Mr. Miller is nothing if not dependable in the manufacture of Zionist apologetics, even as Bibi is hardly qualified as a sympathetic political protagonist, Mr. Miller does his best . Although he is careful, in this instance, to open with a wobbly meditation on the Paris massacres. He is weakest in this genre of moralizing speculation and strongest in his embrace of the horse race mentality of American’s respectable bourgeois commentators. This is the essence of Mr. Miller’s report: Bibi’s chances for re-election and the effect that his Paris performance will have on that outcome,if any. The rhetorical garnish, Mr. Miller’s pretense to political/ethical seriousness, falls flat.
Bibi’s address to the Paris synagog seems emblematic of his political boorishness: after his admonishment to his auditors that they will only be safe in Israel, the audience spontaneously began to sing La Marseillaises, hardly a vote of confidence in Bibi’s sense of tact or occasion, among other questions. This scene fails as political theater, if domestic perception of statesmanship are at all relevant. Given Bibi’s dismal performance, Mr. Miller’s maladroit arguments seems to teeter on the brink of the unconvincing.