Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...


Everything but tech support.

1948, 29 Sep 15

DWS’ Rabbi Lays it Down


Now this is humorous. Democratic national Committee Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz apparently had to sit through a Yom Kippur sermon by her own rabbi tearing into members of Congress who supported President Obama’s Iranian nuclear deal.

Wow. Good for this rabbi. I wonder how many rabbis spoke out against this. Most of my fellow Jews, and the rabbis who lead them, are ardently liberal, pacifist, etc., particularly among the Reform denomination, which is the largest.

I imagine she was pretty shocked.


1948, 29 September 2015


  1. Northern Pike

    What makes that rabbi think he has any special knowledge of foreign policy? Who does he think he is, the Pope?

  2. scott

    How shocked could she really be? If he’s her own rabbi, she is probably already familiar with the fact that he’s an idiot.

  3. Kevin Scheunemann

    So a member of a Jewish congregation cannot be called to task by the head of a Jewish congregation for supporting a deal with evil that calls for the genocide of Jewish people?

    And the leader of the congregation that speaks against those calling for Jewish genocide is an “idiot”?

    Wow. Just wow.

    Generally, those who tear into those supporting genocide are fairly smart in my book.

  4. old baldy


    Could you point out the section and paragraph where the treaty “calls for the genocide of the Jewish people” ? Be specific.

  5. Kevin Scheunemann

    When you make a deal with people calling for the destruction and annhilation of the Jewish people…without demanding your treaty partner reverse that public stance…you are complicit in that call for genocide if you support the treaty.

    Standing with genocidal evil Iran, without demanding repentance/reversal of the genocidal position, is supporting genocidal evil.

  6. scott

    “you are complicit in that call for genocide if you support the treaty.”


    Seriously, though. Do Republicans have better ideas? I watched the debates and those clowns certainly didn’t. What else have I missed?

  7. old baldy


    Answer the question, or admit you screwed up….

  8. Kevin Scheunemann


    The better idea is: You don’t make a deal with demons, unless the demons are repentant about the evil they commit. It they are repentant.

    Then you make a deal where you trust but verify the heck out of everything.

    All 3 things are missing from this treaty.

    1.) Iran is unrepentant about wanting to wipe out Israel.

    2.) Iran, because it is unrepentant about its evil, cannot be trusted. It’s government still proudly supports “death to America” mantras as well.

    3.) The treaty wipes away any reasonable verification that was in place prior to the treaty.

    The better idea is: marginalize the evil on the world stage until it wants to reprent of that evil, and if needed use force if Iram is out of line.

    If you want to be a Neville Chamberlain where you pretend its a substantive deal, while the other side continues to spew genocidal hate for a group of people, you fail to learn the simple lessons of history. All Chamberlain did with his peace deal with Hitler, which was far more substantive than this deal, was embolden evil, which ended up costing more lives.

  9. old baldy


    So you made it up, right? Typical.

  10. Kevin Scheunemann


    If a member of the treaty calls for genocide, you are showing support for that position if the treaty is silent on it, or fails to put the treaty “party” in the position to repent, or reverse, their genocidal demands in the treaty.

    That is the disgusting part.

    When you lie down with demons, you support what they do.

  11. scott

    Kevin most of your reply to me above is…well, just made up. But this part I’ll address directly: “The better idea is: marginalize the evil on the world stage until it”…

    Well, it’s settled then! But I do have one question: HOW? Nobody else wants to keep the sanctions in place. That coalition is done. I have yet to hear any plausible ideas for putting one back together. And the idea that we’re going to “marginalize” a country all by ourselves is silly.

    The current agreement really does look to me like about the best we can get right now. The fact that every Republican alive is calling it The Worst Thing EVAR doesn’t change that.

    Let’s not forget who else made deals with Iran. Could it be…Ronald Reagan? He was selling ARMS to them in secret for heaven’s sake. Somehow that is just peachy but this nuclear restriction deal is DOOMSDAY! Heh.

  12. Fairs Fare

    Who cares what the agreement says or doesn’t say. Who cares who likes it or doesn’t like it. The fact is now we have something in writing. An enforceable document/treaty. In the end Iran will renege on the treaty. The enforceable document can then be held up to the world as proof of the broken deal. Military force will then be used to bomb them back to the Stone Age. Remember this method? It was used to lay the ground work before Iraq 2 and wait, wasn’t that also the work of Republicans. Get a grip.

Pin It on Pinterest