A REVEALING Conversation Three weeks ago President Obama sat for a long wide-ranging interview with the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg touching on Iran anti-Semitism and his relationship with Israel among other topics. It was very revelatory of the president’s thinking in many areas in particular because Mr. Obama was speaking with someone he sees as a friend and ideological ally.
Consider that this is the same Goldberg who wrote in 2012 that he takes Obama “at his word” on Iran “in part because he’s repeated himself on the subject so many times and in part because he has laid out such an effective argument against containment and for disruption by force if necessary…. Given the number of times he’s told the American public and the world that he will stop Iran from going nuclear it is hard to believe that he will suddenly change his mind and back out of his promise.”
Yet after all that the president has said and done in regard to Iran since then Goldberg has learned nothing. Were I to have written something that turned out to be so trusting yet so deeply deluded I don’t know that I’d be able to show my face in public let alone continue to hold myself out as a commentator.
But Goldberg has no such compunctions. He can still bring himself to write without even a hint of self-consciousness at his past credulity that he and Obama “spent the bulk of our time talking about a country whose future preoccupies him almost as much as it preoccupies me.” And it is this very starry-eyed worship of the president who can do no wrong that enables Obama to speak his mind so openly to Goldberg. I’ll begin with two observations gleaned from this interview and perhaps in coming weeks continue with some others.

HUBRIS MATTERS When commentators (including me) write about Obama’s overweening arrogance it’s because character flaws — arrogance prominent among them — are not just personal affairs that are none of the public’s business. Instead they are relevant to the ability of the president to wisely guide the ship of state. But Mr. Obama’s outsized self-centeredness takes the ramifications of flawed character to a new level.
Goldberg writes that he
brought up a persistent worry. “A majority of American Jews want to support the Iran deal ” I said “but a lot of people are anxiety-ridden about this as am I.” Obama responded with an argument I had not heard him make before.
“Look 20 years from now I’m still going to be around [G-d] willing. If Iran has a nuclear weapon it’s my name on this ” he said referring to the apparently almost-finished nuclear agreement between Iran and a group of world powers led by the United States. “I think it’s fair to say that in addition to our profound national security interests I have a personal interest in locking this down.”
This is nothing short of extraordinary. I could perhaps imagine a president saying “I have my legacy on the line here but much more importantly the security of the Middle East and with it the world is at stake.” But incredibly he inverted that statement. Let’s understand: he’s not merely saying that he wants to be sure to get the Iran deal right to ensure a lasting legacy he’s telling the people over whom the Iranian nuclear threat hangs like a mushroom cloud not to worry because his “name is on this.”
The same dynamic manifested itself in the president’s recent comment to his confidant David Axelrod as reported by the latter that “I think I am the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office. For people to say that I am anti-Israel or even worse anti-Semitic it hurts.” Reacting to Mr. Obama’s sentiments Charles Krauthammer put it plainly: “For Obama this is a matter of personal hurt. I mean who cares what he feels?”
But all becomes understandable when we consider that this is a man whose self-possession has grotesquely distorted his perception of reality to the point that he not only equates in importance his legacy and his feelings of hurt with the future of humankind but thinks everyone else does too. The Mesillas Yesharim describes at length the power of arrogance more so even than other character flaws and its ability to almost literally remove a person from this world to lose touch with the world as we know it. We have here before us a case study of the phenomenon.

My JEWISH PROBLEM As for Mr. Obama’s reference to being “the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office ” comments like these cause me to worry that deep down I might be an anti-Semite. Permit me to explain.
A proudly Jewish government official once told me of a weekend visit he and his wife made to the Camp David presidential retreat together with George W. Bush. The latter invited the couple to sit in on the regularly scheduled Sunday morning prayer service there and as it was about to begin Mr. Bush turned to them and smiling broadly said “You’re about to see the most in-your-face Christian experience you can imagine!”
The Jewish couple greatly enjoyed the line and took not an iota of offense from it because they heard it precisely as it was intended as Mr. Bush’s good-natured attempt to put them at ease in what he realized might be an awkward situation. And knowing what I know of President Bush of his combination of humanity good humor and personal faith I heard it the same way.
Indeed there was something downright refreshing about the remark. Mr. Bush dispensed with all the politically correct nice-nice-making and beating-around-the-sneh that is obligatory in a contemporary society in which religion is too awkward and embarrassing a subject to be discussed openly and honestly. Instead talk of personal convictions is lumped together with all the other topics that make us psychologically anxious to be aired only with a thick coating of euphemism and pluralistic blandness.
But the awkwardness some feel about discussing religion openly is merely a reflection of their own religious ambivalence. People of real faith don’t see it that way; for them their faith is a lived reality of which they are mightily proud that deserves to be spoken of forthrightly. Believers understand that when they speak of their own beliefs in a good-natured way with no intent to proselytize those who believe differently are heartened not threatened.
George Bush with his unabashed remark about an “in-your-face Christian experience ” would never qualify as the “first Jewish president ” yet as a Jew I feel totally at ease with him. But then along comes Barack Obama with his talk of being “the closest thing to a Jew” in the White House. He’s echoed by the reliably obeisant Goldberg who notes that he has in the past referred to Obama as “America’s first Jewish president... based on the depth of [his] encounters with … Jewish mentors… fellow community organizers Jewish literature Jewish thought….”
And despite this veritable Jewish lovefest I feel queasy. My unease only grows upon reading Mr. Obama profess rather excessively in the Goldberg interview that “precisely because I care so deeply about the State of Israel precisely because I care so much about the Jewish People I feel obliged to speak honestly and truthfully about what I think will be most likely to lead to long-term security and will best position us to continue to combat anti-Semitism and I make no apologies for that precisely because I am secure and confident about how deeply I care about Israel and the Jewish people.”
I read and I wonder: Is it me? Am I an anti-Semite? —