Type to search

Iran Deal: Why Would We Heed The Same Voices That Are Always Wrong?

Editor's Blog Featured Post Memo Pad Middle East Politics

Iran Deal: Why Would We Heed The Same Voices That Are Always Wrong?


Nobody was surprised by Benjamin Netanyahu’s immediate denunciation of the Iran nuclear agreement as “a historic mistake for the world.” Echoing the Israeli prime minister’s opposition throughout the negotiations were all the usual suspects in this country — a panoply of pundits and politicians from Weekly Standard editor William Kristol and Fox News Channel analyst Charles Krauthammer to MNSBC host Joe Scarborough. Now this same crew will urge its rejection by the United States Senate.

Focusing on the alleged pitfalls of the deal between Iran and the world powers, these critics downplay provisions that would allow economic sanctions to “snap back” quickly if Iran violates its promises, and greatly increase the Islamic Republic’s difficulty in building an undetected bomb. They don’t explain that if the United States had walked away, the result would have been the disintegration of international sanctions, the rapid buildup of Iran’s nuclear capability,  and the likelihood of war – not just bombs, but “boots on the ground.”

What everyone should remember about the agreement’s prominent foes is something they will never mention: their own shameful record in promoting our very worst foreign policy mistake since Vietnam.

Like his admirers here, Netanyahu was a fervent proselytizer for war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. He appeared before the United States Congress in 2002 to frighten Americans and whip up belligerence. “There is no question whatsoever” – mark those words – “that Saddam is seeking, is working, is advancing toward the development of nuclear weapons,” he intoned, restating the “mushroom cloud” rhetoric of national security advisor Condoleezza Rice and vice president Dick Cheney, among others.

Around the same time, Krauthammer declared: “Time is running short. Saddam has weapons of mass destruction. He is working on nuclear weapons. And he has every incentive to pass them on to terrorists who will use them against us.” As the vote on Bush’s war resolution approached that fall, he warned that “we must remove from power an irrational dictator who…is developing weapons of mass destruction that could kill millions of Americans in a day.”

And we heard the same endless, hysterical exhortations from Kristol, Scarborough, and the entire cohort that had been pushing for war in Iraq ever since 9/11. No doubt they wish we would forget they ever uttered such nonsense. But at the time they argued that not only would Saddam’s overthrow mean “the end of his weapons of mass destruction,” as Scarborough once gloated, but the democratic ouster of all our enemies in the Mideast.

On that claim, Netanyahu was unwavering and absolute. “If you take out Saddam, Saddam’s regime,” he told Congress, “I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region. And I think that people sitting right next door in Iran, young people, and many others, will say the time of such regimes, of such despots is gone.”

Of course, Bibi’s “guarantee” was worth less than the pitch of any used-car salesmen. So was Kristol’s blithering reassurance that Iraq’s Shi’a and the Sunni communities felt no enmity that would disrupt the bright future post-Saddam.

As Netanyahu noted not long ago – while arguing, ironically, against negotiations with Iran – the mullahs in Tehran now have far greater influence than we do over the Iraqi government in Baghdad, because both are dominated by Shi’a parties. (He failed to recall his own wrong predictions.) So we wasted blood and treasure to throw out Saddam and empower the Iranian mullahs in his place. And now the same figures responsible for that policy disaster demand that the United States turn away from the prospect of a peaceful resolution with Iran, and toward still another armed conflict.

The fundamental truth, recognized by Republican idol Ronald Reagan, is that negotiations are always preferable to war. Yet many on the American right have often preferred war, including the utterly insane risk of nuclear war, to dealing with our enemies. Earlier this year, Scarborough suggested that even if the Iran deal looked better than expected, he disdains peace talks on principle – as do the neoconservatives, who rose to prominence lobbying against strategic arms negotiations with the Soviet Union.

“I never trusted the Soviets,” said Scarborough. “I never wanted Reagan to make deals with the Soviets in the late ‘80s. It turned out well, but I was always against détente and against dealing with communists. And right now, I’m against dealing with a country whose Supreme Leader calls us the devil, who says death to America at the same time he’s negotiating this deal.”

“It turned out well” is to put it very mildly. Not only was President Reagan’s reputation enhanced, but owing to decades of negotiation, we avoided a nuclear conflict that would have ended life on this planet. Yet Scarborough and his ilk reject the idea of talking with our enemies – although any negotiation over matters of war and peace will always require that distasteful necessity.

