Something modern totalitarians have in common is any opposition to their designs is an unprincipled attack on the Volk and on the Fatherland! And any such opposition is inspired by foreigners and, of course, The JOOOOOS!
And thus is it with opposition to Obama enabling deal with genocidal Iran. Why would anyone oppose that? . . . unless they were in league with foreigners and JOOOOOOS!
Cue Barack Obama’s fanboys at the Daily Kos.
Daily Kos is calling Chuck Schumer an Israeli Jew Traitor for opposing Iran deal. Seriously: http://t.co/JWxHdXgZeY pic.twitter.com/kf02VlM2Ny— Jeff B@AoSHQDD (@EsotericCD) August 9, 2015
Yes, I am siding with Senator Schumer here. Sit down and take some smelling salts if you need to.
Cue Obama in saying Republicans and hardline Iranians are in league.
"In fact, it's those hard-liners who are most comfortable with the status quo," Obama said Wednesday afternoon. "It's those hard-liners chanting "death to America" who have been most opposed to the deal."
"They're making common cause with the Republican caucus," Obama said to laughter and wild applause.
Yes, wild applause. Praise the Dear Leader for exposing the connections of Running Dog Republican Traitors with nefarious foreigners!
Cue any number of thinly veiled accusations of duel loyalty and JOOOO money from the Obama regime’s various fronts. Check out this from Honest Reporting (scroll to item 2) for a taste of that.
This is becoming too much for even the Left-of-Center Tablet whose editors have sounded the alarm and with passion:
What we increasingly can’t stomach—and feel obliged to speak out about right now—is the use of Jew-baiting and other blatant and retrograde forms of racial and ethnic prejudice as tools to sell a political deal, or to smear those who oppose it. Accusing Senator Schumer of loyalty to a foreign government is bigotry, pure and simple. Accusing Senators and Congressmen whose misgivings about the Iran deal are shared by a majority of the U.S. electorate of being agents of a foreign power, or of selling their votes to shadowy lobbyists, or of acting contrary to the best interests of the United States, is the kind of naked appeal to bigotry and prejudice that would be familiar in the politics of the pre-Civil Rights Era South.
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.
We do not accept the idea that Senator Schumer or anyone else is a fair target for racist incitement, anymore than we accept the idea that the basic norms of political discourse in this country do not apply to Jews. Whatever one feels about the merits of the Iran deal, sales techniques that call into question the patriotism of American Jews are examples of bigotry—no matter who does it. On this question, we should all stand in defense of Senator Schumer.
But then the Tablet is published by JOOOOOOS!
In all seriousness, the editors of the Tablet are right. I think it important to add and emphasize that this is how totalitarians act, from the dictators of Venezuela and Cuba who blame their failures on the Yanqui and yes, the Jews, too, to the 20th Century Nazi and Communist regimes that plagued Europe. Any failure of and any opposition to the regime is never the fault of the Glorious Leaders but of foreigners and Jews and of traitors in league with them.
It is beyond sad that here in the United States we now have a regime that so conducts itself.