Many of the Democrats denouncing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech next week to a special joint session of Congress as an intrusion into U.S. domestic politics leapt to their feet in 2010 when then-Mexican President Felipe Calderon, in a similar address to Congress in 2010, slammed U.S. immigration laws and called for immigration reform. Calderon also drew a standing ovation from Democrats when he slammed Arizona’s own immigration law.

That address is forgotten today by the likes of Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), who has announced her decision to join the minority of Democrats boycotting Netanyahu’s speech. (Full disclosure: I ran against Schakowsky in 2010). Schakowsky has explained her decision in a bizarre Huffington Post article in which she makes the essentially racist claim that she cannot be anti-Israel because of her “DNA,” then goes on to offer two extremely weak justifications for her boycott.

The first is that the talks must be allowed to continue even “if there is only a small chance that an agreement can be reached that will prevent Iran from building, perhaps within months, a nuclear weapon.” But that ship has sailed. Under the terms currently being discussed, Iran would be poised just months away from developing a nuclear weapon. And Iran has used the cover of ongoing talks–extended now a year past the original deadline Obama promised–to build its nuclear capacity.

Schakowsky denies that. She claims that “Iran has essentially halted its weapons program under the Joint Plan of Action while the talks are ongoing.” That is completely false, and is contradicted by the most recent report of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which noted that while Iran has complied with some of the interim agreements conditions on nuclear enrichment, the Iranian regime continues to hide the specifically military portion of its nuclear program.

Second, Schakowsky argues that the speech compounds “the damage that has been done to bi-partisan support for Israel.” That is rich, coming from an early supporter of the far-left J Street organization, which has tried to move Congress to the left on Israel issues. Schakowsky knows well that the reason bipartisan support for Israel is threatened is that Democrats are less supportive of Israel than they once were. The one-sided opposition to the Netanyahu speech is further evidence.

When Democrats, then in control of both houses of Congress, invited Calderon to address the legislature, they knew full well that he would insert himself into a contentious debate about American domestic policy. He did so in the ugliest way possible, accusing Arizona of racism in trying to protect a border that Mexico has failed to secure on its own side. The empty arguments presented by Schakowsky and her ilk cannot hide their betrayal of Israel and their partisan hypocrisy.

Senior Editor-at-Large Joel B. Pollak edits Breitbart California and is the author of the new ebook, Wacko Birds: The Fall (and Rise) of the Tea Party, available for Amazon Kindle.

Follow Joel on Twitter: @joelpollak