Twelve years ago, we made the historic mistake of listening to all these false and foolish prophets. There is no excuse to repeat that tragic error.

Photo: Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry shake hands in Vienna, on November 20, 2014, with Baroness Catherine Ashton. (U.S. Embassy Vienna via Flickr)

Joe Conason

A highly experienced journalist, author and editor, Joe Conason is the editor-in-chief of The National Memo, founded in July 2011. He was formerly the executive editor of the New York Observer, where he wrote a popular political column for many years. His columns are distributed by Creators Syndicate and his reporting and writing have appeared in many publications around the world, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, The New Yorker, The New Republic, The Nation, and Harpers.

Since November 2006, he has served as editor of The Investigative Fund, a nonprofit journalism center, where he has assigned and edited dozens of award-winning articles and broadcasts. He is also the author of two New York Times bestselling books, The Hunting of the President (St. Martins Press, 2000) and Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth (St. Martins Press, 2003).

Currently he is working on a new book about former President Bill Clinton's life and work since leaving the White House in 2001. He is a frequent guest on radio and television, including MSNBC's Morning Joe, and lives in New York City with his wife and two children.

  • 1


  1. idamag July 14, 2015

    Had a co-worker tell me once that when the Democrats were in taxes went up. I replied and when the Republicans are in, they start wars. So which is worse – paying taxes or sending our young people to die?

    1. Darsan54 July 14, 2015

      The economy also improves whenever the Democrats get in.

      1. Independent1 July 14, 2015

        You got that right. Like 2.6% average annual GDP growth since 1900 under Republicans vs 4.3% during those 115 or so years under Democrats.

        And don’t forget the stock market: Zero net gain during the 42 years a Republican was in office vs 300+% during the 43 years a Democrat was in office (since just after the ’29 market crash). Virtually every bit of realized gain in the market has occurred during Dem presidencies.

      2. paulyz July 15, 2015

        Yeah, like we have seen the last 7 years, LMAO.

        1. Paul Bass July 15, 2015

          Yes in your delusional right wing echo chamber.

        2. Independent1 July 15, 2015

          Let’s see: The longest positive jobs growth stretch in American history by around a year – NO OTHER PRESIDENT IS EVEN CLOSE!!

          More Jobs created in the last 6 years than were created in 12 years under the 2 failed Bush presidencies.

          The unemployment rate reduced faster and further the past 6 years than under any other president!!

          The stock market virtually tripling in 6 years for the 1st time in histthanory since the market has been over 3,000; salvaging the retirements of millions of Americans including mine.

          Deficit spending reduced faster and further over the past 5 years than under ANY PREVIOUS PRESIDENT!! Spending reduced more than 1 trillion/yr in 5 budgets.

          An auto industry that was on the verge of collapse, now seeing profits that it hadn’t seen since another Democrat was in office – Clinton.

          And I could go on and on. But I’ll let you dream real hard and try to list for us what any of the last 5 FAILED GOP PRESIDENTs who has come even close to accomplishing any of that!!!!!!!!!

        3. Independent1 July 15, 2015

          Something I failed to mention which should be dear to the hearts of many Americans.

          THE LAST 6 YEARS HAVE BEEN BY FAR THE SAFEST 6 YEARS FOR AMERICANS WORKING ABROAD over the past 40 plus years!! With only one attack on our consulates with 4 people dying!!

          While under the last 3 FAILED GOP PRESIDENTS, there was an average of 10 attacks during each of their presidencies with more than 70 people dying in those attacks!!!

          And those numbers don’t include the 241 Marines who died in their sleep in Lebanon during Reagan’s presidency; or the almost 3,000 who died on 9/11 because Bush and Cheney failed to do anything to try and prevent that attack (even though they were warned 7 times that it was coming).

      3. Dominick Vila July 15, 2015

        Which is remarkable considering the damage done by the Bush administration, which led W to admit in 2008 that the U.S. economy was on the verge of collapse.

