Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week
Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?
They don't want to stop building nukes. They want to start up the program again.
Ridiculous as that sounds.
The "TEA Bagger Cult" took the House and almost the Senate. What short memories you Liberals have!Obama is not competent to preserve America's place in the world.
Iran does whateverthe fuck it wants and Obama does nothing.
All cults end badly, fucknuts.
Like the Tea Baggers???
The "TEA Bagger Cult" took the House and almost the Senate. What short memories you Liberals have!Obama is not competent to preserve America's place in the world.
Iran does whateverthe fuck it wants and Obama does nothing.
All cults end badly, fucknuts.
Like the Tea Baggers???
Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week
Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?
what part of "there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues." eludes you?
Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week
Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?
what part of "there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues." eludes you?
The part where the Republicans will block any legislation that could make Obama more electable. Mitch McConnell has already stated that is his primary objective
Until the Republicans can identify a specific objection and why the 26 meetings over the last ten months could not answer them...their motives are clear
Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week
Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?
Did the lame duck congress under President Bush take a 2 month holiday?
Why are the Republicans stopping START? - The Week
Republican lawmakers are blocking a push by the Obama administration to get a major nuclear arms treaty ratified this year. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev back in April. The deal, which needs to be aproved by the Senate, would cut both countries' nuclear stockpile by about 30 percent. But Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), the GOP point man on the issue, said he does not want to schedule a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress because there's not enough time to overcome complex and unresolved issues. What's behind the delay?
I am waiting for what happens, if the government (Democrats and Republicans) fail to reduce the deficit and balance the budget within the next few years the US will go into a death spiral, then collapse, and result in revolution or civil war, some estimate at the current rate the US will collapse and split apart by 2020.Did the lame duck congress under President Bush take a 2 month holiday?
Wouldn't it make more sense for the Congress to finally pass a budget, which they have not done yet? Don't you think that some sort of spending plan would make sense, instead of worrying about something that has no immediate impact?
The worlds nuclear wannabes, starting with Iran, should send a thank you note to Senator Jon Kyl. After months of negotiations with the White House, he has decided to try to block the lame-duck Senate from ratifying the New Start arms control treaty
The treaty is so central to this countrys national security, and the objections from Mr. Kyl and apparently the whole Republican leadership are so absurd that the only explanation is their limitless desire to deny President Obama any legislative success.
The Republicans like to claim that they are the party of national security. We can only hope that other senators in the party will decide that the nations security interests must trump political maneuvering.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yRzQz0KMyI&feature=related[/ame]We will just become a new colony of China.
What Mr. Kyl did not mention is that there have already been countless briefings and 21 Senate hearings on the treaty sufficient for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the countrys top military leaders, six former secretaries of state (from both parties), five former secretaries of defense (from both parties) and seven former nuclear weapons commanders to endorse it.
As for concerns about modernization, President Obama has already promised an extra $84 billion over 10 years to modernize the nations nuclear weapons complex and its arsenal. That would raise spending 20 percent above the levels of the Bush years and is far more than we think is necessary
If the budget isn't fixed within the next 5 years there won't be an office for him to be elected to, the US will be bankrupt.What Mr. Kyl did not mention is that there have already been countless briefings and 21 Senate hearings on the treaty sufficient for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the countrys top military leaders, six former secretaries of state (from both parties), five former secretaries of defense (from both parties) and seven former nuclear weapons commanders to endorse it.
As for concerns about modernization, President Obama has already promised an extra $84 billion over 10 years to modernize the nations nuclear weapons complex and its arsenal. That would raise spending 20 percent above the levels of the Bush years and is far more than we think is necessary
Obama can promise all he wants, but I see a few problems with this one.
That makes this promise worth exactly as much as his "Yes we can, but..." spiel.
- Obama will not be in office for another 10 years
- The president does not make the final decision on the budget, Congress does.
- Congress is prevented from authorizing spending more than 2 years at a time by the Constitution.