r/politics • u/masterchief6913 • Jul 15 '26

No Paywall Fetterman warns he would leave Democratic Party if it turns its back on Israel

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5970730-john-fetterman-democratic-party-israel/
19.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

4.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3.8k

u/chipmunksocute Jul 15 '26

For real like...how is THIS the defining issue for him? Israel does fuck all for US Citizens.  Ill bet data centers and health care are way more relevant issues for his constituents than giving israel free money.

1.4k

u/horceface Indiana Jul 16 '26

It's not an issue. It's a justification.

550

u/ayeroxx Jul 16 '26

bye fatfuck

309

u/clarkkentsson Jul 16 '26

ratfuck*

73

u/browsingat_work Jul 16 '26

I've heard it both ways...

29

u/gravemistakes Jul 16 '26

You know that's right.

22

u/Justin_Queso1187 Jul 16 '26

Now let’s go get some jerk chicken nachos. And a pineapple milk shake.

18

u/DankStew Jul 16 '26

C’mon son!

2

u/gotroot801 Jul 16 '26

...and this is my partner, Hummingbird Saltalamacchia.

1

u/----__---- Jul 16 '26

Mm.. Mom?

-1

u/Jibtech Jul 16 '26

Ive heard it bowlth ways brotha

0

u/The108ers Jul 16 '26

Why not both?

1

u/rumster Illinois Jul 16 '26

hey now... us fatties have nothing to do with it. Leave fat out of it.

290

u/Wiccy Jul 16 '26

I say let him leave, he's been a turn coat since the stroke.

227

u/Intrepid_Blue122 Jul 16 '26

Which may indicate that brain damage will make you think like a Republican. Poor soul.

51

u/TrulyOutrageous42 Jul 16 '26

Brain damage causes a change in the amount of engagement, but does not itself (as a broad concept) make one conservative. However, there are biological differences in how brains work that massively predict political alignment, and damage to certain areas could very reasonable cause that change to being conservative, especially if it causes an increased perception of threats or diminished critical reasoning skills.

20

u/theguidetoldmetodoit Jul 16 '26

Apparently the biggest study on the topic:

Researchers observed no change in political ideology or party affiliation

16

u/angryapplepanda Oregon Jul 16 '26

All the better. It makes more sense that Fetterman is an opportunist. I'm not saying that some people haven't changed their politics from a brain injury, but I think it's probably very rare. Some people really will just do anything to get elected.

3

u/Much_Possession1227 Jul 16 '26

He really did play the voters he's only ever been a wolf in sheep's clothing. But it's hard to tell who would be worse him or Oz as a senator.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fetterman-defends-pulling-shotgun-black-jogger-2013-explains-why-he-would-would-not-do-now

3

u/The108ers Jul 16 '26

People change their politics due to age as well or other influences. Don't let people use ableism both as an excuse for behavior or as an attack for one's behavior. Fetterman is just a POS, end of story. I have brain damage, I type bad, speak wrong/stutter sometimes but I didn't became a fascist, rightwing bootlicker from it.

2

u/angryapplepanda Oregon Jul 16 '26

Agree. I mean, there's multiple spectrums of brain damage, and I'm sure that a person's personality can be altered significantly depending on how it happens or where.

But I would love anyone to give me an actual example of this that isn't just completely explainable by the person simply being a opportunistic dickbag before and after the injury.

I'm sorry for your injury. My partner had brain surgery several years back. He didn't become a Republican.

2

u/The108ers Jul 16 '26

Right. I have damage in my frontal left lobe, pretty small but brains are complicated. It's right in the middle of my speech center so messes with words obviously. I would argue if Fetterman's brain damage was so severe his whole life view changed he'd look a lot more pathetic and sloppy than he does already. I think he's just a fat, lazy, lying opportunist. that's it, not complicated.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/The108ers Jul 16 '26

Sorry to hear about your partner, glad it seemed to work out? A family member of mine had brain surgery recently and so they tested me for the same cancer/tumor and while I didn't have it or need brain surgery (thank god) they did find another issue and reasons for some of my speech symptoms and headaches.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/theguidetoldmetodoit Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

Well, he is a very special case. Most people don't have to structure their identity around politics. They have a lot of room to re-evaluate their life, without it being about something external and abstract and hinge their politics on a handful of core issues. But that's not what politics is, to a politician. For him, it's a matter of economic survival.

Which absolutely is opportunistic, but also just a reflection of the shift in the political landscape. I think it makes sense that someone who was anti-establishment against someone like Hillary, would try to find more allies and security elsewhere, after losing a lot of sense of security in other aspects of his life.

