I heard everything that you just said. Now, bring us back reality. What is the alternative now? Do you really think if we bring back sanctions on our own, Iran really cares? I don't want to hear about 10 or 15 years from now. I want to here about now.

If this Iran deal works without us, the Republicans are going to be the liars. Their obstruction will be used by future parties on what not what to do.

Again, the world sees what he did. We keep on coming back to the fact that the US was the only ones negotiating a deal with Iran. Since when doesn't the UN represent the world? If I was trying to make an argument that the Republicans live in an alternative universe, your comment of the world, as you see it, makes the case. Hatred of this president makes everything that he does completely wrong. That can't be the case. Why would anyone floating in the middle of road, wherever that is now, listen to a word that the Republicans say? Everything is colored by their hatred. They just going looking for news outlets that back up their beliefs. Then, they turn around and call this be open minded or "fair and balanced".

If Obama is living a lie, he has plenty of company with the Republican party and their followers. I hate that conversation on this board always has to take the path of naming calling, and one upmenship.

O" yes let's pass it to see what's in in!

When this President leaves office and can no longer "come down" on his party for not cow tailing, it will be interesting. I know that every President of every party has this influence and that every president from every party has people in their party who follow them without questions...

BUT, this is a man who we know does not even speak to his party most times....I think the revelations will be amazing....but for now....

"Sen. Ron WydeSen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, said Saturday that he has concerns about the nuclear deal with Iran, adding that that he believes the Obama administration is “flouting” Congress by going to United Nations to get approval first.

“Now there was a new wrinkle in this on Friday, which concerned me, which was the administration was talking about going to the U.N. to get approval,” Wyden told a town hall audience this weekend. “I think the U.N. does some very good things, I think they do some other things not so good. But the point is going to the U.N. before the Congress weighs in is really in my view flouting the Review Act, you know the whole point…”n, amocrat from Oregon, said Saturday that he has concerns about the nuclear deal with Iran, adding that that he believes the Obama administration is “flouting” Congress by going to United Nations to get approval first.
“Now there was a new wrinkle in this on Friday, which concerned me, which was the administration was talking about going to the U.N. to get approval,” Wyden told a town hall audience this weekend. “I think the U.N. does some very good things, I think they do some other things not so good. But the point is going to the U.N. before the Congress weighs in is really in my view flouting the Review Act, you know the whole point…”

Sen. Ron Wyden On Iran Deal: Obama "Flouting" Congress By Going To U.N. First - BuzzFeed News

Oh, let's criticize it before we read it. We, as Republican law makers, can't call President Obama, or John Kerry to get an idea, what the major points of the agreement are, because they have unlisted telephone numbers. We can't offer our opinions, because we have none.

The conservative heads of governments in England, France, and Germany aren't really conservatives. If they were, they wouldn't be in partnership with the communist countries of Russia, China, and soon to be US. Anyone, that can't see that President Obama wants to be Chairman Obama, isn't looking. The P5 plus one is the great left wing abomination joined together to bring an end to the world. We, as Republicans, will stop that road to extinction as soon as we get our head out of hind part.

You want sarcasm. You got sarcasm. Now, that we know that two can that game, how about offering an alternative, if you override the President's veto? Given even an attempt to do that, it is quite clear that there isn't one, or at least one coming from the Republican party.

The idea of the Review Act is to go into debate of an act with an open mind. Senator Ron Wyden is in the Senate obviously. The Senate does contain reasonable people from both parties. Senators may have a good reason to have their nose a little out of joint.

However, the House is a horse of a different color. Mr. Boehner showed his true colors, when he invited President Net tin yahoo (no disrespect, but my spelling really sucks) speak before a joint session of Congress. The House Republicans never had any intention of approved the agreement with Iran.

We keep on coming back to the fact that we think we are the only one that negotiated with Iran. There is a 90 day period for the UN agreement to take effect. There is a 60 day period for Congress to act. If Congress overrides the veto, we will be standing alone. So, why wait for Congress approval before getting an UN vote?

Originally Posted by Guest

The idea of the Review Act is to go into debate of an act with an open mind. Senator Ron Wyden is in the Senate obviously. The Senate does contain reasonable people from both parties. Senators may have a good reason to have their nose a little out of joint.

