Bryan Fischer Award Nominee: Sen. Tom Cotton

The Bryan Fischer Award is given to those who display a breathtaking lack of self-awareness, accusing their opponents of their own worst sins and remaining gloriously unaware of their own self-contradictions. Sen. Tom Cotton, the man behind that letter to the leaders of Iran, has definitely earned that award:

Earlier in the day, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters that when it comes to the U.S. policy towards Israel, “We’re currently evaluating our approach.” The comments were important, but not surprising – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent antics were bound to carry some consequences.

But Cotton, the right-wing freshman in his second month in the Senate, called Psaki’s comments “worrisome“ – for a very specific reason.

“While Prime Minister Netanyahu won a decisive victory, he still has just started assembling a governing majority coalition. These kinds of quotes from Israel’s most important ally could very well startle some of the smaller parties and their leaders with whom Prime Minister Netanyahu is currently in negotiations.

“This raises the question, of course, if the administration intends to undermine Prime Minister Netanyahu’s efforts to assemble a coalition by suggesting a change to our longstanding policy of supporting Israel’s position with the United Nations.”

Hold on a second. Cotton is now concerned about U.S. officials “undermining” foreign officials “currently in negotiations”?

Seriously?

Yep, seriously. The hypocrisy is so undeniable that Steve Benen asks if this was “intended as some kind of performance-art statement on the power of irony?” Nope. He just really is that clueless.

"Great routine by a great comic whose insights into mass foolishness should be even more ..."

Wiles: Christians in America Just Like ..."
"I see what you did there, good catch.Also, at the end of a sermon, one ..."

Christian Right Still Oblivious to Their ..."
"Heh. As I like to tell my kids and grandkids, "You gotta learn to allow ..."

Christian Right Still Oblivious to Their ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • John Pieret

    But … but … Obama is undermining Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel, which is a whole different thing than undermining a President of the United States, who is a Democrat, Muslim, Kenyan, Commie, Nazi and black!

  • StevoR

    Are we really sure he’s not one long convincing Poe?

    Y’know a “Deep Cover Liberal”* like Anne Coulter is reputed to be and all that?

    * See : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deep_cover_liberal

  • gshelley

    I can’t help but think some of these people from the religious right think they are required to put Israeli interests first, even ahead of the US.

  • Trebuchet

    @3: Of course they are. That’ll help to bring about Armageddon and the 2nd coming, which is the only reason they’re interested in Israel.

  • Michael Heath

    gshelley writes:

    I can’t help but think some of these people from the religious right think they are required to put Israeli interests first, even ahead of the US.

    Even worse than that, in the 2008 campaign and since then there were/are GOP leaders who advocated blind fealty to Israel. Regardless of what policies Israel promoted, it was the duty of the U.S. to slavishly submit to carrying out a supportive role. Sarah Palin was one of the most prevalent that had me monitoring this emerging phenomena.

  • gshelley

    How do they get away with it? Do they see israel and the US so strongly linked that what is good for Israel will always be good for the US (though I wonder how they cope with changes in government and policy in Israel), ir that God will bless any nation that does what Israel wants, so it is always in the US best interests to do so. Or as #4 suggested, they don’t really care about benefiting the US, they just want the world ready for armageddon?

  • lorn

    Should the Jews be accepting of Christian fundamentalist help? As I understand the fundamentalist world view is that, in the final days, all the Jews either convert to Christianity, or die. Which may explain some of the the discrepancy.

    Messing with the talks with Iran, ostensibly to keep them from getting nuclear weapons, might very well be seen as a method of making sure they have nuclear weapons. Iran nuking Israel would seem to be advancing the Armageddon story line. Millions of nuked Jews means millions fewer that have to be converted or killed.

    Similarly, working to keep Netanyahu in high office helps maintain the conflict between Israel and Iran, and other surrounding nations.

    The two acts seem contradictory but they may be all part of the same plan to advance the timeline to Armageddon. The big question for me is why the people of Iran and Israel, or the US for that manner, would want to pick up the scripts they didn’t write, stand on the marks on a stage they didn’t chose, read the lines for a part they didn’t ask for, and participate in a play which ends with all of them dead and the Christians in the audience giving a standing ovation.

  • Michael Heath

    gshelley writes:

    How do they get away with it? Do they see israel and the US so strongly linked that what is good for Israel will always be good for the US . . .

    It’s been a long time since I’ve encountered a Republican who was demonstrably motivated by improved results, with only a handful of exceptions (MI’s gov. Rick Snyder).

    Whenever I encounter the stereotypical Republican arguing for a better result, it is almost always a popular set of conservatives talking points where experts argue employing such would lead to worse results. Again with a handful of modern-day exceptions.

  • felidae

    Oh, Tommy, don’t get so upset that Obama won’t go smoochy-smoochy on Bibi’s kiester like you want him to! Just because you want the Israelis to have veto power over our foreign policy is no reason to throw a tantrum