    2. Independent1 July 14, 2015

      Remind your co-worker that when taxes go up, so generally does job creation, the economy and the stock market. When taxes are low, especially capital gains, businesses and the wealthy don’t have an incentive to take the risks involved in creating new companies or expanding existing ones. It’s too easy for them to make money through investments – especially overseas. It’s only when taxes go up and cut their profits from investments, that the wealthy and companies really pull their monies out of investments and are willing to take on more risk. (And when they’re willing to do that, hiring usually goes up as do salaries which often more than offset the tax increases.)

  2. Darsan54 July 14, 2015

    Joe, don’t be insulting to used car salesmen. You know going in its a negotiation and some of the facts are going to be held back; just like you’re going to hold some back from him. Kristol and Krauthammer are deluded and incapable of seeing the errors in their thinking. They didn’t use reason getting into it, so they aren’t going to use it to get out.

  3. Independent1 July 14, 2015

    The GOP is going to keep their charade up about the Iran deal as long as possible, because they’re running out of fake scandals like Benghazi and the never happened IRS fantasy, in their efforts to divert the American populace from realizing that they have no clue how to govern and are once again playing the stalling game. They desperately don’t want to make their constituents really aware that they’ve had total control of Congress for almost 7 months and have virtually accomplished nothing; so they’ve got to create as much diversion as they can while they continue their legislative stalling.

    So we’re going to see them milking a really non-existent illegal alien situation, a just recently accomplished Iranian nuclear deal, what they can salvage of the Benghazi fiasco and of course their opposition to anything and everything Hillary; or even Bernie may campaign on.

    1. charleo1 July 15, 2015

      This strategy would seem to be loser for them. Because even though most Americans do not trust Tehran. They correctly see the alternative to a deal, as another war in the Mid-East over presumed development of WMDs. There is simply no trust in our intelligence agencies to get it right. And no dry political powder for another boots on the ground 200,000 troop deployment, either here nor, certainly in an economically troubled Europe. There will no repeat of Iraq.
      Period! If Iran was the threat, then that’s where we should have gone in 2003.

      1. Independent1 July 15, 2015

        You would think the vast majority of the American public would be smart enough to realize that; and the GOP too. But notice the GOPers all coming out with dire predictions: Boehner and Cheney even claiming: “the deal is moving us closer to nuclear war”. Starting in with the heavy-weight fear tactics.

        1. charleo1 July 15, 2015

          I look at it this way. If I were the American public. And I am of course! Why would I buy another used car from these guys? After the Iraqi clunker they sold me back in ’03? I don’t think so. It’s like W. said, “Fool me once shame on you.” “Fool me twice…ain’t gonna fool me again!” Those are profound words to live by, my friend!

          1. Independent1 July 15, 2015

            I can only hope what you’re thinking comes to pass. What bothers me, is even though it’s as plain as the nose on your face that the GOP is working to destroy SS and Medicare; they make that very clear;still a plurality of seniors vote for these destroyers of their retirement years.

          2. charleo1 July 15, 2015

            Well, I don’t mean to sound cocky. But these peckerwoods really do have nothing to offer 99% of Americans but a line of BS. And, as good as that’s been in hornswoggling the rural Whites, the demographics are going to get them. You are the numbers guy! So you know what I’m saying. And undoubtedly they see it too. Their numbers crunchers warn them to be careful how they talk about Latinos, and other minorities. And to at least attempt to thread the needle when talking about the poor. To be cautious in how they address women’s issues on pay, or contraception. But just listen to them already. Only a couple of months into their must win Presidential race. Trump is # one, with their still hopping mad hangers on in the hinterland, over a Black man in the White House, in their America! They really are a sick, out of touch political organization. And people are not half as dumb as they apparently think. When they talk about running out of money for SS. But, demand the rich pay no taxes, and a carte blanche free for all for the corporations, seemingly mucking up everything they touch. Their transparent non-issue of voter fraud, they all are forced to trot out to try to hold off the swelling tide of people who are wise to their anti democracy, shill for rich crap. As I said it’s hard not be be cocky. But I also realize, things are too important to become complacent.

          3. Independent1 July 15, 2015

            One thing’s clear, it’s imperative that the Dems work hard at overcoming as much of the GOP voter suppression as they can and get volunteers to do the legwork needed to get out as many voters in 2016 as is possible. If there’s a good voter turnout, we stand a much better chance at keeping the GOP clown show out of the White House. America could simply not survive another GOP disaster president as the country is trying to just get recovered from the last one.