4

u/Eccohawk Jul 16 '26

Mildly interesting, but the way it was conducted feels like it leaves a lot to be desired. They basically found a group of veterans with brain injuries and asked them to recall if they had different political views prior to their injuries from 40-45 years ago. I feel like I would have a hard time even remembering that in the first place, let alone adding in a brain injury. That said, kinda hard to build a control group and just sorta hope some of them damage their brains at some point down the line so you get the necessary data.

1

u/theguidetoldmetodoit Jul 16 '26

Totally, I should have pointed out that I only did a superficial search and didn't find much on the topic, indicating that it's just understudied.

However, they measured their brain activity during those questions to see if the affected brain regions lit up. So it's more that questions about party affiliation did not register in a way that suggest, it's something that was affected by their injuries.

4

u/spez_might_fuck_dogs Jul 16 '26

So you’re saying that being a stupid coward is a pretty large indication of being a Republican?

2

u/Intrepid_Blue122 Jul 16 '26

These days every indication is pointing towards that, is it not?

2

u/TrulyOutrageous42 Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

I think that's a bit reductive, but it is absolutely the case that studies on brain activity in people who hold very strong leftist or regressive views on society are extremely different, with leftists showing increased activity in areas tied to empathy and critical reasoning while regressives show increased activity in areas linked to threat perception, fear, and preferences for social hegemony. Notably, conservatives on average have notably larger amygdalas, which is the part of the brain responsible for reacting with fear and derision of "others".

It's also separately the case that many conservative ideologies (not specific points but the overarching meta-level ideological platforms and policies taken as a whole) are based on a lack of critical thinking, notably when they hold self-contradictory viewpoints, and that on average conservatives are significantly less educated when it comes to higher reasoning skills that are typically taught in college/university. It's worth noting that the primary reason people end up "liberal/leftist" after going to college is due to having POSITIVE experiences with the targets of their bias that cause them to begin to have self-critical analysis of their preconceptions, resulting in a more worldly approach to concepts in the future because they're now aware they've been wrong before.

Of course, maybe hypocrisy is the point and pretending they are unaware is the flex, but many people are just normal folks trying to get by and do the right thing but they're running on autopilot with bad information.

1

u/The108ers Jul 16 '26

Thanks for this. I have brain damage and I never changed my views on big picture things. Personally I find the original commentor's comment incredible ignorant and insulting. Fetterman is just a lying asshole, don't let a health issue form as an excuse for him lying to and betraying his constituents.

2

u/antharosa Jul 16 '26

"may"?! Republicans were human once but they got mugged or had a TBI

2

u/chibiusa40 Jul 16 '26

I had a stroke in 2020. I had to re-learn how to read, write, speak, and understand my native language, but you know what I didn't have to re-learn? How not to be a racist piece of shit.

Enough of the "Conservatives are only Conservatives because of brain damage" rhetoric. It's a lazy trope that not only implies that Conservatives have no agency in their decision-making processes, but is also pretty fucking ableist.

1

u/ImSoObnoxious Jul 16 '26

what having a stroke and getting AIPAC money does to a mf

1

u/The108ers Jul 16 '26

I have brain damage, it most certainly does not make you change political thought and is quite an ignorant and insulting statement for you to make. Maybe, he was always just a fat, lying POS. Take your preconceived notions about people's health conditions and GTFO.

67

u/Temporary_Hawk_9061 Jul 16 '26

I don’t buy it, he was never actually a guy who was going to be progressive in any sense of the word. Just a good campaigner

62

u/ShimbyHimbo Jul 16 '26

I'm not confident he could be called a good campaigner either. He had a terrible opponent and an easy angle of making Dr Oz look like a super wealthy, out of touch, non-Pennsylvanian. Some of the best campaign material was the crudite, go back to New Jersey shit.

3

u/Drama79 Jul 16 '26

When your job is "be the less gross sack of shit", and your best qualifier is "JK I am just as shitty I can just mask it better" you know you need better candidate vetting.

4

u/NGEFan Jul 16 '26

He won his primary though.

1

u/ImCreeptastic Jul 16 '26

I voted for Connor Lamb. I think he was too bland, Fetterman definitely campaigned better.

32

u/zherok Jul 16 '26

He's kinda backing himself into the same corner Sinema did. Like you can annoy Democrats by being a bad Democrat, sure. But that's generally the limit of your cross-over appeal with the opposition party (and at the expense of your appeal with the party you're ostensibly a member of.)

If he switched parties I have to wonder why Republicans would want him over a MAGA Republican candidate they almost certainly can draw from.

