Not A Single Active Democrat Attended the Jerusalem Embassy Ceremony

[HappyJoy]

Palestine is a very big issue and a very real recruiting tool. Also moving the embassy to Jerusalem takes us out of the position of being a neutral arbiter. There isn't an upside to moving the embassy for the United States.

What's done is done. We were never a neutral arbiter anyway. We have always been pro Israel.

Oh, certainly leaned in that direction but we never fell flat on our face giving Israel everything it wanted in regards to Palestine.

We leaned so far in that direction our faces must have only been an inch from the ground.

Yeah well, that last inch cost a lot of lives and it's only day 2.

There's millions more where they came from.

Oh, we've only just begun.

 

[HappyJoy]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Lieberman is not a Democrat, and the only noteworthy thing about the U.S. embassy moving a couple miles down the road is the bloodbath it caused.

Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2000.

The "bloodbath that it caused"?! That's the talking point being peddled by Al Qaeda, ISIS, the PA, etc., etc.

And if you think the only "noteworthy" thing about the embassy move was the intolerant, bigoted reaction of Palestinian/Arab thugs, I am not surprised that you're peddling the radical Muslim line about the move.

Get a grip. It was an unpopular move among most Democrats, of course they are not going to attend.

Twenty three years ago nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the Jerusalem embassy act, which demanded the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, so what happened that made them oppose it now? Trump was doing it.

Exactly!

And that only goes to show what hypocrites Demrats are.

Because you don't understand why both Democrats and Republicans have held off moving the embassy?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Twenty three years ago nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the Jerusalem embassy act, which demanded the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, so what happened that made them oppose it now? Trump was doing it.

It demanded it! Stat!

Sorry it was US policy not to move the embassy to Jerusalem until the Palestinian issue was resolved. Both Democrats and Republicans. Why? Because the additional shit this stirs up.

The Jerusalem embassy act, passed almost unanimously by Congress, demanded the embassy be moved within six months unless the president certified to Congress that the move had to be delayed for national security reasons, and Clinton, Bush and Obama all lied every six months and said the move had to be delayed for another six months for national security reasons. It was never US policy the move would be delayed until there was a final status agreement. Aside from some rhetoric, no shit has been stirred up except in the imaginations of some Trump critics.

There were obvious national security implications. For starters the Palestinian issue is a recruiting tool for terrorism.

There were never any national security issues and everything is a recruiting tool for terrorism among the Arabs.

Palestine is a very big issue and a very real recruiting tool. Also moving the embassy to Jerusalem takes us out of the position of being a neutral arbiter. There isn't an upside to moving the embassy for the United States.

The embassy has been moved to the western part of the city which even the PLO recognizes as sovereign Israeli territory, so if the US can be blackmailed by the Arabs into refusing to to move its embassy to a place in Israel that everyone recognizes as sovereign Israeli territory, the US has no credibility with either side. Not moving the embassy was cowardly and unprincipled, and while the US allowed itself to be bullied this way, it could legitimately called itself neutral. Clinton could have argued he was in the middle of trying to close the final status agreement he had forced Israel to negotiate so he wanted to wait just a little longer, and Bush could have argued that he was putting together alliances with Muslims to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, but Obama had no excuse and was just flat out anti Israel. This move does not foreclose any of the demands the Arabs have made, so there is no rational basis for their objections, and in fact, aside from the PA, there is very little objection in the Arab world. There is no downside to this move, and the upside is, for the first time in a long time, all the people in the ME can trust the US to behave with principle.

 

[toomuchtime_]

It demanded it! Stat!

Sorry it was US policy not to move the embassy to Jerusalem until the Palestinian issue was resolved. Both Democrats and Republicans. Why? Because the additional shit this stirs up.

The Jerusalem embassy act, passed almost unanimously by Congress, demanded the embassy be moved within six months unless the president certified to Congress that the move had to be delayed for national security reasons, and Clinton, Bush and Obama all lied every six months and said the move had to be delayed for another six months for national security reasons. It was never US policy the move would be delayed until there was a final status agreement. Aside from some rhetoric, no shit has been stirred up except in the imaginations of some Trump critics.

There were obvious national security implications. For starters the Palestinian issue is a recruiting tool for terrorism.

There were never any national security issues and everything is a recruiting tool for terrorism among the Arabs.

Palestine is a very big issue and a very real recruiting tool. Also moving the embassy to Jerusalem takes us out of the position of being a neutral arbiter. There isn't an upside to moving the embassy for the United States.

What's done is done. We were never a neutral arbiter anyway. We have always been pro Israel.

The American people have been, but if the government was always pro Israel, why wasn't the embassy moved to Jerusalem 70 years ago?

 

[bodecea]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Lieberman is not a Democrat, and the only noteworthy thing about the U.S. embassy moving a couple miles down the road is the bloodbath it caused.

Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2000.

The "bloodbath that it caused"?! That's the talking point being peddled by Al Qaeda, ISIS, the PA, etc., etc.