            On a little different subject, there’s an article in the Daily Kos today by a contributor using the byline PCalith that I agree with 100%. The article is titled:

            Obama’s Spectacular Presidency

            Here are some excerpts:

            I just wanted this to get some air. Obama is officially the best President the U.S. has had in a long, looong time. From finally cracking the health insurance nut, to getting the Iran deal, his Presidency has been one of cool, clear headed forward thinking.

            His presidency holds massive symbolic value as proof that the reign of white men over American government can be halted and America as a whole can be represented. And while he was too slow in announcing support for same-sex marriage, he appointed two of the justices behind the Supreme Court’s historic decision legalizing it nationwide, and enlisted his Justice Department on the side of the plaintiffs.We’ve never had anyone like him – and I would be very surprised if we ever did again. No man has carried the office, through joy and struggle, as well and as dutifully as President Obama.

            There are definite points of disagreement I have with him, but it’s still a damn shame we can’t get a third term out of him.

            To read a little more on the article where PCalith sums up what he feels are some of Obama’s accomplishments, go here:


  4. anothertoothpick July 15, 2015

    The repubs have put themselves in a lose…lose situation.

    With the Anti-everything Obama I hope Obama fails mantra they have set themselves up to vote yes for peace and loose the next primary.

    The repubs are their own worst enemy.

  5. Dominick Vila July 15, 2015

    Because having failed at making President Obama a one term president, the only recourse left to the most radical members of the GOP, and their financiers, is to undermine his legacy. The contents and efficacy of the nuclear weapons agreement reached with Iran is immaterial to most Republicans, their goal is to punish a man they hate, even if doing so compromises our national security and the security of the world.

    1. FireBaron July 15, 2015

      Dominick, I have already figured out what the next GOP target against Barak Obama is – Criminal Justice Reform. Here’s why.
      With the exception of the Koch Brothers’ sock puppet, Scott Walker, ever other major Republican aspirant for President has been calling for Criminal Justice Reform (the Koch Brothers have been, too, but apparently they have not been able to successfully throw their voices into Walker on that one yet.)!
      Yesterday, the President called for Criminal Justice Reform. Now we can guarantee that the GOP will be opposed to it in any way, shape or form. Why? Because President Obama is calling for it! Just like Single-Payer Health Care reform was originally a Republican idea, once a Democrat asked for it, the GOP was required to oppose it.

      1. Dominick Vila July 15, 2015

        I support Criminal Justice Reform 100%. There is no justification or logic to lock up young people for years, and ruing their lives, because they got caught with a few ounces of pot in their pockets. That is, except for the need to support the prison system, which is a money making machine.
        I would not be surprised if in the end a couple of Democrats loyal to Israel, such as Schumer and Levin vote no, a handful of Republicans vote yes, and all the Independents vote yes, with enough votes in favor of the agreement to avoid over-riding a presidential veto. In addition to attacking anything President Obama proposes, the GOP knows, deep inside, that this agreement is bound to help stabilize the Persian Gulf, the Middle East, and may even have a positive impact on our economy, as a result of potential exports and the availability of cheap Iranian oil, which would further reduce gas prices at the pump.
        Since the benefits of this agreement are likely to be felt 2 or 3 years from now, the GOP is delighted to score political points now, and take credit from the benefits of this agreement a few years from now…if our lame media allows them to do so.

        1. GraceAdams830 July 15, 2015

          Privatized prisons are the one constitutional loophole in the 13th anti-slavery amendment. There are some very sore losers of the Civil War.

    2. charleo1 July 15, 2015

      Now there’s some real Patriots! With people like this in our own Gov. We don’t need to go half way around the World to root out threats to our National Security. Maybe Iran is not the Country with nuclear capability, the World should be most worrying about? Just sayin’

      1. Dominick Vila July 15, 2015

        The worst part, in my opinion, is the damage the GOP is doing to the Office of the Presidency, this time at an international level. When the representatives of all the other countries participating in the negotiations agreed to the terms of the agreement, the issue was settled and agreed upon. In our case, the immediate reaction by the GOP was criticism, negativism, fear mongering, and a receptive attitude to the predictable statements made by Netanyahu.

        1. bobnstuff July 15, 2015

          The best part is they did it without even reading it.

          1. Dominick Vila July 16, 2015

            …which is not unprecedented.