However, the House is a horse of a different color. Mr. Boehner showed his true colors, when he invited President Net tin yahoo (no disrespect, but my spelling really sucks) speak before a joint session of Congress. The House Republicans never had any intention of approved the agreement with Iran.

We keep on coming back to the fact that we think we are the only one that negotiated with Iran. There is a 90 day period for the UN agreement to take effect. There is a 60 day period for Congress to act. If Congress overrides the veto, we will be standing alone. So, why wait for Congress approval before getting an UN vote?

Just going to give my thoughts very quickly on the entire thing which is over because that is how it is.

We had sanctions. The UN had sanctions. They were working. That is why Iran agreed to come to the table. We set parameters for those negotiations and changed each and every one of them to the benefit of Iran.

Congress wanted input. The President did not want to give it. Congress won that on a vote. Israel, the single most affected state on this thing wanted to be involved or at least have an opportunity to speak their mind. The President did not want that, thus the Speaker invited him here simply to give his opinions to the congress.

We had partners, every single one of which had very strong reasons to lift the sanctions but needed this deal to do that.

We said recently that no way would we allow the arms embargo from the UN to be lifted. Our President needed to apply pressure to the congress and thus went directly to the UN to have them lifted. They were lifted,

Thus congress is now gong to be the bad guy one way or the other and the President has what he wants......not stopping nuclear building, simply postponing. ALL the neighbors in the region are opposed. Those who are with the US are those who will trade and make much money off the deal, including Russia.

We now have Syria looking to build up arms. Israel re looking at all their options and announcing they will not consult with the US as in the past but if they feel threatened will take unilateral action.

The terrorists in the middle east, sans ISIS so they say, are in joy. The only state in the ME that supports them now can do it openly and arm them, because remember we took that off the table because Iran asked us to.

We are screwed....those or some of those will rave about the ability of the President to box in his own congress while allowing Iran to celebrate taking us to the cleaners. He wanted the deal, despite caving on every requirement he had before beginning, and he got it just as he gets it all, by manipulation and being shrewd, something we don't see much in a President when discussing foreign affairs, especially in a situation this serious.

So let the strong party democrats celebrate. Let the nuclear race begin in the ME. Let the arms flow being TO Iran from Russia. Let the money flow to Iran from France and Germany for arms and oil.

Next thing, and I am not joking will be when Iran cheats and they WILL cheat, Obama will blame someone else....not him. When the arms race begins it will be anyones fault but his.

Too much verbiage with no substance.
So we would stand alone. Is that supposed to be a big deal?
We are supposedly in the agreement for the impact on Iran's nuclear capabilities.
The other countries are in favor of it ONLY because once the sanctions are lifted there is gain in it for them.
Russia-weapons, China-oil to name the top advocates behind Obama.

The others in the UN follow suit because there is a gain for them as well (I really don't know or care....they are not in it for the nuclear aspect).

Some of you need to know a little more than is exhibited in the posts here to make any sensible comments about why the agreement is good or bad.
Look at it from the point of view of what is in it for America. I will bet not one of you can state any gain for the USA in this agreement.

All we get is the rah rah cheerleader section for Obama and the UN are all for it. At least that is what Obama, the WH, the media and some of you would like us to believe.

Once you understand the reality of our position and discover that nobody is in it for what YOU think they are including Iran.

I do not expect anybody to respond except with the usual party and Obama love antagonism.

And that really is a shame for you and your family members future.

Post 22 by me was posted while I was doing mine and now see it before my 22.....my comments of no substance do not apply to this post which is 100% on targer!!

Only a feckless fool could have negotiated such a dangerous, one-sided deal that guarantees a nuclear armed Iran. Too bad Trump wasn't the negotiator ... even those who can't stand him (and his hair) will have to admit he would be a MUCH more formidable presence at the negotiating table than the hopeless John Kerry

Originally Posted by Guest

President Obama, and John Kerry know the political in fight that is going on between the parties in the US. Maybe they should have brought in a responsible Republican in the negotiations with Iran. It couldn't have hurt any, and the Republicans would know what was obtainable, and what was not. If Republicans can't trust one of their own, what can you do? It wouldn't have stopped this legacy nonsense that comes up with everything President Obama does, but this would have almost guaranteed a veto proof agreement.

