Schumer, No. 3 US Senate Democrat, to oppose Iran nuclear deal

[Steely Dan]

Here is some commentary on the kind of race baiting in support of a deal we are seeing from Obama and Kerry, not to mention some of our esteemed members.

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/192751/crossing-a-line-to-sell-a-deal

This use of anti-Jewish incitement as a political tool is a sickening new development in American political discourse, and we have heard too much of it lately—some coming, ominously, from our own White House and its representatives. Let’s not mince words: Murmuring about “money” and “lobbying” and “foreign interests” who seek to drag America into war is a direct attempt to play the dual-loyalty card. It’s the kind of dark, nasty stuff we might expect to hear at a white power rally, not from the President of the United States—and it’s gotten so blatant that even many of us who are generally sympathetic to the administration, and even this deal, have been shaken by it.

[fvw53]

http://www.haaretz.com/beta/1.669390

Retired top brass Israeli support the Iran deal : are they idiots or enemies of Israel ?

[Ulysses G.]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Neurath]

Schemer is an American patriot. The politicians who support this crazy "deal" for self-aggrandizement or partisan reasons are treasonous.

Perhaps. But then, those who don't support it for self-aggrandizement or partisan reasons would be equally treasonous, no?

[Credo]

I would expect a Jewish member of Congress to lean toward supporting laws that are beneficial to Israel. That support should, however, not overshadow what is best for the USA. This is a controversial agreement and as such I have no particular problem with this guy's decision to not support the agreement.

Israel, however, has injected itself way too far into the American political landscape. Netanyahu in particular has decided to take on the White House. I think he can expect little respect for his opinion given his behavior on recent issues.

Israel, however, is well positioned to build a one-time coalition to take out Iran's nuclear deal. You have some neighbors who are probably willing to assist -- not openly, not directly, but then they aren't know for being open.

The US has to protect it's interests and Israel has to protect theirs. There will be conflict. Keep it civil and keep it diplomatic otherwise the focus is lost.

[stevenl]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

So according to you Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis is the same as Israelis.

[Ulysses G.]

The US has to protect it's interests and Israel has to protect theirs.

Congress is mostly against the crazy "deal" and so are the majority of American and Israeli citizens. In this case, our interests coincide.

American Voters Oppose Iran Deal 2-1, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2265

[Jingthing]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

So according to you Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis is the same as Israelis.

That's an interesting question even though presented in an obvious bait. I am assuming they don't mean Hebrew would need to be the native language to be counted, but that the person could speak Hebrew:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4335235,00.html

[up-country_sinclair]

Schemer is an American patriot.

The self-described "guardian of Israel" is an Israeli patriot. He, like the Israeli Firsters posting here, automatically put Israel's interests before America's and they should renounce their US citizenship.

[Pakboong]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

Do you think that 7 billion Goyim verses 15 million Jews has anything do do with that disparity?

Edited August 8, 2015 by Pakboong

[stevenl]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

So according to you Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis is the same as Israelis.

That's an interesting question even though presented in an obvious bait. I am assuming they don't mean Hebrew would need to be the native language to be counted, but that the person could speak Hebrew:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4335235,00.html

No bait whatsoever.

Stating 76% of the Israeli public ...' and later stating '76% of the hebrew speaking Jewish Israelis ...' in other words, that is the same: sorry, it is not.

Aldo good forum practice with a link to the news source is missing, the text only states the company executing the survey and the company ordering the survey.

[elgordo38]

What doesn't seem to be talked about here is whether or not Schumer is Jew or not, this is a big blow to Obama. Schumer holds good sway in the Senate. This will probably tank the deal.

Cannot see how the deal can tank Obama holds the trump veto card and it takes 66% to over ride him plus he can arm twist them with unlimited pork offerings. Pork here is like the movie Dune 1984 and a famous quote from this movie is "he who controls the spice controls the world" When these things come up for a vote it is pretty well a slam dunk. All the arm twisting and porking(the political kind) has been done the votes tallied and if there are not enough well its like a rinse cycle in a wash machine.

Edited August 8, 2015 by elgordo38

[elgordo38]

The only Schumer I like , is his family member Amy.

She's great. Yes!

