Trending Topics:

Obama gets Wasserman Schultz– and salutes her ‘homeland’ with a Netanyahu valentine

on 44 Comments

This is the image atop the White House website tab for “Foreign Policy.” It’s President Obama holding up his hands at Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem, in 2013. On his left are Elie Wiesel and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, I believe, based on news accounts of the visit.

This is the famous Zionist balcony of the memorial: you pass from the horrors of Europe out to a vista of Israel to the northwest. Deliverance.

The accompanying text from a 2014 Obama speech to the U.N. seeks to unite the Zionist dream with the Iran Deal:

“For America, the choice is clear: We choose hope over fear. We see the future not as something out of our control, but as something we can shape for the better through concerted and collective effort. We reject fatalism or cynicism when it comes to human affairs. We choose to work for the world as it should be, as our children deserve it to be.”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

I don’t know when this image was published on the White House site. Max Blumenthal (author of the 51-Day War) sent it to me today. The timing is appropriate because yesterday the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee made the most difficult decision she has made in a soaring political career that began 25 years ago when she sent out her resume to 180 politicians, and a state legislator in Florida discovered her. Yes: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, 48, came out for the Iran Deal after stuffing the deal at the DNC meeting in Minneapolis last month. Here’s her statement in the Miami Herald. It is incredibly honest about her concern for Israel.

This is the most difficult decision I have had to make in the nearly 23 years I have served in elected office, and this vote will be the most consequential.

It’s also one that is deeply personal. Iran’s leaders routinely call for the destruction of the United States, the nation to which I have dedicated my life to serving. Iran’s leaders are also virulent anti-Semites and call for the destruction of Israel, the historic homeland for me and millions of other Jews.

She’s one legislator who didn’t mind being lobbied by Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer (a move that backfired for many others!):

I also spoke or met with independent economists, nuclear experts, military and intelligence experts in Israel and the United States, and ambassadors from our allies that are parties to the agreement as well as Israel’s ambassador.

She reached an honest understanding:

we cannot now get a better deal, as I was unable to find a credible source to say otherwise….
The statement rounds the turn and heads home by talking about Israel as the central issue for her:

My commitment to the security of Israel as an American ally, but more personally as a deeply committed member of the Jewish community, has weighed heavily on me throughout my review process.

Make no mistake: This is an American national-security issue. But when Iran continues to call for the destruction of the Jewish people and the state of Israel, our most staunch ally in the region, and its proxy Hezbollah continues to launch attacks against innocent civilians, it is irresponsible not to consider this agreement’s impact on that nation.

Iran doesn’t call for the destruction of the Jewish people and the state of Israel, this is propaganda. But guess what, the deal means more support for Israel than ever, in its endless conflicts:

Furthermore, almost everyone agrees, including American and Israeli intelligence, that under the agreement Iran will not be able to produce a nuclear bomb for at least 10-15 years. With the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] in place, the United States and our allies will be able to more closely concentrate on stopping Iran’s terrorist activity.

Critically, all sanctions related to terrorism remain in place, and we will apply even more if their terror activity increases.

It is essential that if the agreement goes forward, that the United States develop a robust security package that allows Israel to access technology and hardware that would enable her to protect her people.

In fact, as a member of the Appropriations Committee, sitting on the State and Foreign Operations Subcommittee, I pledge to be a vote and a voice to make that happen. I am confident in President Obama’s commitment to provide additional security to Israel because I have spoken with him about it personally and because of his demonstrated record through the Iron Dome missile-defense system and the significant military and intelligence cooperation that has increased under his administration.

Her statement ends with more about the Jewish people than the American people.

As the first Jewish woman to represent the state of Florida in Congress, I am disturbed to my core over how much of the debate around this hugely consequential issue has devolved into thinly veiled and sometimes blatant tropes of anti-Semitism. My colleagues who took principled stands in opposition are being accused of having dual loyalties. Those of my colleagues who support this deal are being accused of abandoning Israel or, worse, their own faith and people. Some of that hateful rhetoric has already been hurled my way, and I’m sure more is to come, though nothing could be further from the truth.

Throughout our history as a nation and certainly, throughout the Jewish people’s history, we have taken great risks for peace and security. Often, the easier path to choose was to dig in harder. But the thorough, pragmatic and factual analysis I have done and my fervent desire as a Jewish mother to ensure that Israel will always be there — l’dor v’dor — from generation to generation lead me to the conclusion that this agreement provides the best chance to ensure America’s, Israel’s and our allies’ security today and tomorrow.

