President Obama defends the Iran nuclear deal. Photo: Screenshot.

President Barack Obama’s often-bitter attack strategy on the Iran nuclear deal has enfeebled the very merits of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action he has sought to defend before Congress, an editorial in the Washington Post said on Wednesday.

“By not sticking to the merits of the deal, Mr. Obama implies a lack of confidence in them,” wrote the Post‘s editorial board.

The editorial chided the president for attacking critics who believe the nuclear deal legitimizes Iran to become a nuclear threshold state while not demanding any sort of steps toward regional moderation up-front through “certitude” and ad hominem attacks, especially against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Republican caucus, which Obama compared to hardliners in Iran who also want to scuttle the deal.

The editorial noted that the president’s attacks against some Republicans was disingenuous, as he had warmly praised  Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-TN) just a few months back for being “sincerely concerned about this issue,” calling him a “good and decent man.”

The Post also rebuked the White House for vindictively turning its back on New York Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer — a likely contender to replace Harry Reid (D-NV) as Senate Democratic leader — encouraging Democrats to “deny him the job” after the senator penned a 1,700-word treatise on why he respectfully opposed the administration’s nuclear deal with Iran.

House Republican Majority leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) meanwhile said there was a chance Congress could gather enough Democratic votes to override Obama’s veto should the House and Senate vote to reject the Iran deal and leave sanctions in place, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday. Speaking from Jerusalem, Israel, McCarthy said with Schumer and Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) leading the way, the prospects of Congress killing the agreement were more viable.