Sunday, August 23, 2015

The Veto Override

The Iran Accord will depend on a veto override. My thoughts going in is that Senate democrats that are up for reelection in 2016 would count the votes against and they would be allowed to vote to override veto to help with their reelection bids. I did a little research.

There are currently 27 democratic senators supporting the Accord and 4 leaning toward support. It takes 35 supporters to stop the veto override. There are 13 democratic senators still reportedly on the fence. Of those, 4 are running in 2016, and one is retiring in 2016 for a total of 5 democratic seats up for bid.

There is plenty of room to allow those running for reelection to vote against the Accord to bolster their reelections. The ones not running in 2016 will be counting on the voters forgetting about their vote in 2015. All just political show.

Neither of the NM senators are running for reelection in 16, and both are big supporters of the Accord. Don’t forget. Senator Bennet of Colorado is reportedly on the fence and up for reelection in 2016. The way Colorado seems to be going, you can place your bet that he will come down against the Accord in a show vote.

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

The Library Presentation

Obama is working on his presidential library funding. He is also working on the legacy items that will be highlighted in the library. The Iran Accord will have to be one of them. It will be interesting to see how he presents it.
Unlike Obamacare, there are democratic heavy hitters coming out against it. Polling shows that a majority of the citizens would vote against it if they had a chance. So many that politicians are concerned how their vote will impact their elected futures. He took it to the UN for a vote before he allowed Congress to act on it. He will have to veto the no vote to get Congress to over ride the initial vote. With the track history, he may even proceed with it even if Congress over rides his veto. There is also the reference that this is a 'good deal' if it is fully implemented, so if it doesn't work as the 'vision' then it is someone else's fault.
There are many negatives associated with his Accord and his actions. The master of 'hope and change' probably won't surprise us in how he presents his view of this in the library.

Saturday, August 15, 2015

What Makes You Think They Wouldn’t?

The other day Sec Kerry said that if Congress did not approve the Iran Accord that the US may no longer be the world’s reserve currency. This is a strange selling point. Did he and the President offer up some more side deals as a part of this negotiation? Obama has taken major steps during his time to greatly weaken the US. I am not an economist but many have said that the US dollar not being the world’s reserve currency would cripple us. When you look at the growth of the debt under the Obama Administration, you have to wonder if this just isn’t another step as his presidency winds down. One would ask themself, surely he would not turn over the reserve currency to a communist dictatorship, then you would think back and say, that was a stupid question to ask myself based on his record.  
Contact your Senators and Congressmen and let them know you want them to vote on this Accord.

Monday, August 10, 2015

Credibility Should Be His Concern

It appears that most people that oppose the Obama's accord with Iran are in league with hardliners in Iran.
It appears that democratic elected officials that oppose the Obama accord are thoughtful but mistaken.
With the vast bi-partisan opposition to the accord, Obama is concerned that the US's credibility will be damaged with the world. Obama is not concerned about his credibility with the US let alone the world.
Everything that he does is calculated and will result in long term damage to the US. Thoughtful and purposeful.

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

If You Don't Trust Obama Surely You Can Trust The UN

The Administration assures us that there are no side deals. There are just important stand alone deals between Iran and the IAEA. Nothing to look at here, move along.
The Administration knows that the UN and Iran have our best interests at heart and will negotiate quality inspection programs that will fully protect our and the world's best interests in the UN's high standards. They have total faith in Iranian leadership and the UN.
Not sure about you but I have less confidence in the UN that I do in the Administration.
To top that off, Kerry says that he is not concerned about what the Iranian government will do with the hundreds of billions of dollars they receive with the accord. All around out of touch with reality.
Be sure to 1) contact Lujan, Heinrich, and Udall on how you want them to vote on this issue, 2) watch Obama's speech on the accord today and compare it to reality.

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

He Doesn't Believe It Either

Recently the President told us that ISIS can only be defeated with new and better ideas. It is being reported that drone strikes and government military assaults picked up during the President’s visit to Kenya and Ethiopia in order to keep the Islamist’s busy and away from the president. Attacking terrorists seems to be the same old recycled idea instead of the new, better ideas that the President referred to. Seems like he would have taken the opportunity to share new, better ideas with them instead of trying to kill them. That would be leadership and leading by example and personal commitment.  

Since he is in the neighborhood, you would drop in on the Iranian leadership. He needs to share new and better ideas with the people he just negotiated the great nuclear accord with, but keep chanting that they need destroy the US. He has to know that by setting across from them over a glass of tea that he could turn them around and the accord would meet the expectations. Leadership and commitment.

Obama will say anything at any time. How come the Islamist’s don’t buy into it like our press  does?

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Follow Up on the Iran Accord

I found Kerry’s testimony at the Senate Hearing on CSPAN and set through the approximately 4 hours. I just don’t understand.

Kerry stressed that we had to deal with Iran in good faith or all was lost. The Administration that just dealt in bad faith with the Congress over the accord is stressing the need for good faith negotiations. The means justify the ends is their view of good faith.

Kerry works through the process that the sanctions were not working, while noting that the sanctions brought the Iranians to the negotiating table, but wants people to believe that we will ‘snap back’ sanctions will be a deterrent for the Iranians not violating the accord. The Administration panel then didn’t support the Congress renewing the existing sanctions legislation when it expires. They didn’t think it was needed to put sanctions back on Iran.

Then there was a disagreement in the reading of the accord on the sanctions. There is a provision in the accord about putting sanctions back in place if the accord if it is broken. The Administration position is that the US can just put sanctions back in place when we want. Senator Corker said is spoke with people representing Britain and France and they did not agree with what Kerry said about the same sanctions not being allowed to be put back in place. You can bet that Iran doesn’t agree with Kerry no matter what. It appears that good faith on someone's part will play a role in this at a future date.

I would love to believe what the Administration says about the agreement and have faith in what they actually may believe. This is the same group that used the truth to sell you Obamacare, Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, that it is degrading and destroying ISIS, and that the boarder has never been safer or more controlled.
What do Udall and Heinrich believe?