Just watched her last night in the new movie "Trainwreck" it was really funny.

[Ulysses G.]

Stating 76% of the Israeli public ...' and later stating '76% of the hebrew speaking Jewish Israelis ...' in other words, that is the same: sorry, it is not.

Nitpick all you want. That was the headline of the news story. The majority of Israelis want to scuttle the crazy "deal" and the majority of Americans too.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

The only Schumer I like , is his family member Amy.

She's great. Yes!

Just watched her last night in the new movie "Trainwreck" it was really funny.

Her t.v. show, Inside Amy Schumer is much funnier than that.

[up-country_sinclair]

Stating 76% of the Israeli public ...' and later stating '76% of the hebrew speaking Jewish Israelis ...' in other words, that is the same: sorry, it is not.

Well spotted!

Unfortunately, this tactic is par for the course with our Israeli Firsters.

Meanwhile, Senator Schumer (aka "War Monger Chuck") is now facing a concerted effort to prevent him from becoming the Democratic leader of the Senate after the 2016 elections. Obviously that's still a long way off, but it will be interesting to see what happens.

Edited August 8, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[Seastallion]

Schemer is an American patriot.

The self-described "guardian of Israel" is an Israeli patriot. He, like the Israeli Firsters posting here, automatically put Israel's interests before America's and they should renounce their US citizenship.

Correct.

The question, "If Netanyahu was ambivalent on the matter, where would Schumer stand?" will not be honestly answered by most pro-Israelis, because they know the answer is that Schumer would likely back Obama IF Netanyahu didn't care one way or the other....and that implies Schumer's first loyalty is to a foreign leader, not his own.

[stevenl]

Stating 76% of the Israeli public ...' and later stating '76% of the hebrew speaking Jewish Israelis ...' in other words, that is the same: sorry, it is not.

Nitpick all you want. That was the headline of the news story. The majority of Israelis want to scuttle the crazy "deal" and the majority of Americans too.

No nitpicking, just correcting your facts, which are clearly wrong.

[Ulysses G.]

The newspaper's facts and it represents the majority of Israelis either way. Nitpicking.


http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/07/31/poll-76-percent-of-israelis-think-israel-needs-to-continue-fighting-iran-nuclear-deal/

[Seastallion]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

So according to you Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis is the same as Israelis.

That's an interesting question even though presented in an obvious bait. I am assuming they don't mean Hebrew would need to be the native language to be counted, but that the person could speak Hebrew:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4335235,00.html

Speak Hebrew and be Jewish.

So the poll is of less than 80% of Israelis.

Thus under 60% of the Israeli public. Not the "more than three quarters" stated.

So, 40% of Israelis are for the deal or ambivalent, and in that 40% is the long list of high ranking officers in security, intelligence, and military.

I know which group has the highest credibility.

[Neurath]

The only Schumer I like , is his family member Amy.

She's great. Yes!

Just watched her last night in the new movie "Trainwreck" it was really funny.

Her t.v. show, Inside Amy Schumer is much funnier than that.

Particularly the do-over of 12 Angry Men. Brilliant, hilarious, serious.

[stevenl]

The newspaper's facts and it represents the majority of Israelis either way. Nitpicking.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/07/31/poll-76-percent-of-israelis-think-israel-needs-to-continue-fighting-iran-nuclear-deal/

So other news sources are taking on the same incorrect information and that makes it true?

I started off thinking you just overlooked the fact, but I'm now thinking you realised the numbers were not correct but decided to post anyway.

Edited August 8, 2015 by stevenl

[Publicus]

With the New York sometimes-D Sen Schumer now working to destroy the Agreement, Republicans in the Senate need 12 more Democrats for the Rs to override Prez Obama's expected veto of expected Republican legislation to kill the Agreement.

We'll have to wait for the actual vote count to literally materialize in this respect, but it does indeed look like Prez Obama will have support of his veto in the Senate, that Rs will not get their desperately needed 12 more D senators.

In fact Friday D Sen Tammy Balwin of Wisconsin announced for the Agreement. Earlier this week, New York D Senator Kirstin Gillibrand announced for it, as did D Florida Sen Bill Nelson, CA D Sen Barbara Boxer, and Maine Independent Sen. Angus King.

