So you can only speak about the deal if you have served in the Military? Do you really think that Shumer would be in favor of invading Iran?
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
Obama didn't send in troops, he negotiated a deal preventing possible military action. If Iran reneges on the deal, we can at least say we tried a peaceful solution.
Not at all! It just seems to me that they'd rather go to war than have a peaceful resolution. Just my opinion, I'm sure you feel otherwise.
That is not totally correct but tempering your rhetoric may be an idea if you have not served. It's a different world on the side of the active duty. Try it, you may like it. It sure wouldn't hurt all able-bodied men to serve two years in the military. It wouldn't hurt at all.
A couple of good laughs at this response:
The SCOTUS does NOT make law, they interpret the law and rule on it's constitutionality.
No major legislation can be enacted without being voted on and passed by both houses of Congress. The executive authority of the President is very limited. One can argue rather or not Obama exceeded executive authority in a a couple of instances, and those situations are now in the courts and the courts will make that decision.
Here's a short civic lesson for you:
"Policies" are viewpoints. Viewpoints that become enacted are called "laws" that's something congress does, the president cannot do that arbitrarily and unilaterally.
The only two EOs that I can think of that have been challenged on legal grounds that I'm aware of is the one regarding the temporary moratorium on deportation of illegals that have been here for 5 years, and the use of the EPA to enforce CO2 emissions. Honestly I cannot recall commenting on either of these regarding the legality, much less "spending my message board life on them". On the substance I agree with them but as far as their legality goes, I'll say it once more, I don't have that expertise. That's up to the courts to decide of executive authority was exceeded.
I'm glad to see you agreeing with the Obama position on incentives for domestic manufacturing. He has called for tax relieve for US based corporations and penalties for those setting up shop offshore to evade taxes - unfortunately the do-nothing congress has ignored those pleas. The bottom line is as long is the auto manufacturers can get $5/hour labor in Mexico there is nothing President Obama, President Trump or President JC himself can do to bring manufacturing back. The truth is, those manufacturing jobs that left us over the last 2 decades are gone, and they ain't commin back regardless of the ridiculous Trump rhetoric the only the gullible would swallow.
??? The EPA head held a news conference yesterday taking 100% responsibility. I guess Rush didn't bother to mention that today.
That was a purely political deal. He has an enormous Jewish constituency, in fact his nickname up there is "The Senator from Israel". The backroom deal has already been cut in favor of the treaty. The have counted the votes and the votes are there, so he is now "allowed" to oppose it to keep his political fig leaf in tact.
There it is. Anything, absolutely anything attributed to the Bible god is justified by irrational believers. Ripping up or burning pregnant women, specifying a curse that induces a miscarriage, slaying infants, ... It's all good. We'll just ignore that Yahweh/Jesus was involved with that stuff. Pro Life my ass.
I don't want to ever hear you say a damn thing about the "evils" of another religion until you admit to the barbarism in your own mythology. As a believer in the ancient Jewish war god, you own all of the Bible, and that includes the blood thirsty monster described in the OT.
Hillary ClintonVerified account@HillaryClintonHow does your student loan debt make you feel? Tell us in 3 emojis or less.
Then some Republicans need to lose their positions in the next election.
Plenty of votes to turn down the deal. Not enough to override a veto. Republicans are safe.
Note: science deniers can ignor this message:
Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.
The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.
The two-page letter may give the White House arguments a boost after the blow Mr. Obama suffered on Thursday when Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, a Democrat and among the most influential Jewish voices in Congress, announced he would oppose the deal, which calls for Iran to curb its nuclear program and allow inspections in return for an end to international oil and financial sanctions.
The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/w...ran-nuclear-deal-in-letter-to-obama.html?_r=0
Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.
The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.
The two-page letter may give the White House arguments a boost after the blow Mr. Obama suffered on Thursday when Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, a Democrat and among the most influential Jewish voices in Congress, announced he would oppose the deal, which calls for Iran to curb its nuclear program and allow inspections in return for an end to international oil and financial sanctions.
The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/w...ran-nuclear-deal-in-letter-to-obama.html?_r=0
No, think he means the votes AREN'T there to override Obama's veto.
The vote up or down on the Iran deal is going to lose and lose huge and lose in a bipartisan manner with every GOP voting against joined by several brave Democrats. But not enough Dems willing to be brave and defend the country, they won't sully Obama's legacy by then helping to override his veto.
Let me get this straight.
29 top scientists signed on to blindly support a deal where some of the details are intentionally kept secret. They know some of the relevant data is being hidden, but they formed a conclusion anyway.
Sound like some top scientists to me and not political hacks.
29 top scientists signed on to blindly support a deal where some of the details are intentionally kept secret. They know some of the relevant data is being hidden, but they formed a conclusion anyway.
Sound like some top scientists to me and not political hacks.
The Nordic social system seems to work rather well. Look at Finland they have one the highest per capita incomes, the best educational system and a leader in quality of life and human development. Considering 70 years ago they were basically a backwoods country with a low literacy rate.
Go ahead and down vote the Iran deal, just means they'll have a nuclear weapon sooner, other countries won't continue sanctions and we'll be deeper in the Middle East quagmire.
You really think countries would rather do business with Iran than the United States?
Sanders wants to push Congress to pass a constitutional amendment that would overturn Citizens United and move toward public funding of elections.
I actually agree with the Dems here, Schumer is saving face and knows the votes are there.
Why worry about Iran having nukes, it's the Saudi's that scare me.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ortedly-bought-nuclear-weapons-from-pakistan/
Wikileaks also has communications from Saudi government official discussing that they wish to procure nuclear weapons.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ortedly-bought-nuclear-weapons-from-pakistan/
Wikileaks also has communications from Saudi government official discussing that they wish to procure nuclear weapons.
It's long been understood that if the Saudis ever needed nuclear protection/return fire, Islamabad would be he one to take care of them. Whether the Saudis have missiles with their own logo on them isn't a huge deal, honestly.
Your welcome to go over in Martin County and get a drink of water out of the Tug Fork river, maybe get some that nice mud on the river bottom for a facial.
All the coal and gold mined will not matter when you can't get a clean drink of fresh water.
Their government seems pretty shaky, we couldn't even trust them with intel where OBL was.
But there's an arms race in the Middle East and the UAE, Saudi's and Israel (has nukes) are on the forefront.
Government is shaky, military is not. Very similar to Egypt in a lot of ways.
[QUOT="qwesley, post: 2081712, member: 1800"]Deeeee's kids need to take his keys away. No way he has the faculties to still be driving.[/QUOTE]
Deee is delusional pure and simple or just plain stupid.
Deee is delusional pure and simple or just plain stupid.
Similar threads
