JTA.org (the Jewish global news service) has been doing a series on the US Presidential election. A recent Op-Ed piece lists great counterpoints to the "Bush has been the best president for Israel" line that has been overused and under-investigated.
In his first National Security Council meeting, he decided to disengage from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and his disinterest shows: The road map was presented and then forgotten. Bush opposed Israel's security fence throughout 2003, threatening Israel's loan guarantees, and then suddenly supported it -- coincidentally at the start of the election year.
The same goes for unilateral separation. Prior to 2004, Bush refused to call Arafat a terrorist and insisted he remain the negotiating partner; a former political officer at the Israeli Embassy in Washington noted ruefully that Bush is the reason Arafat is still around.
Some hailed the president's "promises" to Ariel Sharon in April as a victory -- yet Bush all but reneged, including regarding the Palestinian right of return, two weeks later. Just last week at the U.N. General Assembly, Bush called for a settlement freeze. Which is the real Bush policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
With the second intifada, many here felt that only strong American involvement would help reach a negotiated end to the misery. To date, George W. Bush hasn't even visited Israel.
The article also discusses Kerry's consistent support for Israel.
Here's the link:
Why This Israeli is Voting for Kerry