The Huffington Post has been covering the Schumer development and has been given it top billing, and here is one example of the White House responding to Schumer's attacks. Just a reminder before we get into the comments: Remember that all Schumer did was disagree with the way that the Obama administration was handling the Israeli/Palestinian situation. He said that they should be pressuring the Palestinians, because the current negotiating tactics were "counterproductive." Robert Gibbs responded by saying, "I don't think it is a stretch to say we don't agree with what Senator Schumer said."
So this is the executive branch and Senator Schumer arguing over the best way to pursue Israeli-Palestinian peace. In substance it's not any different from a senator disagreeing with President Obama's policy toward immigration or healthcare reform. Despite this, the HPers immediately formed a phalanx of opposition toward Schumer, claiming that he was secretly (or not so secretly) loyal to Israel. Other accusations were that he should move to Israel if he loves them so much, and he is "placing Israel's interests over America's." They never explain exactly how disagreeing with Obama on how best to pursue the peace process is giving priority to Israel's interests, but their loyalties aren't the one in question, right?
The fully moderated thread has amassed over 800 comments. I didn't get all the ones with variations of the "dual loyalty" accusation, but I did get many of them. There were of course others worth sharing.