I’m sure you heard that last week Sen. Schumer announced he would not support the Iran deal and would even vote to override a veto. Today I learned that MoveOn announced it would withhold money from Schumer and any other Dem who nixed the deal, to the tune of $8.3 million.
“We thought Schumer and the Democratic party had learned this lesson a decade ago after the war of choice in Iraq,†said Nick Berning, MoveOn’s communications director. “We want to demonstrate to those who haven’t made their decision yet there will be substantial political consequences for those who want to take us to war.â€
Also:
The National Iranian American Council, which also supports the Iran nuclear deal, took Schumer to task by comparing his diplomatic stances to former President George W. Bush. “He states that he is opposing the deal because Iran will retain ‘its nuclear and non-nuclear power,’†said Jamal Abadi of the NIAC. “These demands make the Bush Administration’s aversions to negotiations seem pragmatic in comparison. In what negotiated outcome would Iran have relinquished not just its nuclear power, but its non-nuclear power?â€
Oh, yeah … good point.
Chuckles wants us to think he spent a lot of time studying the agreement and considering what it might do before he decided to vote against it. This is a vote of conscience, he says. At Foreign Policy, Jeffrey Lewis says the Senator didn’t study it hard enough. Of Schumer’s written statement opposing the deal, Lewis says, “Schumer’s missive came across a bit like your crazy uncle who gets his opinions from talk radio and wants to set you straight at Thanksgiving.” Lewis goes on to explain all the details the Senator got wrong.
However, Schumer doesn’t seem to be twisting arms to get other senators to vote his way. Many suspect the Dems have the votes to protect the deal without Schumer’s vote, so Chuck was let off the hook and could vote to appease the Israeli lobby. However, MoveOn, Credo and other progressive groups are campaigning to prevent Chuck from taking over as Majority (we hope) Leader once Harry Reid steps down.
This is a pretty stupid thing for Schumer to do. Pro-Israeli PAC’s are running ads on the Tee Vee that are so easily disputable the deal must be good, I mean when they can’t hire an ad company to put forth lies that are at least plausible they obviously got nothing, except the GOP and Senator Schumer!
Well, maybe I’m just a dimwit who is easily manipulated, but after listening to Obama’s talk on the Iranian agreement I came away with a sense of awe in how well Obama described the benefit to America and the world for accepting the agreement. As far as I could see he didn’t miss any angle, and he explained the logic and the safeguards that went into the agreement to make it the best deal possible with the greatest benefits possible for all parties concerned.
He even addressed the Munich Agreement crowd’s foolishness. He pointed out that those who desire war will get their justifications for war with Iran handed to them on a silver platter if Iran doesn’t comply with the terms of the agreement. It seems the only thing the Munich Agreement crowd will have to forsake is the power of their fear mongering.
To my mind, anybody who opposes this deal is just opposing it to either win favor with Bibi camp or to tear down Obama’s legacy at any cost. I defy anybody to listen to Obama’s presentation and then counter that presentation with any meaningful argument on a point for point basis..
All the opposition has to offer is bullshit and fear.
I see the deal going through– I don’t see enough other Dems undermining it to stop it. It’s the best we can get; it’s better than what we got; it’s got overwhelming support outside the Beltway.
UpChuck Schemer is a putz!
And someone else needs to be the leader of he Senate Democrats after Harry steps down!
My choices would be Jeff Merkley or Sherrod Brown.
I’ll also be ok with Dick Durbin.
Swami, I wouldn’t say your easily manipulated:) Your analysis is spot on, if the calm and sober message that President Obama gives on this topic got half the coverage that the over-exaggerated Israel first crowd gets it wouldn’t even be close. The MSM certainly seems to be with the latter on this one. I especially like the Presidents statement that “those who desire war will get their justifications for war with Iran handed to them on a silver platter if Iran doesn’t comply” to me that says all that needs to be said?
Meanwhile, on the west coast, Feel the Bern!
Chuck Shumer, a man who never met a TV camera he didn’t like (along w/McCain and Graham).
Maybe he thinks it a bad deal for America (and Israel).
I think if he wants to shape our policies to make Israel
happy he should go run for office there. I have no patience
with politicians who are loyal to any nation but their own.
I agree with you, justme. My thought is that Schumer is putting out the reluctance to get onboard vibe just for gaining the exposure. Chucky has moved his visibility up by publicly putting on the brakes and intimating that some profound thinking is necessary to agree with the terms of the treaty. At the last minute, when he’s sucked up all the attention possible, he’ll go along with the agreement crowd and hold himself out as an icon of wisdom by doing what was obvious in the first place.
It’s basic political game playing. Chucky just needs some exposure! Oh, look, everybody notice Chucky!
Not to blow my horn or anything, but I’m the youngest of 7 children and I have no formal training in psychology, but I have understood and employed the dynamics of gaining attention in a crowded field even before I was potty trained. So, neither Chucky Schumer, nor Teddy Cruz, or Ann Coulter are going to impress me with their childish antics and attention getting ploys.