One of the things that the Republicans did bring up on the ACA was letting health insurance carriers cross state line. Competition would drive down insurance rates. that might have helped the people that have insurance, but do very little for people that can't afford it.

One change that should be acceptable to both parties is remove the penalty for not having insurance for people that live in states that didn't accept Medicaid funds. These people seem to be punished twice for the same crime.

A "responsible Republican"?

LOL - thank you for the laugh of the day ....... bur Sarah Palin wasn't available.

LOL........

Originally Posted by Guest

A "responsible Republican"?

LOL - thank you for the laugh of the day ....... bur Sarah Palin wasn't available.

LOL........

Avoidance of the subject and mocking someone is a characteristic of, I assume, having no idea of what to say to discuss, which is sad when you think of it.

We do live in the information age and so much is available, and yet so many never get off the comics page.

Originally Posted by Guest

A "responsible Republican"?

LOL - thank you for the laugh of the day ....... bur Sarah Palin wasn't available.

LOL........

Character Austin Millbarge in Spies Like Us....

"We mock what we do not understand"

This should really make you laugh, but I am dead serious here. The responsible Republican I was thinking of was "W". This would be in the vain of Nixon, staunch anti-communist, visiting China to try to normalize relations with them. "W's" mere appearance there would give Iran the unmistakable impression that we want a deal, but we are not going to roll over for it. He was also knowledgeable on Iran.

President Obama had a news conference, where he defended the deal against all the short comings that the Republicans, Israel and the press had brought up. Reduction in uranium centrifuges, explain why the 24 waiting period wasn't a problem, UN could follow the flow of nuclear material to Iran, they would find out if Iran was building up nuclear material in other countries, some MIT nuclear professor told him nuclear material give off a detectable scent, which easily can be detected etc. He covered everything. He certainly doesn't believe he totally rollover, a deal just for the sake of a deal. If Iran cheats, President Obama won't be president, when that happens. People don't listen to him now, so why would they listen to him then?

I hope that you not applying that Iran will be selling weapons to ISIS. You know that that is not going to happen. The Muslims sects hate each other more than they hate us.

Iran will never be a nuclear threat to us. Going to war with Iran will be a lot harder than it was going to war with Iraq. Iran is one step above a third world country.

The arms flow isn't going to go from Iran directly to the terrorists. That stunt was stopped in one big hurry by our Navy, when Iran tried to send weapons to the Yemen terrorists. They will go from the seller to the terrorists, and Iran will be billed.

Not until the Republicans do a 90 not a 180 degree turn to the center, every conversation is going to have a hostile ring to it, but there is never an excuse for name calling.

A few tidbits from todays news on this Iran agreement....

"Iran’s ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the nuclear inspection organization is barred from revealing to the United States any details of deals it has inked with Tehran to inspect its contested nuclear program going forward, according to regional reports.

Recent disclosures by Iran indicate that the recently inked nuclear accord includes a series of side deals on critical inspections regimes that are neither public nor subject to review by the United States."

Iran: U.S. Banned from Knowing Details of Iran Nuclear Inspection Agreement | Washington Free Beacon

For those who object to links they do not like even though based on facts this is also available on NEWSWEEK but I do not subscribe and have used my quota.

"In a 416-page manifesto called Palestine, Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei details his view on the destruction of Israel and the deception of the US. The book, which credits Khamenei as "The flag bearer of Jihad to liberate Jerusalem," is only available in Iran, the NY Post revealed.

According to the Post, Khamenei quickly asserts his belief that Israel does not have a right to exist as a state. He does this by using three words: nabudi meaning annihilation, imha meaning fading out and zaval meaning effacement. The book allegedly states Khamenei's strategy for the destruction of Israel is through "well-established Islamic principles".

Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei publishes book to destroy Israel and deceive US

President is near to speaking on this treaty as he wants to convince all americans to be for it, which is far and to be expected.

Just please do not be led astray by the false and phone premise...

It is this agreement or it is war

That is really a simple pressure point and as his own folks testifying before congress agree, a very very far fetched way to present it.

Has anyone heard more on the Iranian warship pointing its guns at a US helicopter or was that an error on CNN ?