          2. charleo1 July 16, 2015

            It is my perception the World community has became very concerned about America’s loss of it’s ability to speak with a singular voice, and therefore to create a reliable consistent foreign policy that is understood to generally transcend the office of the President. This has been especially true after Bush 43, and his team turned American foreign policy on it’s head, post 9/11. Which left many of our European, and NATO Allies to wonder, what can we expect next from this incredibly powerful Nation upon which so much of our own, both military, and financial security depends? And in both cases, they feel as if America had essentially sold them a bill of goods. First with the contention that their governments must ally with us to take nuclear weapons out of the hands of Saddam Hussain, who would absolutely give them to terrorists bent on killing millions in the West. And they agreed, only to find that we, our intelligence agencies, or our leadership, were either accidentally wrong, or worse, and much more frightening to the Europeans, had intentionally deceived them. In the end it didn’t matter. They had been mislead, and most replaced their leaders, and governments at the earliest opportunity. Only to discover that another kind of betrayal had been imposed upon them. This one served to devastate their economies, and further erode their confidence, and trust. And as their collective economies teetered on the brink between some recovery, and the abyss. They took some heart that Americans had also changed their leadership. And hoped that whatever had taken grip over the mental state of the Country, could be set on a saner course by this new historic President. And America would return as the strong, prudent, voice in World affairs that they themselves are so invested in, and need in so many ways. After all, they must wonder, if not America, then who? The Communist Chinese? This is one reason America needs to back it’s President on this. An issue I believe many around the World correctly as a decision between continuing down a path toward a policy of preemptive war, or one of a prevalence for negotiated peace, and containment for the World’s worst actors.

          3. Independent1 July 16, 2015

            Problem is Republicans have a couple major problems with international treaties – 1) As Jeb Bush just pointed out, recognizing all those big words with lots of syllables that are usually included in treaties, and 2) even if they’ve seen the words before, having the intelligence to truly comprehend what the words mean.

            As Itsfun has already demonstrated here, although the treaty with Iran actually is a road map to preventing Iran from creating a nuclear weapon, being a Republican, Itsfun doesn’t have the intelligence and comprehension ability to understand the treaty. So his only option is to criticize it and make up some propaganda about it just like Faux News does with everything it publishes. Because Faux News is of course staffed by Republican lovers so the Faux News staff also doesn’t have the intelligence to even understand the lies they spew every day.

          4. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015

            itsfun doesn’t have the brains to “make up” even the drivel he posts: sounds like it’s straight from Fox “News” to me.

      2. Independent1 July 16, 2015

        As I’ve mentioned at least a few times: The GOP is America’s worst enemy; they’re working to destroy America from the inside.

    3. Sand_Cat July 15, 2015

      Clearly they hate Obama more than they hate the Iranians.

      1. Independent1 July 16, 2015

        And part of that is because the Iranians, like Saddam did, give the Republicans a ‘fear factor’ to rile up their base and even other Americans.

  6. gmccpa July 15, 2015

    Not to mention N. Korea. After the Clinton administration, the war hawk administration took a very hard line with them. How’d that work out?

    1. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015

      How did their signature foreign policy “accomplishments” – Iraq and Afghanistan – work out?

  7. itsfun July 15, 2015

    A new nuclear arms race begins.

    1. Paul Bass July 15, 2015

      They were 2 months away from a bomb, now 10 years, are you saying you agree with the loony GOPs.

      The republicans agree with the Republican Guard, the most anti-everything, head chopping off regime in history, worse than the Nazis?

      I guess they are so simple they believe the “republican” in Republican Guard.

      1. itsfun July 15, 2015

        Giving nuclear weapons to people that still vow to kill all Americans doesn’t make a lot of sense.

        1. Paul Bass July 15, 2015

          Giving??? Have you not read anything? They ALREADY have enough weapons grade fissionable material to make OVER 10 bombs!!!
          They are going to REDUCE this number 95%, AND we can have inspectors at their military sites for the FIRST time!
          Please read anything about the actual agreement before you appear uninformed.

          1. itsfun July 15, 2015

            Do you actually believe Iran will reduce anything? We have to give a 14 day notice before any inspections. A lot of things can be moved in 14 days. The only thing this agreement does is guarantee a nuclear Iran. Other countries over there are not just going to stand by and watch Iran get nuclear weapons.

