Ilana Mercer often defends Israel, which is fine, but she has also hammered neoconservatism and its proponents. Nothing contradictory about that, since we have pointed out time and again that “neoconservative” does not mean “Jewish.” Why, then, does she now imply just that? Why write “President Bush doesn’t readily consult or even take directions from his Cabinet, much less from his neoconservative minions“? I fully agree that Bush is ultimately responsible for everything his administration does. But why is she suddenly lending credence to the charges of David Brooks and co.?