Chuck Schumer Against The World

Jack Engelhard’s classic international bestselling novel Indecent Proposal, which later became a worldwide hit movie,

by Jack Engelhard

Of Abraham it’s said that in smashing idols and embracing the absolute sovereignty of a single G-d, he became one man standing against the rest of the world. Well maybe it’s not quite that lonely and heroic for Chuck Schumer, but pretty close. To a Democrat like Schumer,Barack Obama is “the rest of the world.”

That took guts doing what he did. Last week Schumer put to rest all doubt. He will vote to defeat Obama’s Iran Nuke Deal.

So doing he risks the displeasure of the President and the Party. He also risks losing his bid to become Party leader in the Senate.

Toughest of all, perhaps, Schumer risks being called out for voting Jewish

Yes, Schumer is known for his warmth for the Jewish State. But Schumer is a United States Senator. He declared himself against the deal because the deal is harmful to the United States. He spoke up for his New York constituents and he is acting in accord with his American conscience.

This is a rotten deal. It is against the best interests of the United States and it must go down. That is Schumer’s thinking and that is Schumer at his best.

Last week, Obama spent an hour trying to put lipstick on this pig. 

The President resorted to a crafty age-old trick, blaming Israel – you know, the Jews, wink, wink – in case the deal fell, and he singled out Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for being so stubborn.

Bibi is guilty of “unprecedented interference” in US politics, according to Obama with Fareed Zakaria on CNN. As if an Israeli leader speaking his mind is somehow out of turn. 

This is the same Obama who dispatched an army of political fixers to interfere Bibi from getting reelected.

Obama was sending a message. 

The message was meant for Bibi and the warning was meant for Schumer. Behave or else.

Hours later, Schumer went public. He refused to be intimidated. The timing itself – that really took guts.

Schumer became an instant hero to those who disdain the Iraq deal, and rightly so, but some people wanted more. Why did Chuck say that he was only acting on his own behalf? Why did he say that he would not, repeat not rally his fellow Democrats to his side?

Well, what more can we possibly want? Schumer still has to live in the real world. He still has to caucus with members of his own Party.

He still has to do lunch with the President – the leader of his Party, the leader of his country. Too much lobbying would be rubbing it in.

Schumer has done plenty as it is. He should not be made to answer for what he is not doing.

We know where the Liberals stand. Running on TV at the moment is a J Street commercial frantically supporting the deal.

Swallow it, they say. It’s good for you. Take the medicine.

Why is it so good? Because Obama says so, that’s why.

Plus, John Kerry and his team put it together and is there a smarter man on the face of the earth than John Kerry?

To this observer, there is no need to talk centrifuges or “snap-back” clauses or secret agreements to know that Kerry was taken to the cleaners.

The proof of it is that Kerry left Tehran leaving four hostages behind. If he could not get that much business done, surely he was swindled on everything else.

But the Left insists that we won. They tell the rest of us that we have no right to object because we do not have all the facts.

This is true. We do not know all the details. Precisely why we are suspicious and why we find it impossible to talk to a Liberal.

They truly say this… They argue that nobody knows what’s in the deal… but it’s a good deal.

Stop scratching your head. Go, make sense of that logic…plus this logic from Obama himself, saying that they “don’t really mean it” when they chant “Death to the United States” and “Death to Israel.” Six million Jews had to die in order to prove that Hitler really did mean it.

How many chances are we supposed to give the ayatollahs to likewise prove that they mean what they keep saying?

New York-based author and bestselling novelist Jack Engelhard writes a regular column for Arutz Sheva. Website: www.jackengelhard.com

I was wrong about Schumer, and it feels so good

by Michael Goodwin

Never has being wrong felt so good, nor has a mistake been so worth celebrating.

Chuck Schumer surprised me in all the best ways. His opposition to the terrible Iran nuke deal is breathtakingly bold and opens the door to actually defeating it. That would be one of the best things to happen to America, Israel and the civilized world in a very long time.

Let us count the ways Schumer’s decision matters.

First, because he is the next Senate Democratic leader, I expected him to follow a president from his party and the majority of his caucus. He may pay a price for breaking out of the political box, but he gives cover to other Dems to do the same.