          2. Independent1 July 15, 2015

            Apparently there are still NM posters who aren’t aware they’re trying to carry on a conversation with a six-year-old babbling idiot!! You need to really grow up!!

          3. bobnstuff July 16, 2015

            So if we do not have an agreement they get a boom, we have no one on the ground and go in blind against the best army in the middle east.

          4. itsfun July 16, 2015

            This is a country that has and is still saying death to America. They are going to do what they want to regardless of any agreement. They only understand violence and killing. I am not and never have said anything about going there and taking on their army or anything. just saying you can’t trust that country any farther than you can throw a building. Saying their neighbors are not going to just stand by and watch them get nuclear weapons and not do anything. The sanctions were working. We had the big gun, instead we caved in to them.

          5. bobnstuff July 16, 2015

            If we do nothing, leave the sanctions in place, they get the boom. If Israel goes to war with them we go to war. This is our best option. The people of Iran want to be part of the world again. As far as them saying death to Americans we call them the evil empire.

          6. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            I see you have awakened the helmet clad moron. Who travels in a sailboat.

          7. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            I think the responsibility goes to those who voted him into office.

          8. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015

            That’s what you get for thinking when you haven’t a clue, unless you’re talking about Eisenhower, who started our problems with Iran in order to shore up BP’s – yes THAT BP – profits. If you want to agree with someone, you might trying picking someone other that itsfun. I’m confident it will never be me.

          9. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            When you say the best army in the middle east, you mean like Saddam’s Republican Guard? Or maybe Egypt who got beaten till eyes bled by tiny little Israel.

          10. bobnstuff July 19, 2015


            Iran is no so defenseless as you would think. They have population and land mass as well as a well educated population. After all they can build atomic boom can’t they?

          11. hicusdicus July 20, 2015

            Yes they are. If the US military showed up the Iranian population would turn the Mullahs into ground hamburger. The Iranians are Aryan not camel jockey’s. As far as nuke building, what about the retarded north Korean regime and the Packies. My father in-law built Nukes.. He said they were not that difficult but H bombs were a different story. He had degrees in chemistry, Physics and structural engineering plus some other stuff. Most everything he did was classified and he has since passed.

          12. bobnstuff July 20, 2015

            Things to remember, the top Iranian engineers were trained in the US. They know what they are doing. Iran has a long history and are not to be taken lightly. The US army is well trained and well equipped but if you look at how we fight wars today you wouldn’t guess that. For all the money we spend it should be a lot better but we spend it in the wrong places.

          13. hicusdicus July 20, 2015

            If you really want some clarification on the issue. Read Arms and the Dudes.The author is Guy Dawson. Its a true story and you will need to buy a lot of anti acid pills. How about 22,000,000 rounds of AK 47 bought by the US military from China and through corruption a good deal of it went to the Taliban. This does not include 465,000 small arms ,15,000 hand grenades plus 32,000 artillery shells and 750,000 rifles. This book will really exercise your sphincter muscle.You helped pay for it.

          14. bobnstuff July 20, 2015

            The authors name is Guy Lawson. There is a movie in the works. This is just what I mean about the US not knowing how to fight a war. We waste billions of dollars every year and as long as it goes to the right people, in other words the people that give to your campaign no one does anything about it. I get upset every time I here about this kind of thing. It’s OK for the government, democrats and republican alike to screw over our troops with low pay and bad equipment but the vendor get money even when they screw up and go over budget.

          15. hicusdicus July 20, 2015

            Dawson, Lawson I was pretty close for me being a retard. When I commented I forgot to put my helmet on. Our entire government is a cluster intercourse composed of greedy short sighted morons. Our government is too big and cumbersome to function well. Just be ready for the SHTF. It does not matter who is in the drivers seat. We are headed down the mountain and the brakes are burning. Good luck you are going to need it.

          16. bobnstuff July 20, 2015

            I don’t think is a case of size but more a case of having forgot why they are there.

            We the People of the United States, in Order to form a
            more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

            This is why we have a government.

          17. hicusdicus July 20, 2015

            Now we have way to much government and a fading constitution.

          18. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015

            Each of your posts makes it more abundantly clear how unwilling you are to consider facts, as opposed to right-wing paranoid ravings by the war lovers.

          19. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            Agreement with Muslim fanatics? This only happens between Muslims and that can be pretty ify.

        2. Sand_Cat July 19, 2015

          Your statement about “giving” makes about as much sense as most of the other trash you post here.

      2. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

        What are you talking about????????

    2. johninPCFL July 15, 2015

      Bibi has been announcing annually for a decade that Iran will “have nuclear weapons next year”. It’d be good if he were right just once, wouldn’t it?

      1. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

        Has it ever occurred to anyone they may already have nukes and are playing political games? North Korea has nukes and Russia has nukes and they are all scratching each others back to destroy the US. Who knows, the Chinese may be in on it also.

        1. Independent1 July 16, 2015

          What would you mentally retarded lowlifes do if you didn’t have something to create a fear factor over??? You obviously don’t have the mental intelligence to actually make a sensible post otherwise!!!!!!!

    3. charleo1 July 15, 2015

      A new arms race, in the Mid-East? You mean not counting the first nuclear arms placed in Israel by the U.S. years ago? Or, Pakistan’s, next door to India’s. Or, Saddam Hussain’s huge WMD program that didn’t exist, Bush spent 3 trillion dollars, and expended God knows how many lives, “eliminating.” At some point we’ve got to start making better sense with this issue, don’t you think?

      1. itsfun July 15, 2015

        Assuring Iran a nuclear weapon doesn’t make better sense. i doubt if Israel lets that happen.

        1. charleo1 July 15, 2015

          Israel should be careful they don’t let Netanyahu’s battleship mouth overload his U.S.military dependent rear end. What he needs to do is quit killing his neighbors, quit throwing a fit.
          And remember who’s the one with the real nuclear program.
          And, if he wants to stop an arms race, he could start at home.

          1. itsfun July 15, 2015

            Just won’t surprise me if Israel uses their nuclear power before Iran makes a few bombs.

          2. charleo1 July 15, 2015

            Another Zionist wet dream that will never happen.

          3. itsfun July 16, 2015

            Lets hope not. We only have one earth, nuclear wars would probably destroy it.

          4. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            It won’t destroy the earth it will just get rid of the human pestilence. Then intelligent life can return, like the dinosaurs. I just had a thought what if there were liberal and conservative dinosaurs? The crap would start all over again. At least there won’t be any white ones to blame everything on. The albino’s would be immediately turned into fertilizer.

          5. charleo1 July 16, 2015

            There are Conservative Dinosaurs now. You can tell by the way most of them are humping like rabbits for another Mid East war.

          6. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            They are?????????????????

          7. charleo1 July 16, 2015

            You can’t name any politicians motoring around under the Con
            banner? Writing letters to the head of Iran, in the middle of critical negotiations? Swearing to stop the last, best chance to avoid what would be a disastrous war with Iran. One we the U.S. would be expected to carry out mostly by ourselves? Already 17 trillion in debt, and these budget wonders want another war. And you can’t name one? And you don’t ever tell whoppers?

          8. hicusdicus July 17, 2015

            Name one what? The Muslims have never negotiated in good faith since Mohammed took his first child bride. We are not going to avoid a war with the Muslims we have just kicked the can fat enough down the road for Iran to have time to build up allies and strengthen their military.

          9. charleo1 July 17, 2015

            You’re deflecting about Conservative Dinosaurs. But speaking of Iran building up allies. What do you consider we just spent the last decade in Iraq doing, if not creating an ally for Iran? Besides not avoiding a war with the Muslims, our military adventurism in Iraq over non existent nuclear weapons, has made things exponentially worse. So naturally the thing any Right Winger worth his salt wants to to do, is double down. If we didn’t get the results we wanted the first time, the first 3 trillion, the first 30,000 wounded. The answer is try harder. Send more troops, drop more bombs, invade another Country. This one 3X the size, and no doubt 3X the fun! Because everybody knows talking is for Left Wingers, and Sissies. Every endeavor at diplomacy is appeasement. So, if you want people to do exactly what you demand of them, you just can’t trust ’em. You’ve got to bomb their countries into rubble. Set up your own puppets to run things. And force them Muslims at bayonet point to put down their guns.

          10. hicusdicus July 17, 2015

            That’s the way human kind has been doing it since they started walking upright. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Turn the other cheek so you can see more targets. Love your neighbor as yourself. Bury him in the back yard and move into his house. Bayonets are cheaper than bullets and recyclable. I am sure the powers that be will be real interested in your ideas.