P5+1 Nations Press Senate Democrats to Support Iran Deal

Top diplomats from Russia and China joined a rare meeting of world powers’ envoys on Capitol Hill this week with roughly 30 Senate Democrats to tamp down concerns over the nuclear agreement.

“The prospect of the rejection of a deal makes us nervous,” Philipp Ackermann, the acting German ambassador to the United States, said Thursday. “It would be a nightmare for every European country if this is rejected.”

In the Tuesday meeting, the French Embassy’s deputy chief of mission, Frédéric Doré, maintained that world powers secured the best deal possible with Iran.

So far, the push by European allies and Russian and Chinese officials appears to have been effective.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/06/p51-nations-press-senate-democrats-to-support-iran-deal/

So we see that Sen Schumer is sleeping with the enemy.

[Neurath]

Take it easy on Schumer. There are legitimate reasons for being very wary about this deal. I can't for the life of me think of a better option, and have not seen any better option put on the table, but I respect those who are wary about it even to the the point of considered rejection (this does not include those who reject it for party political reasons or grandstanding, or simply because rejection is one card in their Republican player pack).

Anyway, Schumer knows how to count and what the numbers are. He doesn't have to vote for it to in order for it go forward. He can do what he wants - the 2/3 required to overcome a veto won't be there.

[Jingthing]

I don't see the votes for an override either ... but there is always a chance and if anyone blows it, it will be the leadership in Iran doing some new kind of outrageous thing reminding the U.S. congress what Iran will be like liberated with their released billions.

To be clear, personally I am on the fence ... I feel I am not expert enough to know if this deal is better than nothing but I think I do know enough to see that it's no coincidence that they were dancing in the streets of Tehran about it (they were the better negotiators).

I can't really fault legislators that go either way on this. I don't see this as a black and white thing. It's a very difficult issue.

So it's a matter of trust Obama / Kerry or trust Schumer, etc. Well, that's not a simple choice either! Frankly, Obama / Kerry have NOT been great on foreign policy. I see a lot of failure all over the place. Just because invading Iraq was a mistake does NOT mean that every new position of people who supported that mistake is wrong! That's not logical. Each issue is it's own thing.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Jingthing

[Publicus]

Take it easy on Schumer. There are legitimate reasons for being very wary about this deal. I can't for the life of me think of a better option, and have not seen any better option put on the table, but I respect those who are wary about it even to the the point of considered rejection (this does not include those who reject it for party political reasons or grandstanding, or simply because rejection is one card in their Republican player pack).

Anyway, Schumer knows how to count and what the numbers are. He doesn't have to vote for it to in order for it go forward. He can do what he wants - the 2/3 required to overcome a veto won't be there.

Schumer's campaign to destroy the Agreement gives political cover to any Democrats who might want or need to oppose the Agreement because of heavy-handed rich and powerful opposition to it in their states. The two New York state US Senators are now divided on the Agreement, with D Sen Kirsten Gillibrand supporting it in the name of the same constituents as Sen Schumer.

Schumer wants to be the new leader of the D party in the Senate beginning in January 2017 yet this is not the way to lead his party. In fact until this, Sen Schumer was a shoe-in to be party leader as he is singularly the most prolific money raiser in the Senate of either party. I suspect the new D senators who will take office in January 2017 after the election will determine the outcome of that vote and that the new president will also have a strong hand in it simply because the president needs and must demand the loyalty of party senators on such issues of national security, war and peace. The Senate has after all recently gained a new Republican US Senator from Israel who sits deep inside its counsel as well as addressing the body publicly from the dias.

I don't see the votes for an override either ... but there is always a chance and if anyone blows it, it will be the leadership in Iran doing some new kind of outrageous thing reminding the U.S. congress what Iran will be like liberated with their released billions.

To be clear, personally I am on the fence ... I feel I am not expert enough to know if this deal is better than nothing but I think I do know enough to see that it's no coincidence that they were dancing in the streets of Tehran about it (they were the better negotiators).

I can't really fault legislators that go either way on this. I don't see this as a black and white thing. It's a very difficult issue.

