interesting academic question to wait for history to unfold the answer, except for the very real risk that there will not be enough reading light available during a nuclear winter.
Michael Maracci, Redondo Beach