He writes for the Atlantic and has written for the New Yorker, both sources I respect. He clearly does not not like JK and will take the worst possible interpretation. Knowing that looking at more things re Kerry would not help, I tried to see what was important to him and who he liked.
The phrase often used to describe him is "pro-Israel".
Clearly, he is NOT happy with anyone in the current administration with regards to Israel - his main concern. (Here's a column on Hagel ( http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-22/israel-welcomes-hagel-a-friend-bearing-gifts.html ) Note the adjectives used for Hagel.
So, who did he respect on Israel? He appears to like Hillary and in at least 2 articles made the case that she was the most likely person to get Israel/Palestine to a political solution arguing most of her time should be on that - Note this was from June, 2011 - long after Hillary made it clear that this was not an issue she was working on. Yet he says,
FWIW, I do tend to think that Hillary Clinton has been put on earth in order to negotiate this issue to a successful conclusion. She has the will, the intelligence, the understanding and the prestige to make this happen -- if it is going to happen at all. Opportunities are, in fact, presenting themselves at this moment, and it would be a shame to see Hillary's talents go to waste on lesser projects. And, by the way, I don't believe that solving the Israeli-Palestinian dispute fixes America's problems in the Middle East, but I do believe that it's an important enough issue in its own right to warrant most of Hillary's attention.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/its-hillary-time/68955/
I don't see how anyone solves Israel/Palestine without creating a Palestinian state - or demanding Israel give full rights to all in a one state solution - which Goldberg would never agree to as it would quickly become minority Jewish.
= new reply since forum marked as read