And if you think the only "noteworthy" thing about the embassy move was the intolerant, bigoted reaction of Palestinian/Arab thugs, I am not surprised that you're peddling the radical Muslim line about the move.

Get a grip. It was an unpopular move among most Democrats, of course they are not going to attend.

Twenty three years ago nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the Jerusalem embassy act, which demanded the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, so what happened that made them oppose it now? Trump was doing it.

Exactly!

And that only goes to show what hypocrites Demrats are.

And the so-called religious right are creaming themselves believing this is a step towards their end times fantasy.

 

[toomuchtime_]

The Jerusalem embassy act, passed almost unanimously by Congress, demanded the embassy be moved within six months unless the president certified to Congress that the move had to be delayed for national security reasons, and Clinton, Bush and Obama all lied every six months and said the move had to be delayed for another six months for national security reasons. It was never US policy the move would be delayed until there was a final status agreement. Aside from some rhetoric, no shit has been stirred up except in the imaginations of some Trump critics.

There were obvious national security implications. For starters the Palestinian issue is a recruiting tool for terrorism.

There were never any national security issues and everything is a recruiting tool for terrorism among the Arabs.

Palestine is a very big issue and a very real recruiting tool. Also moving the embassy to Jerusalem takes us out of the position of being a neutral arbiter. There isn't an upside to moving the embassy for the United States.

What's done is done. We were never a neutral arbiter anyway. We have always been pro Israel.

Oh, certainly leaned in that direction but we never fell flat on our face giving Israel everything it wanted in regards to Palestine.

You are apparently not at all familiar with the history. Bush41 withheld aid because of Israeli construction in Jueda and Samaria. Clinton brough down the Shamir government because it wouldn't deal with Arafat and then got Rabin elected, tried but couldn't get Shamir elected the second time, but then bought down the Netanyahu government, all the time supporting virtually every PLO demand. Obama, of course, berated Israel and supported everything the PLO asked for for eight years. No US government can reasonably be called pro Israel with respect to the Palestinians that didn't move the embassy to Jerusalem.

 

[HappyJoy]

There were obvious national security implications. For starters the Palestinian issue is a recruiting tool for terrorism.

There were never any national security issues and everything is a recruiting tool for terrorism among the Arabs.

Palestine is a very big issue and a very real recruiting tool. Also moving the embassy to Jerusalem takes us out of the position of being a neutral arbiter. There isn't an upside to moving the embassy for the United States.

What's done is done. We were never a neutral arbiter anyway. We have always been pro Israel.

Oh, certainly leaned in that direction but we never fell flat on our face giving Israel everything it wanted in regards to Palestine.

You are apparently not at all familiar with the history. Bush41 withheld aid because of Israeli construction in Jueda and Samaria. Clinton brough down the Shamir government because it wouldn't deal with Arafat and then got Rabin elected, tried but couldn't get Shamir elected the second time, but then bought down the Netanyahu government, all the time supporting virtually every PLO demand. Obama, of course, berated Israel and supported everything the PLO asked for for eight years. No US government can reasonably be called pro Israel with respect to the Palestinians that didn't move the embassy to Jerusalem.

RIght? Just wasn't the right time, really got in the way of any peace talks. The embassy doesn't help with the old Jews and Palestinians thing going on over there.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Lieberman is not a Democrat, and the only noteworthy thing about the U.S. embassy moving a couple miles down the road is the bloodbath it caused.

Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2000.

The "bloodbath that it caused"?! That's the talking point being peddled by Al Qaeda, ISIS, the PA, etc., etc.

And if you think the only "noteworthy" thing about the embassy move was the intolerant, bigoted reaction of Palestinian/Arab thugs, I am not surprised that you're peddling the radical Muslim line about the move.

Get a grip. It was an unpopular move among most Democrats, of course they are not going to attend.

Twenty three years ago nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the Jerusalem embassy act, which demanded the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, so what happened that made them oppose it now? Trump was doing it.

Exactly!

And that only goes to show what hypocrites Demrats are.

Because you don't understand why both Democrats and Republicans have held off moving the embassy?

In fact, it's you who doesn't understand why.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

OMG. Arrest them all!

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Don't really care. Israel's problems are not my problems. Selfish I know. Don't give a rat's ass.

 

[toomuchtime_]

There were never any national security issues and everything is a recruiting tool for terrorism among the Arabs.

Palestine is a very big issue and a very real recruiting tool. Also moving the embassy to Jerusalem takes us out of the position of being a neutral arbiter. There isn't an upside to moving the embassy for the United States.

What's done is done. We were never a neutral arbiter anyway. We have always been pro Israel.

Oh, certainly leaned in that direction but we never fell flat on our face giving Israel everything it wanted in regards to Palestine.

You are apparently not at all familiar with the history. Bush41 withheld aid because of Israeli construction in Jueda and Samaria. Clinton brough down the Shamir government because it wouldn't deal with Arafat and then got Rabin elected, tried but couldn't get Shamir elected the second time, but then bought down the Netanyahu government, all the time supporting virtually every PLO demand. Obama, of course, berated Israel and supported everything the PLO asked for for eight years. No US government can reasonably be called pro Israel with respect to the Palestinians that didn't move the embassy to Jerusalem.