I remember hearing rumors of Sinema being told she could win running as an independent in Arizona, and eventually run for President along the same lines of thinking. But there's not really a thing as independents who exist completely outside of the two party binary, they're more than likely going to favor one over the other. Alienating the Democrats didn't open up some magical third way path, it just pissed off the people who wanted her in there in the first place. And Fetterman is following a pretty similar route here.

1

u/ABadHistorian Jul 16 '26

I actually think it's unfortunate we don't have a centrist party folks can be a part of, I find it a valuable tool for the society. We have a right wing party and a far right party. You can run as an independent (kind of) but only in a few states and if you run far to the left (sanders).

Our current party system is broken by money.

10

u/zherok Jul 16 '26

I'd have to hear a coherent description of what the center is supposed to be, because there's not some logical middle point between policies like universal healthcare and deport all foreigners.

But I've heard centrist takes like, "if only progressives dropped trans people from their policies." Which is awful. The Overton window shifts inexorably right despite the shitshow that is the Republican party in full power, but it feels like the left is expected to capitulate as an opening move, like that's meaningful compromise.

I do think there's room for compromise. In New York City we're bound to see reality confront what Mamdani wants to do in office, but I still think he can do a lot of good. I'm all out of fucks to give over centrist civility and being agreeable with the right.

0

u/ABadHistorian Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

Well theoretically I'm a centrist, and I have a trans family member (or did before they passed away), so that's easy. You just don't get my viewpoint represented by politics, because our 2 party system breaks us apart into tribal factions.

Centrist viewpoint - embrace all social/individual rights, government has no place in an individuals life. Gay, straight, religious, not. All equal to us.

Fiscal policies - need to be a managed view of the international political realities - this means we can't unilaterally embrace unions unless we accept that means we have to change how we deal with trade with China/India (this is a big one most liberal progressives ignore, for example Trump's tariffs have made a lot of progressives run away from the Tariff and even attack it when unfortunately they forget Obama used them, as did Biden, and targeted tariffs are necessary (just you know, not on penguins)

The problem is a lot of my viewpoints are actually described as leftist/progressive by american media, due to that same overton window you are talking about, and you've got people running in the DSA who are wiping the internet of their old comments (defund the police, 100% embrace of unions regardless of economic realities), because they need to try to use the "DSA" tag and mislead a lot of voters into ignoring that component (which is "eh" to me, because I welcome a change in government, we've had really bad Democratic and Republican administrations, the DSA deserves a chance to fuck it up too).

But that's not my ideal government. I do not want corporate simps either though, but a realistic politician who deals with realities on the ground, internationally and domestic. I believe corporate money corrupts the process (and indeed that's why we have no centrists in politics today, just corrupt corpocrats).

I think you've been lied to and told that these folks are centrist, and they've stolen my ideology and used it as a mask for their corruption. You are right that meaningful compromise is proving impossible, but that's a case for political reform (that could include a real centrist party)

At the end of the day I believe radical change in either direction (right or left) creates instability, and that it's by wise stewardship of the middle that we avoid civil conflict. I am a historian and I base this on my view of the past with great specificity and depth.

In my ideal view of democracy as we have it, it entails multiparty rule with certain guidelines to ensure long term consistent stability that most democracies world wide dont have (major campaign finance reform, alongside paradox of tolerance checks and balances (to enable that parties that ensure hatred do not have an ability to rise, those are counter productive to society), but enabling for Right-wing parties that include favoritism to the elite/1%/ideas of fiscal trickle down economics and general principles that the few are better stewards than the many.

Then room for my view point of social openness but fiscal moderation (but not to the degree of right-wing opponents) while embracing social democracy style domestic programs (I've been to Finland/etc and really enjoyed their governmental system, they have a pretty centrist government, for all that it's called socialist by some).

Then room for the more left/progressive communal ideas that enable and benefit groups of workers to represent themselves under whatever manner they deem fit. Social collectivism essentially, and all the desires that come with those various wings of the more left ideologies.

By no means would it need to be limited to 3. I know Europe has issues as well with multiparties, and I would not use their democracies as a base but an example to learn from.

We as a society have pivoted between extreme collectivism and extreme free market dominated societies (I'll allow for the argument that true collectivism has never been truly even attempted but that's a separate conversation) and neither is healthy in my POV. I believe a centrist viewpoint allows for individual ambition to be an outlet/driving factor for society while also allowing for communal groups to represent those who would prefer that. These two wings often see their opposing views as mortally and ideologically incompatible, but I argue we need a mix of them and that's where I sit.

