Going Commando Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Only twa is defending the letter. Pretty much everyone else agreed it was a stupid thing to do. twa is willing to die fighting on any hill though, something he's made extremely clear in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Only twa is defending the letter. Pretty much everyone else agreed it was a stupid thing to do. twa is willing to die fighting on any hill though, something he's made extremely clear in this thread. I have to say I admire his constancy. He's been that guy long as I've been here and he does it in a very down homey but clever way that resonates with me anyway. We managed to get the rest of the outspoken righties to chase themselves outta here over the years. TWA doesn't rise to that bait. I appreciate that he sticks to it even if I know he's wrong...or mostly wrong. I mean this as a compliment, hope he takes it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Have their ever been a president that has been as undermined as Obama? Has there been a president that has undermined the House more then this president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Has there been a president that has undermined the House more then this president? I'll bite. Please explain how Obama has undermined the House more than any other President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Has there been a president that has undermined the House more then this president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I thought the Daily Show take on it was interesting. The Republicans are doing essentially the same thing that the Democrats did back in 2007. Both would rather play partisan politics and work with Iran than with each other. http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/ial564/under-miner just watched it. And yeah, he tears 'em both up. (Should probably have a NSFW label, though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Republicans Blame Obama For Tom Cotton LetterWASHINGTON -- Republicans, under fire for a letter signed by 47 senators to the leadership of Iran, said Tuesday that complaints about violating foreign policy convention should be leveled not at them, but at President Barack Obama. GOP lawmakers spent much of Tuesday being pressed on why Senate party leadership went around the White House with an open letter warning Iran that any nuclear agreement may be undercut in the future by Congress or Obama's successor. Several Republicans sought to distance themselves from the letter, saying that while they may not agree with the direction of nuclear talks with Iran, it was the purview of the president to conduct them. But those who support the letter -- even some who didn't add their names -- deflected the blame. If it weren't for Obama's failure to consult lawmakers about the negotiations, or his threatened veto of a proposed bill to give Congress the final vote on a nuclear agreement, senators wouldn't have had to speak out in the first place, they argued. more from the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Now, how did I know that they were going to blame Obama for their actions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 You know I look at this topic as rather funny. Ever since leaving DC the amount of time I spend following politics has lessened significantly. If I was in DC, this would be the talk of the town with my coworkers, but out here in Cali, no one really cars about this or hillary's emails. Hell many have only heard about it in passing. I have come to realize, what is important to DC is rarely important to the rest of the nation. People are far more concerned with state and local politics rather than the national mud slinging. This really is a nothing issue. Same with Hillary's emails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Actually, I would say that both this letter and Hillary's emails ought to be at least kinda important. Not really Watergate important. But enough to hurt the election chances of both. I would attribute the fact that they aren't more important, to a combination of scandal fatigue, and the generous use of the "the other side does it too" as a defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 You know I look at this topic as rather funny. Ever since leaving DC the amount of time I spend following politics has lessened significantly. If I was in DC, this would be the talk of the town with my coworkers, but out here in Cali, no one really cars about this or hillary's emails. Hell many have only heard about it in passing. I have come to realize, what is important to DC is rarely important to the rest of the nation. People are far more concerned with state and local politics rather than the national mud slinging. This really is a nothing issue. Same with Hillary's emails. Oh im sure thats what they're banking on. That people will see it as a nothing issue. Capitalize off the general ignorance of the public. Or their short term memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 So they wrote the letter and now won't take responsibility for writing the letter?Sounds about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 This really is a nothing issue. Same with Hillary's emails. Thing is, the Senate trying to back stab international negotiations on a nuclear issue isn't actually small potatoes. The Hillary thing, I'm not sure about, seems like having the separate email account was/is SOP, but it depends what was sent and why, I suppose. Doing anything that gives Iran a real excuse to walk away from the table is not good. Why should Iran negotiate or slow its nuclear ambitions if the US legislature says they can't trust any deal the US signs on to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Doing anything that gives Iran a real excuse to walk away from the table is not good. Why should Iran negotiate or slow its nuclear ambitions if the US legislature says they can't trust any deal the US signs on to? Iran walking away from billions, I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Iran walking away from billions, I don't think so. Except if they think that the billions will never get paid because as soon as Obama leaves office the deal gets nixed... then there are no billions to walk away from only a lame duck's lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Except if they think that the billions will never get paid because as soon as Obama leaves office the deal gets nixed... then there are no billions to walk away from only a lame duck's lies. seems a good reason to work with Congress then....cause they ain't no think there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Except if they think that the billions will never get paid because as soon as Obama leaves office the deal gets nixed... then there are no billions to walk away from only a lame duck's lies. Then they go right back to what they were doing. Iran is really in a no-lose spot here. Plus many of those billions will be up-front money, so the odds of them abandoning the deal after Obama leaves are just as great as us doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Basically this says when the United States is involved in multi-national talks involving in this case at least 5 countries. You can't loop in some members of Congress because the situation is too big for them, and they will handle it like the way we just saw. They make themselves and their country look stupid and then blame their President for the letter they wrote/signed. Thank god they weren't looped in on the Bin Laden situation. They'd write him a letter saying they aren't cool with the President ok'ing the use of lethal force in that specific situation because of blah blah blah.....before the mission was launched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 they ain't no think there Official Slogan of the Republican Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 seems a good reason to work with Congress then....cause they ain't no think there Let's say Iran wants to do this. Bypass the President and negotiate only with Congress. Other than the constitutional problems... what is Congress' position, their offer and will the other nations (bc this isn't strictly a US v Iran deal) go along with it? The Senate had no plan other than to try to scuttle negotiations. Destruction without purpose. I was just in a twitter conversation about this and basically the conservative side is arguing... no negotiations. The only way to stop them is total war. Is that what we want? Is that what the Senate letter brings us too? No negotiations only boots on the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Official Slogan of the Republican Party. Knowing is better than Obama's Promising More Than My Ass Can Deliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 ---------- Then they go right back to what they were doing. Iran is really in a no-lose spot here. Plus many of those billions will be up-front money, so the odds of them abandoning the deal after Obama leaves are just as great as us doing it. Absolutely. What Congress is "threatening" Iran with is "If you agree to this deal, then there's a chance that, a few years from now, the GOP will reneg on the deal, (attempt to) re-impose sanctions, (and y'all can go back to working on your bomb)". (Worked so well, the last time we did it, too.) ---------- I was just in a twitter conversation about this and basically the conservative side is arguing... no negotiations. The only way to stop them is total war. Observing that, if that's what the Senate wants, there's a Constitutional procedure for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 No negotiations only boots on the ground? you limit choices too much, nor does Congress bind the five other nations. They are needed to bind ours though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 It was a very frustrating conversation. Even worse, than some of the ones in here. "Iran needs to be afraid of us." "War is the only way to stop Iran from getting a nuke." "Iran controls ISIS as its tool." etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 What was the McCain song from his election loss year? Bomb Iran? Bomb Bomb Iran? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.