Notice the complete conflation of the American nation’s interest with Israel’s interest. This will not last. But let’s give it up to Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her courage in standing by the president and for her honesty with the American people about her agony over this decision. We are seeing the Israel lobby naked now in American politics. It is based in elemental facts: American Jews were convinced of the need for a Jewish state after the Holocaust, they understood they had to play a partner’s role to Israel in gaining imperial support for that state, and Jews in high position in our society (lifted by the meritocracy) were called on to use their influence to assure that support. I’m glad it’s all out in the open. Jews now need to discuss whether we need that state, when it is founded on racial discrimination; and if we feel represented by the lobby, when it is based on providing so much support to a Jim Crow project.

BTW, the politican who discovered Debbie Wasserman Schultz in 1990 is a religious Jew who now lives in Israel. And Senator Ben Cardin who came out against the deal the other day, his father was a leading Zionist and his cousin by marriage is on the board of the Jewish National Fund, which sustains the Jim Crow project of buying land for Jews in Israel. These are ardent stalwarts of the Israel lobby, and they are the heart of Jewish organizational life in the last generation.

Here is J Street’s Dylan Williams on the Wasserman Schultz breakthrough, counting important Jews (just as I do):

The now has the support of the majority of Jewish Members of Congress, reflecting such support in the American Jewish community

Here is Ron Kampeas. Smart analysis, and generational: 

Wasserman Schultz’s backing for Iran deal may have been inevitable, but it also signals a sea change in U.S. Jews and Israel

Here is a tweet from the next generation, our publisher, Scott Roth:

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

44 Responses

  1. Sassy on September 7, 2015, 10:34 am

    It’s amazing the propganda dog food she leaves in her trail on this “great” (crocodile tears) decison. No mention of Israels blatant killing of innocent civilians.

    You say, “Jews now need to discuss whether we need that state, when it is founded on racial discrimination; and if we feel represented by the lobby, when it is based on providing so much support to a Jim Crow project.”

    I pray that this is becoming more and more true. Not because I want Israel to go away, but rather because I’d like Israel to become a nation among nations, for it to stand on its own two feet without continual U.S. Food Stamps and for a day that when we think of Israel we’ll think of her great technolgical, phamacuetial and other accomplsiments and not its APARTHEID.

    • Krauss on September 7, 2015, 4:54 pm

      Voltaire used to say, to find out who rules over you, ask who you cannot criticize.

      Well, the lobby is fair game today. That wasn’t the case 10 years ago.
      And while you can criticize it, well, you can criticize the NRA, too. That hasn’t prevented them from having a strangehold on Congress re: gun control.

      While I am all for celebrating the new, (slightly) more open times, I also hope we keep our heads close to earth and understand that this is far from over. The Iran deal has forced these people out of the woodworks, but this is also once in a generation issue.

      Now watch all these self-proclaimed liberals rush to arm and re-arm the Jewish apartheid state.

    • Kathleen on September 7, 2015, 10:24 pm

      She also flat out lies ” Iran’s leaders routinely call for the destruction of the United States. the nation that I have dedicate my life to serving” Then she claims as so many of the warmongers do that Iran’s leaders have called for the “destruction of Israel.”

      Who, where, when? These inflammatory and unsubstantiated claims flow out of like water.

      Now we know fundamentalist in Iran have been out on the streets calling the U.S. and Israel the “devil” and have more than likely called for the destruction of both nations. However is there anything that would back up these endless claims by warmongers?

      I really do think DWS voted for this deal because she was afraid of being bumped as the DNC Chair. Again it would be great to think she voted on the merits of the deal. However there is a fair amount that has been written about the tension between DWS and the White House. That she had strong fears several years ago that she was going to be shown the back door. If she had voted against that would be a strong likelihood.

    • RockyMissouri on September 8, 2015, 8:15 pm

      Truth! Such hypocrites….all of them!!

  2. traintosiberia on September 7, 2015, 10:40 am

    “The most difficult decision!”

    This is the most common,prevalent,and accepted refrain from the leaders singing up for the deal.