There is definitely a mistake that centrists have to be "ignorant of civil rights" that's just stupid branding by stupid politicians. A good politician will ask why his opponent is focused on dividing groups into haves and have nots, while he is trying to help all to the best of his ability regardless of identity/etc.

For a specific example of my centrist policies - I believe we can embrace individual rights while making things as fair as possible for the individuals and their views. Look to Male/Female sports. I believe, as the son of an ex-rugby player who underwent transition later in life, that sports needs to be handled on a case by case basic to make sure it is fair, because ultimately it is the experience that they undergo as kids which is most important because that'll define their lives, and fairness comes in many forms depending on the situation, I believe a one - size - fits all rule is stupid, and that anyone left or right that gives you one is lying to you and selling you an easy answer - but generally republicans attack this issue and democrats either run from it or fully embrace positions that frankly rub ME wrong because otherwise we wouldn't have male/female sports (but also I really enjoy embracing different sporting conventions entirely, and uni-sex games with team make ups of the team's personal choice suits me absolutely fine, if a team of guys want to play in a soccer tourny, cool, if all girls, cool, if mixed, cool - that's my preference, what THEY choose. But hey, I'm a game developer that believes the user given choice is always the best option)

But a lot of people would consider me a progressive for some of my points, others would consider me a conservative! that just goes to show why I need a place to really hang my hat. And those like me.

6

u/zherok Jul 16 '26

I agree there's definitely a sort of takeover of the term centrist by a bunch of guys who seem to exist mostly to scold leftists for being unrealistic as we continue cuts to social programs, explosive growth of our military, and tax cuts for the rich. It's an argument for a sort of perpetual status quo. We wouldn't want things to get better too fast, so any change must be slow, and when Republicans knock the Jenga tower down with a wrecking ball, we still have to meet them halfway like they're a reasonable argument.

It honestly feels more like an anti-left than any meaningful middle. But it's like, a lot of the Democratic party, right? There's like a dozen Atlantic or New York Times articles at any given time fixated on what DSA victories really mean about what people want, or how bad they are for the party and country, and a time when Donald Trump is President and Republicans have abandoned all pretense of responsibility. There's a concerted move to allow Trump to create uncitizens, but you know it's more important we talk about how unrealistic it is for Mamdani to bring free buses to New York.

There's an earnest argument to have about his transportation aims, or any number of similar things, but they seem more urgently concerned about them than what say, DOGE's aid cuts mean to several hundred thousand people who are likely to die from them.

1

u/ABadHistorian Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

I think the problem in some of this comes from - when folks criticize components of the left, or ideology they either assume or take for granted that they criticize Trump as well, or some of that criticism may not come across. (I criticize democrats for the corruption in the party and how it lost the workers, and I have been embraced by some and attacked by others, one of the most common refrains "What about Trump" - well folks, what about him? He didn't come from no where. We had 8 years of Obama before Trump, if we did EVERYTHING RIGHT we wouldn't have him now would we? So let's analyze what we did wrong.

The media's handling of Trump has made it easy for people to dismiss any moderating influence. I proposition to you, this is entirely the fault of the 1% of the 1% who are the ones who actually own most of that media you are talking about, and part of the problem and corruption in the moment we are living in. For example, I sometimes agree on a theoretical level with a lot of the Atlantic articles I know you are talking about because I read them. Sometimes I go, yeah you may be right but you aren't going to win this argument right now because of WHO YOU ARE and HOW YOU ARE TALKING to people who are suffering now. While also not understanding that every time they attack a democrat in a magazine some person may only see the attack of the democrats, and not the attacks on Trump. These articles live in a fairy land where hard choices do not have to be made, and heaven forbid people decide to make a new choice after years of shitty options... even if it's another shitty option.

To those Manhattan based writers in the Atlantic, if you see this- Cool, you don't like the (imho admittedly shitty options of the) DSA? Then actually go out there and run on something substantial (like some of my points here) or shut the hell up and get out of the way of the DSA, or just toss advice towards them (like I do, because ultimately even if I think they've been misguided in the past it doesn't mean they'll continue to be ... at least a significant amount of them seem to care for the idea of human rights and that's a start, if they betray it (like Democratic Senator Menendez did when he covered for his wife's murder, and took gold bars and new cars from Turkey as bribes) then we will kick em to the curb, ideally (unlike what Democrats did with Senator Menendez for YEARS despite removing Al Franken over a photo (an awful one I'll grant you, but in my centrist opinion, not worthy of removing him) in a matter of days.)

