Everyone’s talking about the fact that the chair of the Democratic National Committee bucked President Obama on the Iran Deal, his signature foreign-policy achievement; but none of the media reports remarks over the fact that she gets to keep her job after this betrayal. You’d think that Debbie Wasserman Schultz serves at the pleasure of the president. But you’d be wrong. Another power is clearly at work here. The facts:
At the annual DNC summer meeting in Minneapolis, Wasserman Schultz, the south Florida Democrat and congresswoman, shot down a measure praising her own president on the Iran Deal. Why? Washington Post reporters Dan Balz and Philip Rucker:
Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz prevented consideration of a resolution at the party’s summer meeting here [Minneapolis] that praised President Obama and offered backing for the nuclear agreement with Iran, according to knowledgeable Democrats.
The resolution was drafted with the intention of putting the national committee on record in support of the agreement as Congress prepares to take up the issue when members return from their August recess.
The Post attributes Wasserman Schultz’s betrayal of the president to Jewish political concerns in her S. Florida district.
Wasserman Schultz, who represents a heavily Jewish congressional district in south Florida, has not taken a position on the agreement. She faces significant pressure to break with the president and oppose the deal
I bet this is about raising money nationally. Wasserman Schultz isn’t concerned for her own district but the strength of the party nationally. Her stance also helps explain why NY Senator Chuck Schumer came out against the deal: because he wants to raise money to help Democratic Senatorial candidates next fall, so that they will then vote to put him in as party leader. He thinks that opposing the deal is where the money is. And after all, opponents of the deal are spending as much as $100 million against it. Presumably they’ll spend that much again in 2016 on their friends.
Politico is more honest about the fundraising angle.
Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz refused to say on Wednesday if she’ll back the president’s nuclear deal with Iran, even as she arranged a personal meeting between Vice President Joe Biden and Jewish leaders in her district. Biden, who is already mulling a presidential bid, was scheduled to attend a senatorial fundraiser in Miami on Sept. 2, so it was easy to add the roundtable event in Wasserman Schultz’s nearby district the following day.
That she used her position at the DNC to block this resolution, however, is a surprise.
I beg to differ. Jewish money is a pittance. Most of our media is owned by Jews who support rather than oppose Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. It’s that media not Jewish money that matters.
Les is over-simplifying. There is no huge difference between establishment media that are “Jewish owned” and not. Compare NYT and Fox News, Fox News is presumably more supportive of ethnic cleansing “for a good cause” (I do not watch it, so second-hand information).
In the case of political money, Jews are about 2% of the population, but apparently much more in somewhat misnamed “top 1%”, but quite crucially, the rich Jews have much smaller proportion of GOP donors. Part of the effort of ZOA, ECI etc, the Adelson wing of the lobby, is to get it down to almost zero. Structurally, Democrats are less enthusiastic supporters of the most rich, and reciprocally, they are supported much less, and they have to value their sparser political money more. So, can one explain why Debbie Wasserman Schultz, very nice but not the brightest member of Congress is the chair of DNC? Her role is to be inoffensive team player who is effective fund raiser. Same with Schumer, although he does not pass the first test. But why is DWS effective?
By the way, there is a denial that Debbie blocked a resolution, apparently it was proposed in the last moment in a packet of three motions, and there is a committee that decides what goes to the vote, not just the chair. Quite importantly, the resolution was substituted by a letter signed by most DNC members. Cynically, Democrats want to show their Zionist donors that they did what they could, given that they could not do much in this case, and without further donations the party could be taken over by a truly radical mob, folks who care not just about effectiveness of the foreign policy, (the deal is part of the Big Game, not a marginal ME issue) but even about ethnic cleansing and oppression.
In the same time, some of those radical scary folks actually donate to DNC, so they have some influence.
Democrats who fail to support the President here should lose their national party positions. There have to be consequences for corruption; otherwise it will get much worse.
And, unfortunately, the Israel of today shows us every gradation of corruption, from weaselly go-along-to-get-along so-called centrists, to government officials demanding that the IDF open fire on women when they try to protect their injured child from police brutality, as they are displaced from their homes and land, to police who cannot find any suspects for burning people to death in their homes at night, to political leaders who pander to racist fear and blatantly lie about their intentions.
Every gradation of corruption, racism, and brutality, and it will continue to get worse, until it is brought to a head by direct confrontation via people with power. That would the President, the US government, P5+1, and the President’s political party.
Otherwise, Democrats have embraced all that right-wing, fascist corruption as their own. It’s shameful and disgraceful.
Good to know US foreign policy is an internal Jewish American thing, the other 98% of USA are just chopped liver.