Senate poised to reject Barack Obama’s horrible Iran treaty. Plus: wanna call it ‘treason,’ Barry?

The phrase that CNN should be looking for here is ‘stunning rebuke:’

Senate backers of a bill the White House fears could dismantle a potential nuclear deal with Iran are closing in on a veto-proof threshold of support.

[snip]

The bill already has nine Democratic co-sponsors and a handful of other Democrats have either expressed support or remain open to backing the bill. When combined with the Senate Republicans and one independent who support the legislation, that leaves backers just four shy of the 67 needed to sustain the veto that Obama has promised.

Basically, since Chuck Schumer is looking to be the next Senate Minority Leader, and since Chuck Schumer is also a cosponsor of this bill, getting those last four votes may not be a problem. If for no other reason than the fact that Senate Democrats maybe don’t really want to set the precedent that the next President (who will be a Republican) can simply ignore them when it comes to foreign policy. Remember: nobody in the Democratic party leadership really loves Barack Obama. He blights careers, simply by existing.

Moe Lane

PS: The deadline for that incredibly pig-ignorant petition to have the government try the Republican Senate Caucus for treason came and went yesterday. They had easily enough signatures to require a response from the White House… so let’s hear that response, Barack Obama. I am almost breathless with anticipation.

5 thoughts on “Senate poised to reject Barack Obama’s horrible Iran treaty. Plus: wanna call it ‘treason,’ Barry?”

  1. Well, at some point Senate Democrats had to publically break up with Obama. When Schumer becomes the next Minority Leader, a Republican ( quite possibly one who currently is a member of the Senate)
    Schumer wants to have at least an open door there.

    1. Let’s note that a significant percentage of Schumer’s constituents have ties to Israel. That country disappearing in a very forseeable blaze of radioactive fire might be just a bit difficult for future re-election campaigns to navigate.
      Of course, Iran has sworn our destruction as well, is one of the world’s leading exporters of Islamic terrorism, and has the blood of thousands (at least) of Americans on its hands. New York City is a pretty major symbolic target. We can be pretty sure it’s up towards the top of Iran’s list.
      .
      Just because he’s a partisan cockroach whom I despise for a number of reasons does not imply that he’s completely incapable of acting in a moral fashion.

      1. NYC is one big target. As is every other large American city and – surprise – they are usually represented by Democrats.

        The whole “going up in a thermonuclear blaze” is probably concentrating some minds.

      2. After Tel Aviv, NYC is probably number 2 on Iran’s list.
        Jerusalem is still a holy city in Islam, and Iran wouldn’t want to destroy it.
        They’d also probably erroneously think Israel couldn’t survive without the “Great Satan” so I sort of expect a direct attack on the U.S.

  2. “let’s hear that response, Barack Obama.”

    It’ll probably be something fussily precise that points out that it isn’t actually treason, but lets you know the writer agrees that it should be.

Comments are closed.