U.S. Senate GOP throws USA under bus and aligns with Iran

Because if you are talking about Obama, I disagree, he's not "stupid" he's just overly bull-headed and a bit overly arrogant.

 

And, unlike Cotton, hasn't shown a fundamental lack of understanding of the responsibilities of the branches of government as laid out by the Constitution.

 

Actually, he's right, the president can't have any lasting agreement without congressional approval. Now you can be upset that congress let the world know that they didn't support the deal the president was trying to strike, but it seems the goal was to get a better deal that actually had a chance of being ratified by congress rather than the whole thing being nothing more than a waste of everyone's time.

 

"The end of these negotiations isn't an unintended consequence of congressional action. It is very much an intended consequence. A feature, not a bug, so speak"

Cotton do not want any deal.

And he did so with an amateurish letter to Iran with such simple mistakes that the world can only laugh at and 46 Senators went merrily along apparently without much of any thoughts to the content or consequences of it.

Even if he (and I'm sure many of his colleges) intended on a better deal (such is a r****d thing to said anyway since we have no deal yet), there are better ways to do so without weaken the American position, future dividing the Senate of what is left to not divide, and setting an extreme precedent.

 

Guys. Iran controls Tehran. We've just passed the Rubicon on this issue.

http://crooksandliars.com/2015/03/what-tom-cotton-warns-iran-has-be-stopped

 

LOL. I can't believe that just happened; Bob Schieffer should have caught that. I'm not a fan of his "path to the bomb" rhetoric. Iran has been developing nuclear weapons. Reminds me of "you didn't build that". Very disingenuous.

 

Forget it, he's rollin'

 

I guess the executive agreements we have entered into since WWII (and that have stood ever since) don't count as "lasting agreement(s)."

They don't know anything about the deal, no details have been released. This merely shows that those Senators don't support anything that Obama does, they don't need details or facts, they stand in opposition to absolutely anything that Obama supports.

As has been observed ad nauseum, and completely ignored by those supporting these idiotic Senators, a "treaty," which is the diplomatic action subject to Congressional approval, is not being negotiated here. They, and you, are arguing against a straw man, no surprise that you don't even seem to understand this simple fact.

 

What is being discussed is more than just an executive agreement and pretty much everyone knows it. It's sort of like how we were told that Obamacare wasn't a tax...when everyone knew it was all along.

This agreement is attempting to go beyond the mandate of what a mere executive agreement is capable of....because we all know it's really a treaty but the president simply wants to get through without having to abide by the Constitution.

It's the same as the immigration bill disguised as an executive order that Obama tried to force through. Basically the problem is that Obama wants things his way and isn't willing to negotiate with anyone as to the terms. He's a really good candidate because he's skilled at getting elected, but he's a terrible politician and president.

 

That presumes that the GOP congress is willing to negotiate as opposed to "our way or no way".

 

Surprise, surprise, the "everyone knows" argument from a conservative. Please, point me to any discussion anywhere regarding details of the deal being worked on which would lead one to believe it is "more than just an executive agreement."

Everyone knows that the "everyone knows" argument translates to "they told me this on Fox and I just believe it with no proof necessary."

You mean the penalty for choosing to freeload off of the healthcare system? Easily avoided, get insurance.

First, please describe the "mandate" of which an executive agreement is capable.

Second, please describe how the details of the deal being worked on go beyond the "mandate" to which you refer.

The only people who know this are the ones who believe and regurgitate everything they see on Fox.

Edited to remove snarky comment, replaced with...

If Congress would get their thumbs out of their collective asses and pass an immigration bill, Obama wouldn't have found it necessary to sign an executive order to deal with the problems solely from the Executive.

You do realize that you are making this argument in the context of the Obama administration negotiating the terms of a deal with Iran, Russia, China, and others, right? That doesn't strike me as the action of a man who only "wants things his way," it seems much more like the ones who refuse to negotiate are Republicans. Even the Iranians came to the table on this deal, the Republicans have absolutely refused to come to the table with Obama on anything at all.

ROFL, keep sucking that Fox c0ck, that seems to be all you have.

 

Eh...

Tom Cotton doesn't seem like my type of politician, but that statement isn't egregious. The meaning behind what he is saying is clear. They are a dictatorship that controls their own people and by proxy controls other significant territory without nuclear power, what would they be capable of with it.

 

GR to Bobby

 

For the TLR crowd, I guess I could have just said "b****, please!"

 

To show you just how hypocritical politics truly is, go back and look at what candidate Obama did in 2008 with Iran as Bush was attempting to negotiate a deal with them. William Miller was the go-between who delivered the message to Iran of "don't do a deal with Bush, sympathetic help is on the way starting January 2009 if I'm elected."

This is worse than what the 47 senators did, by a long shot. But I get it, you have all chosen your political football team and you must defend your side.

 

Hi "FV Santiago" - if you're going to lift things verbatim from right wing nutjob blogs, you should probably give credit, I know pushing out fraudulent talking points is *DIFFICULT SRS WORK* - but make an effort, don't be a b****.

And of course, the evidence here = "confirmed to me" where me = random nutjob writing from his basement.

 

Do you have a legitimate source for this?.

 

If he did, he would have posted it. As it is, this would appear to be another one of those "everybody knows" statements to which I referred above.

 

I just googled it. It's a Breitbart linked story

http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...to-iran-undermine-condemnation-of-gop-letter/

 

Refer back to the "everybody knows" thing. Breitbart is hardly a "legitimate source" for something that Obama may have transmitted to Iran via "secret channels."