    The gravity,the falsehood,the lies,the ulterior motives and the sinister presence of the Zionist interest in this type of gentle’s Hasabara
    or Zionist lite Hasabara could be understood and appreciated if we projected it back to 2002 and imagined this situation-

    The hypothetical scenario but a very plausible and sensible if the saner voices prevailed basing their position on the available facts back then-

    : Bush government concluded a behind the scene negotiation with Saddam culminating with 1 International team and US have accepted
    Iraq’s position that it have no nuclear programme
    – It have no connection with Al Quida
    – It have no connection with 911
    – it have no connection with Anthrax
    – it has agreed for election
    – it has agreed to cease support to Palestine
    – it has agreed to safe departure of Saddam
    – it has agreed not to start nuclear program
    In exchange , Sanctions will be lifted, US would still maintain some sanction on military supplies and suppliers of certain technologies.

    I am sure that also would have been resisted by these ” moderates”
    They , I can guarantee would have said ” I support administration but I don’t believe Iraq was not responsible for Al Quida, Anthrax and being a threat to US. I also believe Saddam has nuclear intention, Iraq has been in violation before , Iraq has attacked Kurds and has killed the Quawiti babies ”

    The gist of the refrain or polemic would have come entirely from the Zionist . It would have come from them because they have already provided those factors as the ground to destroy Iraq.

    Essence of the current disclaimer is also coming from the Zionist . Its they ,who provided the mortar and brick of this argument .

    Cardin,Schumer,and Menendez represented by the 2002 placeholders would have started undermining and killing the deal with support of bipartisan lawmakers and through “do and don’t do” list from AIPAC .

  3. Kay24 on September 7, 2015, 11:23 am

    I suppose this unexpected support for this Iranian Nuclear deal, should be an indication that unlike an overwhelming show of support, for a self invited speech in Congress, there are some Jewish Congresspeople, who can say “no” to Bibi, when it comes to doing the right thing for the US and the rest of the world. Many Americans must realize by now that their representatives are supporting the side that wants war, and will not accept any kind of deal. It is obvious that Israel is the only nation that keeps demonizing Iran and want bombs to rain over Tehran. I think Bibi is like an envious old woman that does not want her neighbor to have the bigger home or expensive car. The ads that mislead the American public say that Iran is going to get rewarded by getting billions – fails to mention that it is Iran’s own money. They are trying to deceive the public.

    • piotr on September 7, 2015, 12:56 pm

      SNARK BEGINS: Another deluded leftist idolizing theocracy that hangs people by hundreds, imposes head coverings on women and so on, and try to prevent USA from steadfastly protecting its allies who sensibly prohibit women to drive, and who behead people (much neater than hanging, wouldn’t everybody agree?). There is such a thing as good (beheadings) and evil (hangings) and I am not ashamed that my country has the courage to stand for the good. SNARK ENDS.

      PS. I am glad this this article was also graced with the likeness of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Doesn’t she look like Aphrodite who just emerged from sea foam and loosely covered her body with a bathing robe?

  4. eGuard on September 7, 2015, 11:46 am

    her courage in standing by the president

    Not that much, please. She brought herself in this position.

  5. Theo on September 7, 2015, 12:00 pm

    Our congressmen und women are elected to serve this nation and only this one. I would like to see a speech or comment from one of them, jewish or not, that does not include their obligations to that great state of Israel!
    Would it not sound funny, if the roman catholic ones would always include the Pope and the Vatican into their comments, or the moslems Mecca and Medina? Are our statemen not sure where their obligation should lie?

    • bryan on September 8, 2015, 2:16 am

      Would it not be remarkable and wonderful if the perhaps 90% of American Christian politicians expressed their undieing allegiance and support for the prosperity, security, freedom and equality of the centuries-old but beleaguered and vulnerable communities of fellow Christians attempting to preserve their homeland in the embattled Holy sites of Nazareth, Bethlehem and Jerusalem?

  6. Atlantaiconoclast on September 7, 2015, 12:08 pm

    Aside from Hezbollah, which imo, is simply a resistance , not a terrorist organization, what are they talking about when they reference Iranian sponsored terrorism? It seems any resistance to occupation is deemed “terrorism” as long as Israel is the occupier.

    • oldgeezer on September 7, 2015, 1:24 pm

      Indeed. And while she singles Hezb out it is difficult to find any attacks on Israel by them within the last number of years. Maybe i am searching for the wrong things.

      Israel has been far more active than Hezb in the wanton death and destruction business. Tribal loyalties are misplaced when they overlook such crimes.

  7. Marnie on September 7, 2015, 12:14 pm

    So much BS from Ms. Wasserman. Her speech is full of syrupy prose that shouldn’t impress any American. If Israel is so important to you, then give up your US citizenship and hightail it over to your “homeland”.

    Remember crazy Michelle Bachman who suggested members of congress take a loyalty oath? Wonder if she’d insist on that now, considering most of congress has taken an oath to support and defend a foreign government.

  8. echinococcus on September 7, 2015, 1:49 pm

    Where the hell is “courage” in using as a murderous, vicious propaganda screed a letter about letting go of a lost situation? Where is “honesty”, according to Weiss, in this rattlesnake?
    Anyway, who gives a rat’s bottom if she is Jewish or Wiccan? The very fact of even mentioning that as a US Senator should be enough to disqualify her from that senatorship. She is elected by a geographic district, not a tribe.

    • annie on September 7, 2015, 1:55 pm

      Where is “honesty”, according to Weiss, in this rattlesnake?

      according to weiss, her “honesty” is about her agony over this decision:

      the most difficult decision I have had to make in the nearly 23 years I have served in elected office

      poor debbie

  9. Boomer on September 7, 2015, 2:46 pm

    This is depressing in so many ways, but thanks for writing it. As someone who remembers the Jim Crow era (though not when it was at its worst), I was tempted to comment on your use of the term to describe the treatment of Palestinians, but I decided it would not be constructive.

  10. Sibiriak on September 7, 2015, 3:30 pm

    But let’s give it up to Debbie Wasserman Schultz….


    No way. Not when she spews vile, evil demagoguery like this:

    But when Iran continues to call for the destruction of the Jewish people and the state of Israel, our most staunch ally in the region, and its proxy Hezbollah continues to launch attacks against innocent civilians, it is irresponsible not to consider this agreement’s impact on that nation

    I think the benevolence of this “deal” is way overrated in view of the perpetuation of lies it depends on.

    • just on September 7, 2015, 6:15 pm

      Just HOW is Israel an ally to the US???

      I’ve been asking for years now… and nobody with brains can give me an answer. And that is simply because they are NOT.

      “Make no mistake: This is an American national-security issue.”

      Yeah, it is. The US- Israel relationship has been a national security risk and nightmare for the US for a long time! People in the region and around the world see the grotesque hypocrisy that the US engages in. Ugh.

      She’s up for re- election next year. Yes, she rules over a heavily Jewish district, but man does she needs to go! The drama queen waited until Obama didn’t need her, and then gave this Israel- first, hasbara performance anyway.

      She should really lose her position as chair of the DNC. She’s an AIPAC shill, and has led the bobbing up and down, genuflecting, and led the standing ovations for Netanyahu everytime that I’ve watched his US speeches.

      (I discard any email I get from her without reading it. I feel a tad better everytime I do that.)

      Lil’ Debbie. boo- hoo- hoo.

      • Rusty Pipes on September 7, 2015, 8:16 pm

        No doubt DWS was getting pressure not only from Israel-firsters in her district and in the White House about her vote. She also should be getting pressure about her leadership of the DNC for waffling about supporting the President on THE major foreign policy achievement of his presidency. POTUS has tremendous input about who leads the DNC — in many cases picking one out. Faced with the choice between losing the DNC chair or risking Zionist support in her home district, DWS waited to see which way the wind was blowing (after Obama had secured 34 Senators) and then supported the President. She’s an ambitious woman who reportedly has used the DNC position to earn a lot of favors from other politicians — which she can cash in should she run for a higher office. While there are a lot of retired Jewish Zionist voters in her district, there are many other Democrats as well — some of whom, like African Americans, would hold it against her if she dissed Obama.

        Courage has nothing to do with it.

    • Chu on September 7, 2015, 7:50 pm

      ‘Israel, our most staunch ally in the region’

      man – she needs to freshen up on her outdated AIPAC script.
      and maybe relax that fro…

      • italian ex-pat on September 7, 2015, 9:11 pm

        @ Chu

        . . . and maybe lose the turquoise eye-liner?

      • piotr on September 8, 2015, 9:11 am

        Chu, Debbie is committing a major heresy from AIPAC point of view, “most staunch ally in the region”? So what is this region? Eastern hemisphere? That is not the normal usage. In other words, Israel is most staunch when compared with Cyprus, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and perhaps Turkey. I guess Norway is our most stauch ally in its region and so on. The “correct” phrase is “most precious ally” or something like that, without any qualifier, and if it hurts the feelings of Canadians, Britons, French and so on, let them deal with it.