They are trying to reverse the unprecedented decades of upward mobility and replace the middle class and lower 99% of the 1% (IYKYK) with subservient labor. They openly talk about this. These are the people who own the AI companies and newspapers and invest in everything bilaterally and all intertwined fortunes running on loans and debt. (again, IYKYK... anyone who has been around the 1% of the 1% knows what I'm talking about)

So the people who are claiming they are centrist, and who you are labeling and using as centrist - are not.

They are in my parlance, useful tools for the corporations to present easy options for people who think like me, but do not have the time to research the backgrounds of their candidates, to vote for.

Thereby making more progressive voters (like yourself I'm assuming, correct if I'm wrong!) very liable to hate the very term and consider me, by default, probably someone you want to disagree with off the bat.

Imho this is VERY corrosive for society in the long run. If I was to be put on the spot, I'd argue that the Roman Empire suffered these periods in great numbers as it became more and more decadent and corrupt and then had periods of reform, and then corrupt again... because we are humans and anything we build we can break. I think right now we are in a breaking period for American society, and we have to determine are we going to allow our lack of trust in each other to determine the future? Or are we going to have hope that somehow we can come together?

As a historian I approach everyone with the knowledge they have their bias, and that doesn't make them or me right or wrong at the end of the day on any real given issue. But unless we want to kill each other (which I consider an absolute NO, I'm an EXTREME pacifist who believes violence does NOT create progress in any way shape or form and oh baby I got the historical records to prove it if people want to toy with me on this), compromise is the end goal. Be wary of all the people out there today convincing you compromise is impossible, but I understand skepticism - especially as I've told you people are using my viewpoint as a mask. (Especially the Sinema's, Fetterman... eugh, I'd have to speak to him. I know a lot of people who know the second we cut funding to Israel, there is a high chance it could cease to exist, and that would potentially create another type of genocide - I think honestly a middle road needs to exist, of an international peacekeeping force to divide the sides. I have been a LONG time supporter of Israel, for so many reasons, and yet they've continually proven that they do not deserve my unyielding support, they are murdering civilians and that is beyond the pale).

I'm probably a "Radical" Centrist by some terms, in that some of my beliefs are radical by modern day parlance, but they'd ensure a much more stable long term future then continually careening to the right (like we have legally since I was born pretty much) or going to full communal collectivism (I just have fundamental philosophical principles that disagree with this, and unfortunately a lot of DSA members embraced points - in ignorance I truly believe, ignorance and their own deeply held biases and beliefs (this does not make them morally wrong or anything, and indeed I think I'd love it if their beliefs were generally correct, but I think I am proof positive they aren't, because I don't fully hold them and like my own selfish desires - if that makes sense)

I'm very worried instead the mass of the most flexible voters are beginning to lean towards a hatred of the incumbency - they blame whoever is in power NOW (political elections world wide have borne this out since Covid, and I'm hesitant to say it's an absolute fact for future elections, but it could very well be), and that's very worrisome too for long term stability, and why we need to figure out how to have a more stable government for long term prosperity STAT.

6

u/sixtyandaquarter Jul 16 '26

People forget he didn't become a huge name because people loved him, it was because he was against doctor oz at a time when every single seat really, really, like no I fucking mean it, really mattered. He just happened to be literally the opposite of the worst choice. He could have been almost anyone. Wasn't progressive, a good campaigner, wasn't particularly well doing, just not Dr oz.

But he legitimately took a sharp turn right after the stroke, and brain damage to specific parts of the brain which would get damaged via stroke do make you more combative, paranoid & contrarian.

1

u/Okoruk Jul 16 '26

Camperfood

1

u/CommonConundrum51 Jul 16 '26

Misrepresenting your views and positions isn't being a good campaigner, it's being a liar and committing fraud upon the electorate.

3

u/auandi Jul 16 '26

No, he has always always been like this about Israel. It just didn't come up in 2022 because no one cared before October 7th. He was considered by his colleges stubborn, self-involved, and unwilling to work well with others. That is why "the establishment" didn't back him in the primary, they thought he would make a bad Senator.

The establishment is not always wrong.

2

u/PhilDGlass California Jul 16 '26

He’s been gone since his brain backfired.

4

u/Sufficient_Photo7240 Jul 16 '26

OMG u mean braindead 😭

1

u/aculady Jul 16 '26

It affects which party has control of Congress.

1

u/SM311 Jul 16 '26

Nah. It just made him forget to lie about being a plant in the first place. He hoodwinked PA voters.

1

u/Yoshi2shi Jul 16 '26

He’s been a dipshit before the stroke. The population ignored it. Even still it made no sense to elect a person that experienced a stroke and could hardly function into Congress without his health improving.

0

u/boulderbuford Jul 16 '26

"let him leave"?

