Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

“We have been negotiating with Iran for 12 [years]. We shouldn’t be rushed into an agreement which will have to be comprehensive,” the French ambassador to Washington, Gerard Araud, tweeted during the talks. “For France, any agreement to be acceptable will have to give concrete guarantees on all issues. We won’t bypass any of them.” http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...urn-amid-sanctions-rift-between-us-and-france

Translation, the French have more backbone than Obama (cowardice before the enemy, see signature line) and Kerry (swift boat sugar plum guy).

 

I suspect they did break a long held custom. Customary civility is dying because we are quite likely in the ramping up stage to one of our periodic civil wars.
We have a civil war that completely revamps our political system every 165 years on average. Al Sharpton commented in 2003 that we are in a political civil war. It's getting hotter.
I'm not sure were I read this quote; "There has been a revolution in the English speaking world every two centuries or less for the last thousand years, with a total overthrow of the political system and a complete redistribution of political power, always accompanied by violence or the threat of violence and usually accompanied by massive violence."

Pertinent dates are:
1861
1776
1642
1480
1215
1065

I venture to say that the intensity of political differences in recent years is due to our political pot reaching it's boiling point, as it does from time to time.

 

In this case there never was a guarantee. Read the fine print in the constitution.

 

Sure YOU can disent AND TAKE THE CONSEQUENCES AS A MILITARY GUY. You don't go around and purposely break the law AND admit the reason you did was to stop the Prez, who has discretion to handle foreign affairs, from negotiating!

What makes him think it's better than the 47 Senators? The Logan Act

The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments having a dispute with the U.S. It was intended to prevent the undermining of the government's position. The Act was passed following George Logan's unauthorized negotiations with France in 1798, and was signed into law by President John Adams on January 30, 1799.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act


ONE case SCOTUS used the federalists paper intent to rule? Sure they've mentioned it plenty, but not basing their outcomes on it tand it alone


The amount of deference that should be given to The Federalist Papers in constitutional interpretation has always been somewhat controversial. As early as 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall noted in the famous case McCulloch v. Maryland, that "the opinions expressed by the authors of that work have been justly supposed to be entitled to great respect in expounding the Constitution. No tribute can be paid to them which exceeds their merit; but in applying their opinions to the cases which may arise in the progress of our government, a right to judge of their correctness must be retained."

 

Let me guess, led by the traitorous Confederate States of AmeriKKKa again, the same guys, who by and large stood with King George in 1776, the conservatives?

 

As to taking consequences for my dissent, I've not been in the military for 50 years.
As to the Logan act, controversy with the U.S. I would take as being with the U.S. government. That includes congress as well as the executive. If congress and the executive have not got together on an issue, then that issue is not inplay as far as the Logan act is conserned, IMHO.
To apply the Logan act in this case, I'd think you would have ato interpret "with the U.S." as "with the executive branch of the U.S. government."
Have a nice day.

 

At a guess, I would say one side would consist of minorities who benefit from leftist programs, white liberals, maybe some capitalist like Bill Gates who like cheap immigrant labor, maybe some feminist, maybe some greenies.
On the other social conservative like pro-lifers, people who's wages are hurt by cheap immigrant labor, and certainly white's who don't like affirmativae discrimination in hiring or college admissions, and guys like me who don't like the radical lefts program to eliminate my race by mass third world immigration and forced busing/intergration.

It's Asia for Asians, Africa for Africans and White countries for everyone.

I dare say in the preamble "to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity" didn't contenance the blending away of the white race by mass non-whie immigration and forced assimilation.
This genocide program against the race of the founders is also something worth fighting against.

 

In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304 (1936), Justice Sutherland, writing for the Court, observed,

"[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude; and Congress itself is powerless to invade it. As Marshall said in his great argument of March 7, 1800, in the House of Representatives, 'The President is the sole organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative with foreign nations.'


