Part 4 of Many: Wasserman Schultz and Obama’s Vision for Israel
This the 4th in a series of articles on the pearls of wisdom that come forth from Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Chairman of the DNC and the perm-challenged Congressman from Florida’s gerrymandered 20th Congressional District. This could be called the Wacky World of Wasserman. On June 5th, she had an editorial in the Sun-Sentinel regarding Obama’s Middle East speech at the State Department. It starts off good enough: “Unwavering support for Israel…,” “As the first Jewish woman elected to Congress from Florida…” blah blah blah.
She then states that under Obama’sleadership, Israel is more secure than they have ever been. For example, it is Obama who has enacted the strongest sanctions against Iran which begs the question: to what ends? Have they given up their nuclear aspirations? Do they still possess missiles that can reach Israel? Have they ceased support for terrorism? Obama, she claims, has provided Israel withadvanced anti-missile technology which is kind of ironic considering he left the Czech Republic and Poland twisting in the wind by cancellation of a missile defense system to protect Europe based in those countries. That was done to “reset” relations with Russia. While allies twist in the wind, Russia laughs. But, I digress. And of course she touts Obama’s support of Israel in international forums.
But then she starts to get in trouble. Regarding his proposals for a two-state solution, she states: “That is why it is so disappointing to see the deliberate distortions of President Obama’srecord on Israel in the wake of the president’s speech… These comments are bothharmful to Israel and false. False because they misrepresent, distort and even lie about the president’s strong pro-Israel conviction; harmful because in doing so, they undermine the very thing they claim to support, the strength and security of Israel.” So, in Wasserman’sworld, if one disagrees with President Obama on Middle East policy, particularly the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and a possible solution, they are liars and they threaten Israel’s security. Of course, being the “first Jewish woman” elected to Congress from Florida makes her words carry any greater moral or strategic weight.
Among the lies she attributes to the opponents of Obama’s stated solution, she stated, “The President reiterated longstanding American foreign policy that Israel will not return to the 1967 borders and that changes to the borders need to be negotiated between Israelis and Palestinians taking into account Israel’s security requirements and the demographic changes of the past 44 years.” Wasserman Schultz’s interpretation does not square with the exact words of Barack Obama at the State Department. There, he stated: “The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states with permanent Palestinian borders wit Israel, Jordan and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.” I don’t know what Wasserman is talking about, but Obama’s words are fairly specific here- that the borders of this new state would be based on the 1967 lines. Also, in order to make this new sovereign state “contiguous,” as a look at any map will reveal, would necessarily result in the 1967 borders which today would prove indefensible despite the presence of advanced missile technology or not.
And in classic WassermanSchultz style, she did not let me down and provided us with this over-the-top incendiary comment: “Whether it is for political gain or other motives, the distortion of President Obama’s record and position on Israel only plays into the hands of the enemies of Israel by falsely suggesting that there is a softening of U.S. policy.” It may be only me, but “playing into the hands of the enemies of Israel” of whom we are a close ally militarily infers a certain sense of treason. So according to WassermanSchultz, I, by virtue of being a Republican and opposing practically all of the Obama agenda- domestic and diplomatic- am “at war with women,” a racist, trying to re-establish Jim Crow laws because I support voter ID laws, AND NOW A TRAITOR. Because I oppose, or anyone else opposes Barack Obama, the Democratic Messiah, we “play into the hands” of Israel’s enemies. I submit that it is Barack Obama who is delivering Israelinto the hands of its enemies and it is people like Debbie WassermanSchultz who are equally guilty in their complicity. She brings dishonor upon her faith and her ethnicity in her support of this suicidal plan. Seeing how the United States has treated its allies under Barack Obama, when he isn’t bowing to foreign leaders, giving insulting gifts, flubbing toasts and kissing the backside of socialist two-bit South American dictators, Israel is correct in their summary dismissal of the Obama proposal. Maybe they can learn from the Obama errors in realtionships with staunch allies like Poland, Australia, the Czech Republic and Great Britain. The Democrats like to deride the foreign policy of George W. Bush, but given his and Wasserman’s alternative policy, it looks pretty damn good and certainly more principled than anything this President has done. And it defies logic that after the black vote, the next group of lemming-like followers is the Jewish vote for the Democratic Party.