What, because you love the idea of having all of Trump's cabinet nazis rubber stamped by ass-kissing republicans in the senate?

39

u/well_shoothed Jul 16 '26

Yep. Don't let the door hitchya where the good lord splitchya.

2

u/AnybodyMassive1610 Florida Jul 16 '26

Protecting his gravy train, not his constituents.

2

u/Hesychios Jul 16 '26

Yeah, probably an excuse more than a reason.

2

u/mammiejammie Virginia Jul 16 '26

Right? I LOATHE what Jewish ppl went through w Hitler. It was disgustingly abhorrent that the US waited so long to join in on the fight. It’s also not right to settle into Palestine and murder and bully and run other ppl away. I mean - wtf?!? I’m not even religious. I am a humanitarian though.

1

u/Montgomery000 Jul 16 '26

It's theater, it just lets him, down the line, say to an interviewer, "oh, when the Democrats turned against Israel, our closest ally in the Middle East, I just had to reject them and become a Republican." Instead of "I was always an imposter pretending to be a Democrat, and when they got tired of me, I found just any excuse to leave."

236

u/Cagnazzo82 Jul 16 '26

Because he was a plant from the beginning.

These people steal votes by talking a good game and lying to their constituents... and then they spend 90% of the of the time representing a foreign country above said constituents.

1000% fuck him.

32

u/NGEFan Jul 16 '26

Fetterman didn't really lie though, even before the brain damage and from the very start he talked about being very for Israel and for fracking and for fracking and for fracking. Still though, fuck him.

13

u/SM311 Jul 16 '26

Agree! He was always a “moderate”, and his past was riddled with righty declarations.
Was worried about him being a DINO all along. But he exceeded expectations and turned out to be full fascist.

3

u/Any_Will_86 Jul 16 '26

He was recruited/hired a progressive communications team and the left wing of the party went gaga. Its the same folks who worked with Platner and one in particular (katz) is on staff with Mamdani. Morrs Katz has some interviews out thier discussing how much leeway he had to create his online persona. So everyone saw a gruff guy and boilerplate lefty content and jumped fown the rabbit hole. The waring signs were already there. Its frustrating how this never happens to Rs. And how much better we would have been served by Conor Lamb,

2

u/idiotsecant Jul 16 '26

I don't think it's that simple, I think this is an actual case of massive brain damage changing someone's personality. He had all kinds of staffers that left after his injury when he got more and more paranoid and delusional. It would be sad if he wasn't messing up the lives of so many people

2

u/whimsycantrash Jul 16 '26

no it wasn't until 2022 when he had his stroke that turned him into a vegetable

167

u/Callistoux Jul 16 '26

He and Schumer have to periodically make a public reaffirming statement on their loyalty to Israel. Its never because its a topic that is brought up, its because they ask for the question so they can make the statement publicly to get their stipend.

65

u/Particular_Light_296 Jul 16 '26

Bribe*

2

u/m0nkyman Canada Jul 16 '26

Future favours.

They don’t take the bribes now. They get appointed to boards after.

10

u/Constant-Machine8838 Jul 16 '26

Take Hakeem too.

9

u/tezacer Jul 16 '26

And the media keep pushing like "do you believe in Israel's right to exist?" And if you even hint at saying no, they scandal you out of the public forever. Like why is it our problem whether Israel continues to exist? What kind of existence are we supporting? One that thinks genocide is all good since Palestinians aren't considered people.

2

u/Practical-Ball1437 Jul 16 '26

I'm Secretary of State, brought to you by Carl's Jr.

Why do you keep saying that?

Because they pay me everytime I do.

0

u/treletraj Jul 16 '26

Sounds legit.

0

u/fcocyclone Iowa Jul 16 '26

One of the many times i go "i'd prefer the idiocracy version".

At least reaffirming his support for Carls Jr wouldnt some with a side of genocide.

2

u/Random-Generation86 Jul 16 '26

As much as I hate to defend Fetterman in any way, the most recent Fetterletter (as of yesterday or today) did actually cover a data center moratorium that he supported. I am subscribed to the Fetterletter because I sent him an email calling him a "stupid son of a bitch" and urging him to resign. I cannot unsubscribe, AFAICT

2

u/Infinite-Ad4512 Jul 16 '26

Does fuck all? Have some respect! They are the leading cause of American tourism to the Middle East, all expenses paid by the Department of War

2

u/DaraParsavand California Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

It's crazy I agree. He does have brain damage obviously and so doesn't think completely coherently. But for those that do, I'd say a common thread is you have to "other" the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. They are not human and we must side with Israel to destroy them. People won't say that out loud (most won't anyway), but they think it. There are some other possible justifications like religious nut cases who see Israel as necessary for a story to play out that they think simply MUST play out (as if their God couldn't figure out alternate ways of doing things).

