Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   3 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Does Schumer have any idea how angry his constituents will be if he torpedoes his president on Iran?

By       Message Philip Weiss     Permalink
      (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H3 4/14/15

Author 88895
Become a Fan
  (3 fans)
- Advertisement -

Reprinted from Mondoweiss

(image by Schumer, official portrait)   DMCA

As you surely have noticed, Senator Chuck Schumer has indicated that he is going to side with Republicans on the Iran deal rather than the Obama administration, because he is a "sincere and committed Israel hawk" (as his former intern Matt Yglesias says). Both the White House and State Department are trying to mollify the powerful senator to keep him from voting against the historic agreement in the end.

Where does this leave the rest of us? I don't think that Democrats like Schumer have any clue of what is happening inside the Democratic Party base right now. When I mentioned Schumer's likely apostasy at an art opening in my Hudson River town last night, a painter turned and began spitting fury. "F-- him! F-- him!" he said.

We are in the middle of an historic shift on Iran policy, aimed at preventing another war in the Middle East, and the leading Democratic senator is siding with the Republicans over the President? This is truly unprecedented, as Paul Pillar said at the Israel lobby conference in Washington yesterday (last speaker).

What the politicians don't get is how angry even halfway-informed Americans are about these matters. They watched the Netanyahu appearance in Congress last month in disbelief. MJ Rosenberg said yesterday that Jews cringed over the performance. They did so because they know that other Americans were right to be outraged over such a naked demonstration of influence.

Issues of loyalty and the Israel lobby are now floating into our politics. When Rand Paul said, "We have come to take our country back from the special interests that use Washington as their personal piggy bank," and Chris Matthews said Paul is talking about "neocons and the piggish money behind them," both would seem to be upset by the lobby's intrusion into our foreign policy.

- Advertisement -

Ed Schultz openly questioned Schumer's loyalty in an MSNBC segment earlier this week:

"Schultz asked [talk show host Joe Madison] if Schumer's loyalty is with 'Benjamin Netanyahu or with the President of the United States...' Madison replied:

"'Not only should [Schumer's loyalty] be to the President of the United States, but it should be to the United States of America. The President is clearly doing what he thinks is in the best interest of this country.'

"This wasn't the first time this week Schultz has made similar comments. On Monday, he said:

"'Why didn't Democrats oppose Reagan's deal with Gorbachev? Probably because they were for America.'"

- Advertisement -

No doubt dual loyalty can be an anti-semitic charge; but it also can be a legitimate issue. Even the New York Times says that Democratic politicians feel "loyalty to the Jewish state." Last month the New York Times predicted, accurately, that Democrats

"...will eventually need to make an awkward, painful choice between the president of their country and their loyalty to the Jewish state."

Schumer has opened the door to the loyalty issue, when he says that his name in Hebrew means guardian; and that he acts as Israel's guardian. Four years ago he said that God made him a guardian of the Jewish state. He told a Jewish radio host:

"[M]y name as you know comes from a Hebrew word. It comes from the word shomer, which mean guardian. My ancestors were guardians of the ghetto wall in Chortkov and I believe Hashem, actually [God], gave me name as one of my roles that is very important in the United States Senate to be a shomer for Israel and I will continue to be that with every bone in my body."

Ryan Cooper writes at The Week that if Schumer sandbags Obama on the historic Iran deal, he should not be the minority leader. And Cooper says Schumer's stance is politically dangerous...

"[P]ro-war Democrats have consistently underestimated the long-term political danger behind such casual aggressiveness. Just like Cory Booker, Schumer appears to have forgotten that voting for the Iraq War is the reason Hillary Clinton is not president today."

Next Page  1  |  2


- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It
Philip Weiss is a longtime writer and journalist in New York. He co-edits a website on Israel/Palestine,, which he founded in order to foster the movement for greater fairness and justice for Palestinians in American foreign policy. He is currently working on a novel about the US in Australia during WW2.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

"NYT" and Matthews warn that Netanyahu speech to Congress could lead US to war

Clinton and Israel -- the Marc Rich story

Obama's European message -- self-determination, equality, dignity -- is null and void in Palestine

British Parliament sends a message to Obama: the people see Israel as a "bully"

Gaza massacre is generating ideological crisis in American Zionists

I want my country back