So-called conservative apologist for Spielberg's leftism doesn't comprehend moral equivalence

If there's any conservative I can think of now whom I find most utterly alienating, it's Jonathan V. Last of the Weekly Standard. Some of the reasons why I find him such a turnoff can be found here, but even his take on Hollywood is really angering. Here's an old post of his from his own site written at the time Munich came out, where he said:

For many months there has been a conservative knashing of teeth over Munich by those worried that it will be equivalent, anti-Israel, pro-terrorist, etc. Spielberg’s recent statements have been seen by some on the right to confirm their worries about the film.

I haven’t seen it, but I’ve been very wary of such predictions: Spielberg has been so heavily involved in World War II and Holocaust projects that I find it difficult to believe that he’s going to suddenly head in the other direction. As for his remarks about the cycle of violence, etc., etc., I’ve wondered if he isn’t trying to insulate himself from the left.

Now Todd McCarthy–the best straight-on film critic in America (Lane is an entirely different sort of animal; he’s in his own class)–gives his verdict. He doesn’t like the Munich much but has this to say about it:

Spielberg, Kushner and Roth go out of their way to try not to demonize Palestinians or anyone else, but the story is indisputably told with Jewish and Israeli concerns at heart.

For someone who cites the concern with moral equivalence (or does he? He didn't use the word "moral" in his post), it's a wonder he doesn't realize that McCarthy basically verified everyone's concerns about the movie - that it won't take sides, theoretically anyway.

Besides, as Bret Stephens said when he reviewed the movie, it's not as sympathetic to Israelis as McCarthy would have us think:

Maybe it has something to do with Mr. Spielberg's curious use of "Jewish" tropes. Again and again in "Munich," the Israelis are seen counting the cost of each kill, down to the last dollar: $352,000 for an assassination in Rome; $200,000 for a bombing in Paris. "Killing Palestinians isn't exactly cheap," remarks one of the members of the Israeli team. A Frenchman in the business of retailing the whereabouts of wanted men praises Israeli squad leader Avner Kauffman (Eric Bana) because he pays "better than anyone." A Mossad officer warns Kauffman not to overspend his budget. "I want receipts," he says. [...]

Maybe it has something to do with the straw-man arguments the Israelis offer for exacting their revenge. "The only blood that matters to me is Jewish blood," says Steve (Daniel Craig), the most macho of the Israeli hit men. Steve is a South African Jew, blonde and blue-eyed, and somehow it's no surprise that this Jewish Aryan is made to utter this most racist of views. Avner's mother offers her son an ends-justify-the-means rationalization for his killings: "Whatever it takes," she says, "we have a place on Earth at last." And then there is Prime Minister Golda Meir (Lynn Cohen) who justifies the assassination policy by saying, "forget peace for now, we have to be strong." Never mind that in 1972 neither the Arab states nor the PLO was prepared to live in peace with Israel on any terms. Never mind, too, that peace and strength are not incompatible options.

What's that about Jewish/Israeli concerns again?

I thought it was bad enough that Last would embrace a misogynist screed of a comic book. But there's also his approach to movies like Munich that's irritating, and I wouldn't be surprised if even his stance on Israel in itself is something to worry about.

And while I'd like to think that line about Spielberg insulating himself from the left was written in jest, something tells me it wasn't. Last seems to have a problem of an inability to recognize specific leftist tactics in showbiz, and possibly even in politics.

No wonder I find him so aggravating, and that's why I wouldn't recommend his writing.

The sad thing about Spielberg after all these years is that, if he's as left-leaning as he is, we really can't be surprised he'd go in other direction from Schindler's List, and refuse to recognize the evils of Islamofascism as much as he does the evils of nazism.