Our only hope is to win enough races to get to at least 52 including King and Sanders and then you won't hear about Fetterman defecting because Rs will offer him nothing unless he is the key to flipping the Senate back to them. I assume King (and of course Sanders) and all other D senators except Fetterman are at no risk of doing the actual despicable move (and no Rs are coming over to the D side), so 52 should do it. But I'll gladly take more. Maybe SC is more in play now. I want it all - TX, AK, ME, MI, OH, IA, NE, SC, KY, GA, NC, FL as well as all the states that look like sure things (OR, CO, NM, MN, IL, VA, MA, RI, NJ, DE, NH). That would get us to 58. (Wow, hard to believe we once had a filibuster proof majority)

2

u/NewWindow7980 Jul 16 '26

Track AIPAC says total Israel lobby contributions $487,491

2

u/Random-Generation86 Jul 16 '26

That's not even that much! WHY ARE POLITICIANS SO CHEAP TO BRIBE!? THE FUCKING MAYOR OF NEW YORK WAS BRIBED WITH AIRLINE TICKETS TO TURKEY

1

u/honjuden Jul 16 '26

Former mayor at this point.

2

u/Loud-Vacation-5691 Georgia Jul 16 '26

What's crazy is how Israel has become the litmus test for Democrats.

-1

u/RodChainFurlongAcre Jul 16 '26

It's also crazy how many Democratic politicians fail this simple litmus test that roughly 80% of the base support.

2

u/identifytarget Jul 16 '26

He's brain damaged, literally.

1

u/InternationalWin2850 Jul 16 '26

Sounds like a win-win.

1

u/YouWereBrained Tennessee Jul 16 '26

It’s not. It’s just the excuse he’s going with. Dude is an opportunist.

1

u/DennisTheBald Jul 16 '26

Does he have coattails on his gum shorts? Like he does anything for people or the party. He's the lazy lazy dog of much renown

1

u/Shrike1346 Jul 16 '26

You know which country does have healthcare?

1

u/childroid New Jersey Jul 16 '26

Absolutely agree, especially since it was the progressives who voted him into office in the first place. Y'know, the same people he betrayed. He's gone.

1

u/Interesting-Ad470 Jul 16 '26

Just follow the Money!!!!

1

u/onarainyafternoon Oregon Jul 16 '26

I mean, to be fair, Israel is a defining issue for tons of people even on the Far Left, even though it is maybe 4th or 5th place in terms of relevance to what would improve American lives. Healthcare, wealth inequality, free college, home ownership; these are just issues off the top of my head that would effect vastly more Americans for the better than the fact that we have our Middle East foreign policy tangled with Israel. Not that I’m pro-Israel or anything; I just think that some Leftists get way too lost in the sauce with Israel so to speak.

1

u/NL_A Jul 17 '26

Neither do the countries we send USAID payments to. You know what’s so funny? You guys eat your own at the drop of a hat. People have been ragging on him and got all sorts of shit for it for years and here you guys are, pushing someone back over the line to where real people are. Did enough to grift his way into politics by looking and acting like most of his voter base, and it resonated because you all felt seen- unkempt, no decorum, sloppy, lacking in self belief, and you guys gobbled it up.

1

u/Sea_Statistician8940 Jul 16 '26

Bingo. What the fuck has Israel ever done for us? I am not and will never be an anti-semite, but I want a drastic reduction (or all-out cessation) of monetary aide to Israel and an end to their lobbyists buying and influencing our government officials. Beyond that, Israel can fuck off for all I care, but the United States' relationship with Israel s almost completely one-sided in Israel's favor and I can no longer tolerate that given their government's behavior.

0

u/ogredmenace Jul 16 '26

It’s what Israel pays for him I mean does for him

0

u/crispycritter1856 Jul 16 '26

Israel pays him off, that's why

0

u/lazyFer Jul 16 '26

He has a foreign agent Israeli as a handler ffs

0

u/Showme-themoney Jul 16 '26

Wouldn’t be surprised if Israel/Mossad has blackmail on him.

0

u/sulaymanf New York Jul 16 '26

Worse, Israel literally kills US citizens repeatedly and does nothing about it. The military and settlers kill American reporters and the Israeli government arrests nobody for it.

0

u/heartandmarrow Jul 16 '26

He’s very pro-data center. He thinks we need them to “keep up with China”. 🙄

0

u/Sparkleton Jul 16 '26

He has brain damage. They psyop him with every dollar, troll house, DM, and celebrity or politician available until he thinks it’s the most important issue in the world and Israel is the good guy.

