Don't Call it Treason - Democratic Underground

babylonsister

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-13-10 08:36 AM
Original message

Don't Call it Treason

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2010/11/12/144155/34

Don't Call it Treason

by BooMan
Fri Nov 12th, 2010 at 02:41:55 PM EST

What do you call it when the (soon-to-be) House Majority Leader sits down with a visiting head of state and assures him that he and his party can be counted on to side with his country against the president of the United States?

This isn't a hypothetical, by the way. It's not like I'm asking what would have happened if Joachim von Ribbentrop had sat down in Sam Rayburn's office in 1939 and received assurances that Rayburn and the Dems could be counted on to support Germany and block anything Roosevelt did to try to force concessions. Because, in a case like that (which did not happen) we know what we would call it. We know what Eric Cantor would call it.

But, there I go again, bringing up Nazis, which is in such bad taste in this case.

Last night, Netanyahu met in New York for over an hour with incoming House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who is set to become the highest ranking Jewish member of Congress in history. The meeting took place at New York’s Regency Hotel, and included no other American lawmakers besides Cantor. Also attending on the Israeli side were Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren, and Netanyahu’s National Security Advisor Uzi Arad.

Israeli sources characterized a one-on-one meeting between an Israeli prime minister and a lone American lawmaker as unusual, if not unheard of.

Cantor was understandably feeling delighted with his sense of self-importance and could not help but provide a readout of the meeting for the press. Part of that readout said:

"Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington," the readout continued. "He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other."

This isn't boilerplate. The president is trying to facilitate a peace agreement between two parties, only one of which is Israel. In that process, Israel must make concessions. Eric Cantor is promising to undermine that process.

And that quite clearly harms our national security. Let me remind you of General Petraeus's testimony from back in March, as reported by Haaretz:

U.S. General David Petraeus said on Wednesday that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was fomenting anti-American sentiment due to the perception of U.S. favoritism towards Israel.

Speaking to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Petraeus explained that "enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the area of responsibility."

"Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples ," Petraeus said.

Look, I hate how people lazily throw around accusations of dual-loyalty. But Cantor can't behave this way. He just can't. It's completely unacceptable.