Iranians dancing in the streets shouting "Death to America" are like North Koreans parading for Kim Jong Fat which means we never take it personally. In each country it is strictly business, nothing personal, no matter what books they wave or what instructed slogans are shouted by those fanatical servants chosen by their governments to be in the streets.

The Iranian people don't want war with anyone and they don't want to annihilate anyone, especially a people in the immediate region and neighborhood, as any conflagration would consume themselves and they know it. With this Agreement the ayatollahs have promised their people deliverance to peace and prosperity, which means the mullahs know they have no mandate of heaven for anything other than that and that only.

It's strictly business, nothing personal.

[Seastallion]

I don't see the votes for an override either ... but there is always a chance and if anyone blows it, it will be the leadership in Iran doing some new kind of outrageous thing reminding the U.S. congress what Iran will be like liberated with their released billions.

To be clear, personally I am on the fence ... I feel I am not expert enough to know if this deal is better than nothing but I think I do know enough to see that it's no coincidence that they were dancing in the streets of Tehran about it (they were the better negotiators).

I can't really fault legislators that go either way on this. I don't see this as a black and white thing. It's a very difficult issue.

So it's a matter of trust Obama / Kerry or trust Schumer, etc. Well, that's not a simple choice either! Frankly, Obama / Kerry have NOT been great on foreign policy. I see a lot of failure all over the place. Just because invading Iraq was a mistake does NOT mean that every new position of people who supported that mistake is wrong! That's not logical. Each issue is it's own thing.

Yes, we may well see something like "aluminium tubes secretly delivered to Iran" as a headline again....but with Obama in power, I trust not.

Don't forget the 40% of Israelis that are for the deal or ambivalent!

[Jingthing]

In any case, I can't really relate to over the top Obama partisans or over the top Obama haters on this issue. It definitely isn't the best of all possible deals but the real question remains to the more rational minded (I include Schumer) is it is better than nothing. Obama doesn't believe it's that's great either, important concessions that he promised wouldn't be made WERE MADE ... so now he is naturally trying to oversell it. What choice does he have? In a way I see Obama acting out a PROFILE IN COURAGE going for this deal, which I think he is reasonably sincere about being the right way to go. But how it turns out as it moves forward (assuming it goes forward as I do) is something out of his control so we can't predict the future and whether this PROFILE IN COURAGE will turn out to be done in FOLLY. So I don't blame Obama for this effort. The goal is good. The details of this deal ... it seems perhaps not so good.

So I'm very, very skeptical of extreme voices and sure conclusions about results of deal or not deal about this on either side.

When the deal goes through and some time down the road it turns out it was big mistake, IF that happens which honest people will acknowledge, I reckon these extremist pro deal voices will be not making any comments (except perhaps to blame Israel which has to be discounted because that's just a crutch). Of course, some are stealth or open supporters of the Iran regime and support their goals (extremist anti-America AND anti-Israel.)

Edited August 8, 2015 by Jingthing

[Neurath]

My goodness! Considered, measured and reasonable views on the matter. What's happening to ThaiVisa?????

[up-country_sinclair]

There are always plenty of different opinions in Israel. but WAY more are against it.

Poll: 76 Percent of Israelis Think Israel Needs to Continue Fighting Iran Nuclear Deal

More than three-quarters of the Israeli public believes that Israel needs to press on with efforts to torpedo the Iran nuclear deal, a new Israel Hayom survey conducted by New Wave Research revealed.

According to the poll, 76 percent of Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis believe Israel should continue fighting the deal, while only 15 percent think that Israel should not fight it.

So according to you Hebrew-speaking Jewish Israelis is the same as Israelis.

That's an interesting question even though presented in an obvious bait. I am assuming they don't mean Hebrew would need to be the native language to be counted, but that the person could speak Hebrew:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4335235,00.html

Speak Hebrew and be Jewish.

So the poll is of less than 80% of Israelis.

Thus under 60% of the Israeli public. Not the "more than three quarters" stated.

So, 40% of Israelis are for the deal or ambivalent, and in that 40% is the long list of high ranking officers in security, intelligence, and military.

I know which group has the highest credibility.

A great reply backed up with facts to counter a disingenuous post. Well done!

He gets caught out again and again for just this sort of chicanery, yet he continues to try and get away with it.