MK Slams Left's 'Political Blindness'
Jewish Home MK Ayelet Shaked dealt scathing criticism to the political left on Friday, condemning what she said were multiple instances of bad decision-making.
"Candidates for the leadership of the left and left-wing ministers were struck blind twice: the first time in presidential elections," Shaked fired, at a political event in Tel Aviv. "The left voted for candidates who, even if they had won, would not really have made it all the way to the presidency."
"A second time the left was guilty of political blindness; while Iraq is crumbling and being conquered by an offshoot of Al Qaeda...(Finance Minister Yair) Lapid is busy giving a speech about a withdrawal from Judea and Samaria," she continued.
Shaked noted that Jewish Home's initiatives are gaining more ground in the Knesset. Specifically, she said, the idea of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria - which "was not previously a topic for political discourse" - is now being talked about by "MK Yuli Edelstein, coalition chairman Yariv Levin and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Ze'ev Elkin."
Shaked must be referring on the broad scale, as the proposal to gain sovereignty over Judea and Samaria has been picking up steam in the Knesset for several months.
Elkin himself made an impassioned argument for the move in October, stating "the Right has invested in practical Zionism: the wonderful settlement project in Judea and Samaria, the development of Jerusalem, etc., but has left statesmanship to the Left and this has been its mistake."
Shaked's remarks echo similar reflections from Jewish Home Chairman and Economics Minister Naftali Bennett, who noted on Monday that the party has made significant progress in passing landmark bills.
"Today, a year after the establishment of the government, the situation is this: the Referendum Bill has passed into law, [and] MK Ayelet Shaked's law Nation-State Law has support from the Prime Minister, and I thank him for that," he said.
"This is the bottom line of the current government: there could be another speech, another project [. . .] they could call for a withdrawal, a disengagement, or a surrender - the bottom line is important: We will do, and anyone who wants to [merely] talk - [go ahead and] talk."