Second, his timing. Schumer ­announced his decision only a day after Obama made an impassioned, partisan appeal. Any momentum Obama had was stopped by Schumer, who effectively rebuked the president’s shameless attempt to link Republicans to Iranian hardliners. That rancid argument is now dead.

Third, the substance. Schumer issued a detailed statement demolishing supporters’ basic argument — that the deal, while imperfect, was better than no deal. Schumer persuasively showed the deal served Iran more than our side.

He broke his decision into three parts — the nuclear issues during the first 10 years of the deal, the nuclear issues in the following decade and the “non-nuclear” aspects, meaning Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism. For each, he asked whether we would be better off with or without the negotiated terms.

His conclusions were striking. We might be better off with the deal in the first decade, he argues, but almost certainly we would be better off without it in the other two parts.

He found numerous weaknesses in the text, including over inspections and sanctions. After the first decade, he wrote that Iran “can be very close to achieving” a nuke, and that the quest “will be codified in an agreement signed by the United States.”

He was just getting warmed up. The turning point, he said, was the non-nuclear issues, meaning Iran’s lethal ability to use unfrozen accounts of $50 billion to fund its terrorist programs. That added up to “a strong case that we are better off without an agreement than with one.”

His conclusions, which include doubts that Iran will move away from its apocalyptic theocracy, should resolve suspicions that Schumer might still side with an Obama veto. Absent a miraculous change in Iranian behavior, the senator has made the strongest possible case against the deal, so I don’t think he’ll flip-flop.

A fourth and final significance of Schumer’s position is that it makes New York the clear leader of the opposition movement. Five brave Democratic House members from the state — Eliot Engel, Steve Israel, Grace Meng, Nita Lowey and Kathleen Rice — also said no to Obama. The entire GOP delegation will do the same.

That should not be the end of it. National security is a local issue, as 9/11 painfully proved.

Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani has joined the “no” chorus, and his successor, Michael Bloomberg, should, too. Former top cop Ray Kelly should sign on, as should business and civic leaders who understand the stakes.

Most important, Gov. Cuomo should lead them. Often willing to buck his party’s left-wing orthodoxy, including on school choice, the Iran deal should be the next example.

With the Empire State remaining the perennial first choice among jihadists, New York’s governor has an absolute duty to do everything he can to protect its residents, businesses and visitors from attack.

Schumer’s conclusion alone that Iran would use the end of sanctions to expand its export of terrorism is reason enough for the governor to join the opposition.

He would seem to be halfway there. Cuomo traveled to Israel to show solidarity with the Jewish state during last year’s Gaza war. When he returned, he said, “Any New Yorker who doesn’t understand that Israel’s fight is our fight is living not in the state of New York but in the state of denial.”

Now he can prove he meant what he said.

Iran is a threat to the US & Israel, and Senator Schumer is busy with "long trucks on the highway"?

He is a Jew and represents the second largest Jewish population in the world. Iran is threatening to wipe Israel off the map, and what does this "yolt" do? 

Nothing .... Nada! He has no time for his fellow Jews, he  is busy fighting legislation that would allow large trucks on US highways.

So who voted him in to "represent" us? 
Yes.... you guessed it ... 
the "Heimishe" Gedoilim... who don't care about the USA and don't care about Israel! 
All they care about is how many $$$$ Schumer can bring into the "Heiligeh" Mosdos!

So now that Obama is on a slippery slope to destroy the USA and Israel, Schumer who should be screaming from the Capital rooftop has suddenly lost his voice!

Someone should tell Schumer what Mordechai told Esther:
"For if you persist in keeping silent at a time like this, relief and deliverance will come to the Jews from some other place, while you and your father's house will perish. And who knows whether it was just for such a time as this that you attained the royal position." (Esther 3, 14)

U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer says he’ll fight legislation that would allow longer trailer trucks on the nation’s highways. 
The Democrat said Wednesday that a provision in a Senate transportation bill would authorize twin 33-foot trailers. Current rules allow for trucks to pull two trailers that are each 28 feet long.

Schumer says that when the length of the cab is factored in,the longer trucks could stretch to 84 feet. He says trucks the size of an eight-story building have no place on highways because they would present a “tremendous” safety risk and place too much weight on bridges and roads.Shipping companies support the larger trucks, saying they would allow them to move goods more efficiently around the country.