      • Chu on September 9, 2015, 9:24 am

        And eye-liner as well. There’s a show called ‘What Not to Wear’
        that could help her out.

      • Chu on September 9, 2015, 9:39 am

        It should be something like – ‘Israel – our most needy ally ever’

        Even the word ally is tough to endorse. Allies
        don’t disrespect the standing president of the USA regardless
        of who is in power. It’s a one way street with Israel, and if Yahu
        were replaced tomorrow, we’re sure to see someone even nuttier.

        Too bad Israelis are on a crash course headed to pariah status.
        I guess Zoinism is about cutting off the nose, to spite the face.
        Like a drug user of sorts, maybe they need to hit rock bottom –
        as they can only go up from there with an intense 12 step program.
        Some uber-Zionist should put some seed money into a
        Betty Ford type Clinic for Zionism.

  11. RoHa on September 7, 2015, 8:39 pm

    “the historic homeland for me and millions of other Jews … my fervent desire as a Jewish mother to ensure that Israel will always be there — l’dor v’dor — from generation to generation”

    Strictly throwupsville.

    (To use a phrase from my long-lost youth. Whatever happened to that guy?)

  12. rensanceman on September 7, 2015, 9:56 pm

    Regarding foreign of the U.S., I am developing a theory that I believe will actually be a revelation of what is developing before our eyes: the Zionization of our foreign policy. National casualties: Libya, Lebannon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen. Were these attacks on sovereign nations really in our national interests, or rather for the purpose of accomplishing the Zionist goal of Eretz Israel, which is possession of all of present Palestine,plus parts of Egypt, Lebanon,and most of Syria? The U.S is the naive, bumpkin that is the current host for this grand experiment.

  13. Kathleen on September 7, 2015, 10:36 pm

    Scott Roth’s tweet hits the nail on the head.

  14. Marnie on September 8, 2015, 12:58 am

    To get ‘lil Debbie off the chair –

    A self-help guide for the eyeliner challenged – this one’s for you Debbie! Granted, it is from 2014, but your current look goes way back to 1981 so this is an improvement.

  15. eljay on September 8, 2015, 7:21 am

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz: … Iran’s leaders are also virulent anti-Semites and call for the destruction of Israel, the historic homeland for me and millions of other Jews. …

    1. Calling for the destruction of Israel makes Iran’s leaders anti-Israeli, not anti-Semitic. (Constant existential threats against Iran makes Israel’s leaders and Zio-supremacists in general anti-Iranian. According to Ms. Wasserman Shultz’s way of thinking, it also makes them anti-Persian and anti-Muslim. Why are Israeli leaders and Zio-supremacists so full of hatred?)

    2. Twenty percent of Israelis are not Jewish. Apparently these Israelis do not matter to Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Why does she hate non-Jewish Israelis so much?

    3. Religion-supremacist “Jewish State” may be the “historic homeland” of Jewish people, but Israel is the historic homeland of all of its Israeli citizens, immigrants, expats and refugees.

  16. piotr on September 8, 2015, 8:50 am


    Miami-Dade School Board member Martin Karp, who lives in her district and helped organize rallies last week against the accord, said he started seriously considering a run against the six-term congresswoman after potential supporters began approaching him, just before Wasserman Schultz announced her support for the president’s agreement with Iran.

    “These are real serious people with real money and the ability to raise money who talked to me about running,” said Karp, who declined to name any specific supporters. “I’m really thinking about this — thinking about it a lot. It’s a serious decision and this is a big issue.”

    Karp, 50, said the potential backers “include people who support pro-Israel causes, such as AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] and other organizations.”

    AIPAC, a longtime supporter of Wasserman Schultz, led the charge against the Iran deal.


    My bet is on Debbie. Either AIPAC will inform Karp gently that he can be left dry, or it will have an egg in its face. Of course, Karp will get support from ZOA etc.

  17. piotr on September 8, 2015, 9:03 am

    By the way, I do not think that Iranian leaders called for the destruction of Israel. The quotes basically say that Israel should cease to exists, but the details how it would happen do not include any attack by Iran, instead, they refer to divine and popular will. Those people are messianic, not unlike religious parties in Israel. This similarity means that they do not crave martyrdom, instead they view improved religious observances (including female modesty, proper fasts and much more) as the principal method. In a nutshell, it is Torah studies versus Islamic studies in twelver Shia tradition.