RIght? Just wasn't the right time, really got in the way of any peace talks. The embassy doesn't help with the old Jews and Palestinians thing going on over there.

It was always the right time, but we didn't have the right President until now.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

OMG. Arrest them all!

Fire them all!!!

 

[Issa]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Apart from the evangelicals and the Zionists no one agrees with the move. You both are the scrums of earth.

 

[Issa]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Lieberman is not a Democrat, and the only noteworthy thing about the U.S. embassy moving a couple miles down the road is the bloodbath it caused.

Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2000.

The "bloodbath that it caused"?! That's the talking point being peddled by Al Qaeda, ISIS, the PA, etc., etc.

And if you think the only "noteworthy" thing about the embassy move was the intolerant, bigoted reaction of Palestinian/Arab thugs, I am not surprised that you're peddling the radical Muslim line about the move.

The whole world is against this move. So besides the right nuts in the US and Israel who else is with you ?

 

[Issa]

American Jews have supported the DimocRATs since before WWII. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why they continue to do so.

Jewish Members of U.S. Congress: 115th Congress
(2017-2019)
@ Jewish Members of the 114th Congress

Senate
(8 Democrats, 1 Independent)

Michael Bennet (D-CO)
Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Al Franken (D-MN)
Brian Schatz (D-HI)
Bernard Sanders (I-VT)
Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)

House
(21 Democrats, 2 Republican)

David Cicilline (D-RI)
Stephen Cohen (D-TN)
Susan Davis (D-CA)
Ted Deutch (D-FL)
Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Lois Frankel (D-FL)
Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ)
Steve Israel (D-NY)
David Kutsoff (R-TN)
Sander Levin (D-MI)
Alan Lowenthal (D-CA)
Nita Lowey (D-NY)
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Jared Polis (D-CO)
Jamie Raskin (D-MD)
Jacky Rosen (D-NV)
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Brad Sherman (D-CA)
Brad Schneider (D-IL)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)
John Yarmuth (D-KY)
Lee Zeldin (R-NY)*

They are not stupid they know that the evangelicals want the messiah to come back and they dont give a fuck about the Jews. Most minorities vote anti GOP because it's a bigoted racist party.

 

[Moonglow]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Just think of all the tax money they saved.

 

[JoeMoma]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Lieberman is not a Democrat, and the only noteworthy thing about the U.S. embassy moving a couple miles down the road is the bloodbath it caused.

Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2000.

The "bloodbath that it caused"?! That's the talking point being peddled by Al Qaeda, ISIS, the PA, etc., etc.

And if you think the only "noteworthy" thing about the embassy move was the intolerant, bigoted reaction of Palestinian/Arab thugs, I am not surprised that you're peddling the radical Muslim line about the move.

Get a grip. It was an unpopular move among most Democrats, of course they are not going to attend.

Twenty three years ago nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the Jerusalem embassy act, which demanded the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, so what happened that made them oppose it now? Trump was doing it.

It demanded it! Stat!

Sorry it was US policy not to move the embassy to Jerusalem until the Palestinian issue was resolved. Both Democrats and Republicans. Why? Because the additional shit this stirs up.

Sometimes shit has to be stirred up before it can be resolved.

 

[Political Junky]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Good, Lieberman can't be considered a Democrat.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Can you believe that not a single active, serving Democratic politician attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem? Not one. This shows you how radicalized national Democratic politicians have become.

Only retired Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman attended the ceremony, to his great credit.

Two days ago, Lieberman wrote a great editorial in defense of Trump's decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Here it is:

Sen. Joe Lieberman: Why US Embassy Jerusalem move happened and why it matters

Apart from the evangelicals and the Zionists no one agrees with the move. You both are the scrums of earth.

Why would you disagree with the move?

 

[HappyJoy]

Lieberman is not a Democrat, and the only noteworthy thing about the U.S. embassy moving a couple miles down the road is the bloodbath it caused.

Lieberman was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2000.

The "bloodbath that it caused"?! That's the talking point being peddled by Al Qaeda, ISIS, the PA, etc., etc.

And if you think the only "noteworthy" thing about the embassy move was the intolerant, bigoted reaction of Palestinian/Arab thugs, I am not surprised that you're peddling the radical Muslim line about the move.

Get a grip. It was an unpopular move among most Democrats, of course they are not going to attend.

Twenty three years ago nearly every Democrat in Congress voted for the Jerusalem embassy act, which demanded the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, so what happened that made them oppose it now? Trump was doing it.

It demanded it! Stat!

Sorry it was US policy not to move the embassy to Jerusalem until the Palestinian issue was resolved. Both Democrats and Republicans. Why? Because the additional shit this stirs up.

Sometimes shit has to be stirred up before it can be resolved.

Which is a great way of saying nothing.