Monday, April 6, 2015

Hateful and Mean GOP is Frightened of Any Possible Obama Success

No Matter the Issue: GOP Will Turn 180° Due South to Resist Obama
(and especially health care)

Biggest GOP Goal: Stymie Nuclear Non-Proliferation Talks with Iran

From Yahoo News and various sources:

President Obama is appealing to Congressional lawmakers to reconsider their proposed contentious legislation giving them Congress a say-so (final say-so some GOPers want) on the final Iran nuclear deal that is hopefully forthcoming after the framework talks that just concluded in Switzerland.  One of the co-authors of a bill (Sen. Corker (R-TN) vowed to hold a key vote next week. 

Mr. Obama said recently in a NY Times interview with Tom Friedman that the newly agreed framework of a nuclear deal with Iran represented a ”once in a lifetime opportunity” to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and move toward stabilizing the Middle East, then adding: “I've been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch, and I think they should understand that we mean it. But I say that hoping that we can conclude this diplomatic arrangement – and that it ushers a new era in US-Iranian relations – and, just as importantly, over time, a new era in Iranian relations with its neighbors.”

Mr. Obama also cautioned there are many details that still need to be worked out with the Iranians and there would be “real political difficulties” in implementing an agreement in both countries as he reiterated his opposition to legislation that would give Congress final say in approving or rejecting a deal, but added that he hoped to find a path to allow Congress to “express itself” and not necessarily approve any final deal short of a formal treaty that the Senate would have to ratify or not.

Corker said on FOX naturally – the PR arm of the GOP that Congress would exercise its “rightful role to scrutinize and approve any agreement to curb Iran's nuclear program in exchange for lifting international sanctions,” adding: “It's very important that Congress is in the middle of this, understanding, teasing out, asking those important questions."

Corker's office also said that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee would vote on April 14 on the review legislation but that even amid sustained opposition from the White House, that the Senate is two or three votes shy of the 67 needed to override any Presidential veto.

I would have to say that this threat by the Senate is just about as bad as seeing one man in Iran, the Ayatollah (Ali Khamenei) being the final say-so for them. These two clashing things could make the situation worse and the whole issue could get real shitty real fast and for what: world peace and less nukes or pitiful, raw GOP politics with the purpose to sustain their hatred for any success that Mr. Obama might achieve while he is still in office?

Ha …the answer to that is painfully obvious.


  1. The P5 nations (U.S., UK, France, China, and Russia) + 1 (Germany) have until June 30 to agree on all the details of a final deal with Iran before anything is signed. 
  2. Apart from the Senate rattling their swords, there are also comes concerns to handle from Arab allies who are skeptical about a possible agreement (i.e., Saudi Arabia – a long time foe of Iran).    
  3. Mr. Obama has invited leaders of six Gulf nations to Washington this spring saying he wants to “formalize” U.S. assistance with them in exchange, I guess, for their support of a final agreement since it primarily benefits them in the hot-bed region.
  4. These nuclear talks are a remarkable shift in the frozen relationship between the U.S. and Iran. Now, hopefully it is becoming normal for officials from both countries to communicate and hold face-to-face meetings even though Mr. Obama has not yet met with Iranian President Hasan Rouhani, although they did speak on the phone, and Mr. Obama has exchanged letters with Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 
  5. Khamenei allowed the negotiators to make concessions in the nuclear talks and that suggests that he realizes that the sanctions on Iran have and would continue to weaken them over the long term, and that Iran wants to see themselves back in the world community, then there were going to have to be changes, perhaps distasteful to the U.S. and Iran, but for world stability and fewer nuclear weapons. 
All this, it seems to me, should remain the most-critical part of any deal despite crappy jockeying for silly-ass political reasons or gain under any label. Time will tell – it could go either way.

No comments: