Why are the Republicans stopping START??

[Capitalist]

I thought Obow was busy punishing the GOP as an enemy?
Now he wants a reset, oh wait.

 

[Capitalist]

No Rubber Stamp on this one. The Democrats should actually support the Republicans on this.

They should since this treaty does not address Defense versus offense.

As I posted earlier? The sore spot does not address IRAN...or North Korea...and response if they should launch a bone headed move to launch rogue weapons...

Oddly? Russia supports both countries with thier endeavours.

This should be stopped dead in it's tracks.

This treaty is between Russia and the US. It does not involve Iran or North Korea. If we insisted that the treaty address all issues of concern to us to our satisfaction, there will be no treaty. This is why diplomats negotiate treaties and not Congress. If Congress negotiated treaties, we would probably still be at war with Germany and Japan.

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

 

[Care4all]

They should since this treaty does not address Defense versus offense.

As I posted earlier? The sore spot does not address IRAN...or North Korea...and response if they should launch a bone headed move to launch rogue weapons...

Oddly? Russia supports both countries with thier endeavours.

This should be stopped dead in it's tracks.

This treaty is between Russia and the US. It does not involve Iran or North Korea. If we insisted that the treaty address all issues of concern to us to our satisfaction, there will be no treaty. This is why diplomats negotiate treaties and not Congress. If Congress negotiated treaties, we would probably still be at war with Germany and Japan.

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....

 

[rightwinger]

This treaty is between Russia and the US. It does not involve Iran or North Korea. If we insisted that the treaty address all issues of concern to us to our satisfaction, there will be no treaty. This is why diplomats negotiate treaties and not Congress. If Congress negotiated treaties, we would probably still be at war with Germany and Japan.

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

 

[Trajan]

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

they always could have blocked it, the senate hasn't been that one sided since the early 36 if I recall.

 

[The T]

They should since this treaty does not address Defense versus offense.

As I posted earlier? The sore spot does not address IRAN...or North Korea...and response if they should launch a bone headed move to launch rogue weapons...

Oddly? Russia supports both countries with thier endeavours.

This should be stopped dead in it's tracks.

This treaty is between Russia and the US. It does not involve Iran or North Korea. If we insisted that the treaty address all issues of concern to us to our satisfaction, there will be no treaty. This is why diplomats negotiate treaties and not Congress. If Congress negotiated treaties, we would probably still be at war with Germany and Japan.

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

Of course they do. Why not? Statists love circumventing that old piece of parchment called the Constitution.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

 

[Flopper]

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

Like the Republicans in the Senate, your emphasis is on defeating Obama, not the treaty. This could have been a tax bill, energy bill, or whatever. It would be opposed by the Republicans without regard to it's content.

If this country ever fails, it will not because of government spending, terrorism, illegal immigration, or any of a multitude of ills. It will be because of the inability of our two political parties to work together for the good of our country.

 

[Capitalist]

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

Like the Republicans in the Senate, your emphasis is on defeating Obama, not the treaty. This could have been a tax bill, energy bill, or whatever. It would be opposed by the Republicans without regard to it's content.

If this country ever fails, it will not because of government spending, terrorism, illegal immigration, or any of a multitude of ills. It will be because of the inability of our two political parties to work together for the good of our country.

My emphasis is on hoping we have enough paper left from printing money day and night to even pass around a copy of the treaty. The Dems don't need a copy cause they don't read anything they vote on.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

Like the Republicans in the Senate, your emphasis is on defeating Obama, not the treaty. This could have been a tax bill, energy bill, or whatever. It would be opposed by the Republicans without regard to it's content.

If this country ever fails, it will not because of government spending, terrorism, illegal immigration, or any of a multitude of ills. It will be because of the inability of our two political parties to work together for the good of our country.

Man you sure are sucking that Kool Aid down. Why is this Treaty so great for America? And if it's so important,why not allow our Congress Members to fully read and comprehend it before voting on it? What's the rush? And don't give me that "Crisis" shit either. There is no need to ram this through. It can wait. Lots of other more important things for our Congress to be taking up. January will be a very active time for our Congress. The Lameduckers have to go. It is what it is.

 

[Capitalist]

He’s just trying to remold his image and take the focus off of his domestic failures. Deception is his mantra…
Why would anyone believe the stated positions of a pathological liar?

“I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it. Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. And I will institute an independent “Defense Priorities Board” to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending. Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.”

Barack Obama
22 October 22, 2007​

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtwRcZXrz0k&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
​

 

[MaggieMae]

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

they always could have blocked it, the senate hasn't been that one sided since the early 36 if I recall.

It hasn't been voted on, yet, by the full senate. Pay attention. It passed in the Foreign Relations committee, 14-4. Richard Lugar, Bob Corker and Johnny Isakson joined the Democrats in voting Yes. Jim DeMint didn’t participate in the vote, of course. He was too busy getting face time on Fox. Risch, Barrasso, Wicker and Inhofe also voted no.

 

[MaggieMae]

This treaty is between Russia and the US. It does not involve Iran or North Korea. If we insisted that the treaty address all issues of concern to us to our satisfaction, there will be no treaty. This is why diplomats negotiate treaties and not Congress. If Congress negotiated treaties, we would probably still be at war with Germany and Japan.

But you still want Congress to vote on it, right.
Or would you prefer an Executive Order?

Of course they do. Why not? Statists love circumventing that old piece of parchment called the Constitution.

How to tell a diehard FoxNews fan: Repeat these words at least ten times in political conversation:

Statist
Marxist
Socialist
George Soros
Barney Frank
Acorn
Constitution (destruction of)
Country (bankrupting of)
Country (intentional takeover of)
Racist

 

[MaggieMae]

the senate is who votes on it, not the House, and the Senate has to have a 2/3's yea vote to get it passed, not a simple majority vote, to get it passed....no treaty can be made without the approval of 2/3's of the Senate.

And once again, the Republicans in the Senate will put defeating Obama ahead of what is best for the country

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

Majorities all over the globe are in favor it, you fool.

 

[Vanquish]

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

Like the Republicans in the Senate, your emphasis is on defeating Obama, not the treaty. This could have been a tax bill, energy bill, or whatever. It would be opposed by the Republicans without regard to it's content.

If this country ever fails, it will not because of government spending, terrorism, illegal immigration, or any of a multitude of ills. It will be because of the inability of our two political parties to work together for the good of our country.

Man you sure are sucking that Kool Aid down. Why is this Treaty so great for America? And if it's so important,why not allow our Congress Members to fully read and comprehend it before voting on it? What's the rush? And don't give me that "Crisis" shit either. There is no need to ram this through. It can wait. Lots of other more important things for our Congress to be taking up. January will be a very active time for our Congress. The Lameduckers have to go. It is what it is.

That's what's expected from people who want Obama to fail. Great work in this post. It really shows exactly how you want to build up a head of steam against Obama, not really care about the country.

You should take the Constitution out of your sig pic...it's not like you really care about the actual country created with that document.

 

[MaggieMae]

Defeating Obama and his Treaty likely is what's best for the country. Think about that a bit.

Like the Republicans in the Senate, your emphasis is on defeating Obama, not the treaty. This could have been a tax bill, energy bill, or whatever. It would be opposed by the Republicans without regard to it's content.

If this country ever fails, it will not because of government spending, terrorism, illegal immigration, or any of a multitude of ills. It will be because of the inability of our two political parties to work together for the good of our country.

Man you sure are sucking that Kool Aid down. Why is this Treaty so great for America? And if it's so important,why not allow our Congress Members to fully read and comprehend it before voting on it? What's the rush? And don't give me that "Crisis" shit either. There is no need to ram this through. It can wait. Lots of other more important things for our Congress to be taking up. January will be a very active time for our Congress. The Lameduckers have to go. It is what it is.

The "rush" is that the original START treaty expired a year ago next month, and since that time there has been no "trust but verify" vehicle available passed by previous administrations. But why am I bothering to try to explain something so simple to a fucking idiot? Nevermind. Think what you want, fool.

 

[MaggieMae]

He’s just trying to remold his image and take the focus off of his domestic failures. Deception is his mantra…
Why would anyone believe the stated positions of a pathological liar?

“I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it. Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems. And I will institute an independent “Defense Priorities Board” to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending. Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.”

Barack Obama
22 October 22, 2007​

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtwRcZXrz0k&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
​

The original missile defense called for ONLY the United States to pay for it, idiot. The distrust goes all the way back to Reagan's failed "star wars" which blew billions of dollars. Now there will be one built with NATO contributions. Do some fucking homework before you go off half-cocked for a change.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Wanting Obama and the Democrats to fail is what's best for the country. I know you Hopey Changey sycophants can't fathom this but it is how Millions of Americans feel. Why should the Republicans just Rubber Stamp everything? You know,i remember a time when you guys were all for that "No Rubber Stamping" stuff. So why the change of heart on that? You guys did everything in your power to undermine the previous eight years yet now you're so offended that the Republicans wont Rubber Stamp your guy's agenda? Seems incredibly disingenuous and hypocritical to me. Why is this Treaty so great for Americans? I still haven't heard anyone articulate this to my satisfaction. Like i said,see ya in January.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Like the Republicans in the Senate, your emphasis is on defeating Obama, not the treaty. This could have been a tax bill, energy bill, or whatever. It would be opposed by the Republicans without regard to it's content.

If this country ever fails, it will not because of government spending, terrorism, illegal immigration, or any of a multitude of ills. It will be because of the inability of our two political parties to work together for the good of our country.

Man you sure are sucking that Kool Aid down. Why is this Treaty so great for America? And if it's so important,why not allow our Congress Members to fully read and comprehend it before voting on it? What's the rush? And don't give me that "Crisis" shit either. There is no need to ram this through. It can wait. Lots of other more important things for our Congress to be taking up. January will be a very active time for our Congress. The Lameduckers have to go. It is what it is.

The "rush" is that the original START treaty expired a year ago next month, and since that time there has been no "trust but verify" vehicle available passed by previous administrations. But why am I bothering to try to explain something so simple to a fucking idiot? Nevermind. Think what you want, fool.

Oh so it's another "Crisis." Sorry,not buying that shit anymore. This can wait. No need to ram it through.

 

[JBeukema]

The Iran-START Connection - Elizabeth Weingarten - Politics - The Atlantic