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act#Constitutional_authority_for_foreign_relations

- - - Updated - - -

You taking off your hoodie is noted Pal

 

So it's a good thing that the document WAS NOT SENT to the Iranian government and that it was only and perfectly legally posted to a personal website. But then again if the average leftwinger knew that then they'd realize that they were getting hysterical over nothing at all.

 

Right, an open letter is SOOO much better than sending it via USPS *shaking head*

 

Actually yes it is. The first is a perfectly legal exercise of (what leftwingers in general seem to passionately hate) freedom of speech whereas the second could actually be considered a direct interference with the duties of the Executive Branch . . . which is what the Left is FALSELY claiming actually happened. So the Left is -- as usual -- either deluded or deliberately lying.

 

More right wing nonsense. I'm shocked

"47 Republican senators signed an open letter addressed to the “Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” on U.S. Senate letterhead. The correspondence basically indicates that Iran’s ongoing negotiations on its nuclear program with the Obama administration are an all but futile endeavor"

lol

OOPS


The letter is official correspondence from Senate Republicans,


It explicitly attempts to undermine negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. You know the Prez ONLY has the power on that. Try again Pal

 

Here's a picture of my hoodie. I'm wearing it right now.

This is from the mech ("merchandice") link on whiterabbitradio.net

http://whiterabbitradio.net/goods
scroll down near the bottom and my blue eyed rabbit character is on the next to last item.

 

Yeah, just as I thought...you got nothing but moot points and rehashing the SOS. You need to learn how to read, son.....I said "YOU cannot produce any historical record of a Democratic congressional members doing the same in the last 60 years."

And you haven't.

You can parrot your mantra until doomsday, but it won't change the GOP 47 exposing to the world the GOP's total disregard for governing the country or the USA standing on the world stage so long as they fulfill their psychotic bent of diminishing and discrediting the nation's first black President.

I put you down in the previous post, your insipid stubbornness non-withstanding http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=399818&p=1064858223#post1064858223

You got nothing else, so I'm ignoring your crankiness.

 

Ahh, an acolyte of the Limbaugh, Savage, Maulkin, Hannity, Levine, Krauthhammer, Kristol cabal. Cartoons are about all you guys are good for. Carry on.

 

Psssst . . . an official letter head is NOT an official letter. Did ALL leftwingers fail their mandatory government courses in high school and college? That would explain so very much!

 

"The letter is official correspondence from Senate Republicans"

 

It is not official ANYTHING until it is sent to a foreign government. So . . . just what percentage of leftwingers did actually fail their mandatory government courses? 75 to 90 percent?

 

REALLY? A letter signed by 46 traitorous GOP Senator's on official Senate letterhead?? lol

Official Letterhead:

Letterhead purchased and printed with Senate funds. Senate letterhead, using the words “United States Senate” or “Official Business,” may only be used for official business.

Unofficial “Capitol Dome” or “Senator” Letterhead: Letterhead not purchased with official Senate funds, for officially-related use



Improper Use of Official Senate Letterhead

Personal correspondence.

http://www.ethics.senate.gov/public...?File_id=dc90e163-c591-4571-9b16-5bc2b75f45a0

 

Until it is sent to a foreign government or used formally in government business then it is not official. So what you are accidentally admitting then is that probably about 98% or better of all leftwingers flunked their mandatory government classes. Sweet!

 

When one tries logic one gets comments like 'fake scandals' and 'what scandal'...as deep intellectual discussion gets nowhere with those folk, a simpler picture might work...

 

Got it, you can't be honest when confronted with facts. I'm shocked. Again:

Letterhead purchased and printed with Senate funds. Senate letterhead, using the words “United States Senate” or “Official Business,” may only be used for official business.



Improper Use of Official Senate Letterhead

Personal correspondence.

http://www.ethics.senate.gov/public...?File_id=dc90e163-c591-4571-9b16-5bc2b75f45a0

 

Sigh! Another poster for the ignore list.

 

Got it, you can't be honest when confronted with facts. I'm shocked.