Barry’s hopes of preserving his cherished nuclear ‘deal’
between Iran and world powers is said to have been dealt a setback this past
Thursday when Chuckie Schumer, one of the top Democrats in the Senate said, after
deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, he simply could
not bring himself to support the agreement.
But I think we all knew this was coming. After all, Chuckie’s up for re-election next
year even though he’s a shoe in, he was most likely been given permission to
vote against it so as to have something to brag about next year. But his action does not mean that Barry’s ‘deal’
is in any real danger of being killed.
Chuckie's supposed opposition, announced in a
lengthy statement, could, however unlikely, pave the way for more of Barry's
fellow Democrats to come out against the nuclear pact announced on July 1
between the United States, five other world powers and Iran. Chuckie is said to be among the most
influential Jewish lawmakers in the United States. He was the first Senate Democrat to announce
his opposition to the agreement. But 12
more Democrats would be needed to successfully override Barry’s threatened
veto, which means another 11 Democrats can still safely vote against it. So we should look for that to happen and not
be surprised when it does.
Another supposedly ‘influential’ Jewish lawmaker is
Rep. Eliot Engel who happens to be the top Democrat on the House of
Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee and also said on Thursday that he too
would oppose Barry’s nuclear pact. Mr.
Engel would also be one of those Democrats for whom there is likely an ulterior
motive for coming out against this very bad deal. You see, he too is up for re-election and has
therefore likely been given permission to vote against this deal for purely
political purposes. Granted, he too may
be a sure bet to win re-election but why take any unnecessary chances while at
the same time being able to claim to be a defender of Israel.
Barry has been engaged in his own lobbying effort,
including a combative speech on Wednesday in which he said abandoning the
agreement would open up the prospect of war.
And in making quite clear his preference for operating out of the
gutter, Barry attempted to shore up his increasingly unpopular “deal” with Iran
which many say hands them nuclear weapons “on a silver platter.” Barry gave what was billed as a “major”
policy speech on the accord that Americans now have come to oppose by a 2-to-1
margin. But all that matters very little
to our ‘Dear Beloved Leader,’ Barry “Almighty”. It’s all about him and his supposed legacy, or
lack of.
It was in that speech that we saw an obviously
desperate Barry make some despicable comments, going so far as to compare the
terror-sponsoring Iranian Mullahs to Republicans. It was in reference to anti-American
sentiments that Barry said, “I recognize the resorting to force may be tempting
in the face of rhetoric and behavior that emanates from some parts of
Iran.” And added, “It is offensive. It
is incendiary. We do take it seriously. But superpowers should not act impulsively
in response to taunts.” And he went on
to say, “Just because Iranian hardliners chant ‘Death to America’ does not mean
that’s what all Iranians believe.”
And then in what has become typical behavior for
this our least presidential of all American presidents, Barry proceeded to sink
to what I think would be an all new low, even for him. Because Barry would then say, “In fact, it’s
those those hardliners who are most comfortable with the status quo. It’s those
hardliners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal.
They are making a common cause with the Republican caucus.” Really?
I mean, what is it that he was hoping to accomplish by making such a
polarizing, arrogant and more than a little reckless statement? Was he trying to bully those who oppose his
deal into supporting it?
And then, of course, we have our imbecilic secretary
of state, John Kerry-Heinz, the genius who ‘negotiated’, and I use that term
very loosely, the deal on the U.S. side.
Kerry-Heinz said during a news conference on a visit to, of all places,
the Vietnamese capital Hanoi that he respected Chuckie and Engel but added that
"rejection is not a policy for the future." Kerry-Heinz said, "It does not offer any
alternative and many people in arms control and others have actually pointed
that out. While I completely respect everybody's individual right to make a
choice, I obviously disagree with the choice made." What a buffoon this guy is. It’s amazing.
Chuckie did his best to convince us that he was not
influenced by party or politics and had not been pressured, like any of us
would view that as being anything other than a bunch of political
bullshit. He said, "Advocates on
both sides have strong cases for their point of view that cannot simply be
dismissed. This has made evaluating the agreement a difficult and deliberate
endeavor, and after deep study, careful thought and considerable
soul-searching, I have decided I must oppose the agreement and will vote yes on
a motion of disapproval." Frankly
I was surprised that he was actually able to get through his entire spiel and all
with a straight face.
Barry has promised, no make that threatened, a veto
if the resolution is passed by the House and Senate. Now in order for the Republicans to shove that
threat right up Barry’s ass, they would need at least 13 Democrats in the
Senate and 44 in the House to join them in voting against Barry. The have to be able to muster a two-thirds
majority in both chambers needed in order to override a Barry veto. So, while Thursday's announcements can, in a
sense, be described as being a blow, albeit a minor one, to Barry, opponents of
this deal still face a pretty steep uphill battle to enact a disapproval
resolution.
Chuckie said lawmakers would have to come to their
own conclusions but he would try to persuade other senators to vote against the
Iran deal. Now that may be true, but Chuckie has a history of being a little less
than honest. Keep in mind that Chuckie
is currently the number three Democrat in the Senate and is in line to succeed ‘Dingy
Harry’ Reid as the party's leader in the chamber when ‘Dingy’ finally retires
in early 2017. Meanwhile, a
congressional aide said Engel would vote for a resolution of disapproval and
also vote to override a Barry veto if the resolution passed Congress. However, Engel did not say he would lobby
against the deal among other lawmakers.
Chuckie said he opposed the nuclear deal because he
believed Iran would not change and that the deal would let it eliminate
sanctions while retaining "nuclear and non-nuclear power." He said, "Better to keep U.S. sanctions
in place, strengthen them, enforce secondary sanctions on other nations, and
pursue the hard-trodden path of diplomacy once more, difficult as it may
be." The White House had no
immediate comment on Chuckie's announcement. MoveOn.org said its 8 million members would
organize a "donor strike" to withhold campaign contributions from "any
Democratic candidate who succeeds in undermining the president's diplomacy with
Iran."
Look, we will likely hear a lot more noise from what
will likely be a growing number of Democrats regarding their displeasure with
this ‘deal’, but that’s all it’s likely to be, noise. It will only be for show as there is simply
no way that there will be 13 Democrats willing to sign on to any veto
override. That being, of course, because
the Democrat Party, Chuckie included, possesses a level of hatred for this
country that runs so deep they could never choose sides against Barry and his
Muslim brothers. The very same Muslims who
share with the Democrats that same intense hatred of America. And by siding with Barry they are choosing to
stand against this country.
No comments:
Post a Comment