  18. Kay24 on September 8, 2015, 9:35 am

    Darth Cheney made a speech about how deadly this deal with Iran will be, and that it will attack the US, and a woman stood up a few feet away from him, with a sign that said he was wrong on Iraq and was wrong on Iran. If looks could kill this woman would have died by the evil look cast on her by Cheney. Heh.

  19. kma on September 8, 2015, 8:46 pm

    I may be ahead of my time, but isn’t Wasserman-Schulz the same as Kim Davis?
    Do we have to humor all these religious nuts all the time? Give me a break. No “christian” ever went to jail for refusing to inject lethal poisons into some poor death-row victim, and no blond Jewish Israeli person ever stood up in the White House or Congress to say let’s stop bombing the shit out of all those people who actually owned the land first… “homeland” my ass. Floridians who are black and Jewish can’t even visit their relatives’ weddings. it’s the SAME as the christian crap. same stupid bible even.

    how many of you Mondoweiss editors are going to vote for one of these crap heads? how many of you did last time? do you realize that religion is fiction?

    when do we get to just say it… I’m sick of it.

    • annie on September 8, 2015, 8:52 pm

      no blond Jewish Israeli person ever stood up in the White House or Congress to say let’s stop bombing the shit out of all those people

      i guess i am not getting your qualifiers. medea benjamin is jewish and blond and she’s stood up in congress and said stuff like this a lot.

      how many of you Mondoweiss editors are going to vote for one of these crap heads?

      and your point is… you think a mondoweiss editor would vote for Wasserman-Schulz? you think a person such as myself is not as politically elevated as yourself?

      how many of you did last time?

      do me a favor km, go hang out at some website where you think the editors are as evolved as yourself.

      do you realize that religion is fiction?

      wtf? do you realize what an insulting, ignorant and rude person you’re revealing yourself to be?

  20. CED on September 10, 2015, 1:13 pm

    This Jewish congressperson’s comments and the ‘soul-searching’ of other Jewish politicians are a perfect example of why we cannot vote for Jewish Zionists for any public office. Their first loyalty is to what she calls the Homeland, and not to the US, and certainly not to peace and justice in the world.
    We have seen this again and again. Israel would fall from its inflated place in the world without all the money and other help from the US govt and Jewish backers, which is ensured by these Zionist politicians and the pressure created by AIPAC on all our politicians over the years. Remember what AIPAC did to Rep Cynthia McKinney years ago by running and financing a candidate against her, when she dared to question our unconditional backing of Israel. It served as a warning to the rest of Congress: If you don’t toe the line, we will make sure you don’t get re-elected.
    LOVE the cartoon with the 2 peace doves talking to each other, while pooping on Netanyahu’s head. His brazen move to speak to Congress the way he did is backfiring big time! Hooray! Maybe the American people will come to their senses and tell their elected representatives to stop giving Israel billions of dollars every year that we could use at home. Maybe the International Court will hold him and others responsible for the crimes against the Palestinian people that continue to this day. We can hope.

  21. Pixel on September 11, 2015, 2:00 am

    What stands out most for me is her use of the term “dual loyalty”.

    I’m not sure who her audience is or who might read this but there are a plenty of folks out there who haven’t put that together, yet.

    She planted seeds where none had been yet been sown.

    Thank, you, DWS.

    ps. AIPAC and bright blue eyeliner were both soooooo yesterday.

    • Pixel on September 11, 2015, 2:56 am

      “ps. AIPAC and bright blue eyeliner were both soooooo yesterday. ”

      I’ve come back in to apologize for two things.

      1. jumping on the bandwagon and taking a cheap shot – or any shot – at a woman’s looks. It was small of me. It’s 2015, and I know better.

      2. I failed to gently challenge others who made the same error. Not to have done so was cowardly.

      progress not perfection.

      • Froggy on September 11, 2015, 8:06 am

        Pixel : I didn’t see your comment in that light. Bright blue eyeliner is a choice. You didn’t criticise her looks.

        Just saying….

      • Kris on September 11, 2015, 11:09 am

        I think so too, Froggy.

        Blue eyeliner on her lower eyelid is a choice, and is open to comment. Just as if she chose to wear a muumuu, a wetsuit, or a clown costume to a public appearance.

      • talknic on September 11, 2015, 12:50 pm
      • RoHa on September 12, 2015, 1:57 am

        “Not often women wear ties”

        Though I will mention that I have frequently entered (by mistake, of course) establishments largely staffed by young women who were wearing ties. And very tiny skirts.

        Oh, and make-up. They were wearing make-up.

Leave a Reply