He has a TBI and they literally are curating a separate universe for him to exist in. He has no idea what’s going on in the real world.

This sustained targeted attack on a mentally vulnerable politician is a fraction of the cost of one bomb.

0

u/SageDarius Jul 16 '26

I did a cursory search, and apparently Israel didn't even send troops to help us in Afganistan or Iraq after 9/11. So Isreal has done less to help us than NATO, but NATO are the useless leaches and Israel needs to be integrated into our military chain apparently.

0

u/psychotichorse California Jul 16 '26

How will he keep getting his AIPAC checks if he doesn’t shill for an apartheid state though? He only has a couple more years to cash those checks before Pennsylvanians send him packing.

0

u/giant_xquid Jul 16 '26

John Fetterman PA-SEN [D]

Israel Lobby Total: $487,491

PACs: $264,418 IE: $223,073

https://www.trackaipac.com/congress

0

u/bloodylip Jul 16 '26

Ill bet data centers and health care are way more relevant issues for his constituents

You're correct.

0

u/snymax Jul 16 '26

Both those issues are near and dear to his heart. We’ve been funding Israel’s universal healthcare system and billionaires are actively robbing power and water from communities for these data centers. In his mind these the the constituents he worries about

0

u/blu-bells Florida Jul 16 '26

There is a photo of him wearing the Israeli flag like a fucking cape. This is a sitting "US" senator. It's been his defining issue for awhile now.

-6

u/escapefromelba Jul 16 '26

Israel provides the U.S. with high-value intelligence on Iran and other regional threats, co-develops missile defense and other military technologies, and the operational use of U.S. equipment generates real-world data that helps improve American defense systems.

It’s also one of the world’s leading tech hubs. Intel, Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, Apple, and others have major R&D operations there, and Israel is a global leader in cybersecurity, water technology, and agricultural innovation.

You can argue about how much aid the U.S. should provide, but pretending the relationship is one-sided ignores decades of intelligence, defense, and technological cooperation.

3

u/johnyordinary Jul 16 '26

The only reason they share inelligence is that they want a puppet idiot to act on it like it affects the USA in particular thousands of miles away and not in the service of a genocidal maniac on their doorstep.Previous presidents , even Dubya had the intelligence to not get directly involved in Israels warmongering and landgrabbing.

1

u/escapefromelba Jul 16 '26

Israel has provided the U.S. with actionable intelligence on terrorist organizations, Iran’s nuclear program, missile development, proxy militias, weapons smuggling, and cyber threats for decades. U.S. military and intelligence officials have consistently regarded Israel as one of America’s most valuable intelligence partners because that intelligence serves American interests.

Just as importantly, Washington has ignored or rejected Israeli requests under presidents of both parties when U.S. interests diverged. That alone undercuts the claim that the relationship exists solely to manipulate the United States.

If Trump was more receptive to certain Israeli requests than some of his predecessors, that says more about Trump’s foreign policy decisions than it does about the value of the intelligence partnership itself.

-1

u/johnyordinary Jul 16 '26

Those threats exist precicely because of Israel.

1

u/escapefromelba Jul 16 '26

They exist because of decades of U.S. involvement in the Middle East. Israel is hardly the only state Washington has chosen to back - we’ve also maintained close strategic partnerships with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, and others when it served American interests.

Reducing every U.S. decision in the region to “Israel controls America” ignores decades of U.S. geopolitical strategy that predates many of today’s issues. The U.S. has consistently supported whichever regional partners it believed advanced its own security, economic, or strategic interests.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[deleted]

1

u/escapefromelba Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

Like Trump needed blackmailing  - he’s as corrupt as they come.  And the rest of our leaders aren’t far behind. Beyond which do you really think the United States is innocent of these practices?  The US has a long record of covert interference, coups, and destabilization operations: the CIA’s role in overthrowing Mossadegh in Iran (1953) and Arbenz in Guatemala (1954), backing the coup against Allende in Chile (1973), arming and training brutal proxies in Central America in the 1980s, propping up dictators when it suited Cold War interests (Marcos, Pinochet, Mobutu), and more recent controversies like the Iraq War being launched on faulty WMD claims, drone strike civilian casualties, torture and rendition programs post-9/11, and mass surveillance revealed by Snowden.  

The idea that the U.S. is morally above Israel when it comes to projecting power abroad is hard to take seriously.

But apparently every bad decision made in Washington is really Israel pulling the strings.

-1

u/Elephant789 Jul 16 '26

Don't tell me he's against data centers too. What an asswipe!