          11. Sand_Cat July 19, 2015

            I seem to remember another government that signed treaty after treaty with other nations and never kept one, instead committing genocide against those nations. That same nation was and is still outstanding for condemning others for doing what it does, sometimes covertly, but often openly. That same nation overthrew a friendly, fairly-elected government in Iran to install a savage dictator more amenable to its interests, one of many it has overthrown or sponsored terrorism against.

          12. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            You are with out a doubt anti American. You are also a propagandist who twists things to suit you. You either are ignorant of real history or a blatant liar. Either way you are someone to be avoided.

          13. Sand_Cat July 20, 2015

            Yes, those who speak truth are most definitely to be avoided these days. As for anti-American, I’d say I’m anti-hypocrite, i.e., those pots who call the kettle black. Your statements show it is you who distort history to your own ends. You second statement is completely false, and if you don’t know it, then you are thoroughly ignorant as well. But avoid me if you like; you haven’t done much of a job of it to date, breaking into conversations I had with others at will (which is fine, just not “avoiding”).

          14. Ran_dum_Thot July 18, 2015

            Stop war with Iran? From MSN: ” Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei withheld his verdict on Iran’s
            nuclear deal on Saturday but in a fiery address vowed enduring
            opposition to the United States and its Middle East policies…We have repeatedly said we don’t negotiate with the U.S. on regional or
            international affairs; not even on bilateral issues. There are some
            exceptions like the nuclear programme that we negotiated with Americans
            to serve our interests….. Whether the deal is approved or disapproved, we will never stop
            supporting our friends…. Even after this deal our policy
            towards the arrogant U.S. will not change.” This doesn’t sound anti-war.

          15. charleo1 July 18, 2015

            There is absolutely nothing predestined about a war with Iran. Or nothing their leader said in his, “Fiery speech,” created for domestic consumption, about the U.S. we haven’t heard before. Or said ourselves about his regime, our interests in the region, or our undying devotion to the State of Israel. This deal is not about the West making nice with Iran, or vice versa. But about monitoring their nuclear program to prevent them from doing the things necessary to create a weapon. Which they have always maintained they do not seek. The deal is about the Iranians allowing the World to watch, and the World allow them to have a better economy. Look, Nikita Khrushchev once beat his shoe on a podium in the UN. and promised to bury the United States. And we were able to avoid war. We still talked, negotiated, and signed nuclear reduction treaties. There is nothing that precludes peace with Iran.

          16. Ran_dum_Thot July 18, 2015

            Well, I don’t think the Russians back then were hell bent to kill Americans for being Americans. The Iranians, on the other hand, have made a point of killing Americans considering it a god given obligation. The Russians rattled swords, the Muslims use them.

          17. charleo1 July 18, 2015

            Maybe you’re making a convenient argument, or are too young to remember. But the Russians were plenty dangerous, and very aggressive. They did develop nuclear weapons, and knew
            how to hit us in 15 minutes! Did you know we kept a squadron of B-52s carrying nuclear warheads aloft 24/7 for more than a decade to assure second strike capability? Were they hell bent? We sure thought so. Yet, the thought was to never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate. The success of wise leaders
            on both sides determined to talk it out, rather than fight it out, probably accounts for our being here, and alive today. So yes, absolutely! Stop the war talk with Iran, as if it were a forgone conclusion.

          18. Sand_Cat July 19, 2015

            They want to kill Americans because Americans (or many of those in power) want to kill them. I guess you missed McCain’s little variation on the Beach Boys’s song a few years ago. But of course, most Americans never once have the idea of considering how their enemies see them, and why.
            You also seem to have missed that most Iranian people – as opposed to the demagogues – still love Americans; they hate our GOVERNMENT. Unfortunately, the American people don’t seem inclined to reciprocate: they hate both the Iranians and their government, even though the latter is probably far less representative of the people than ours.

          19. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            Speak for yourself. Iranians are not part of this equation, its Islam and its geopolitical designs for world domination at any cost.

          20. Ran_dum_Thot July 23, 2015

            As long as these lovable people condone their evil government and refuse to rebel against its wrong doing, they are guilty by association. Like most people, the status quo is preferred over the disrupton caused by civil disobedience , dieing or being imprisoned for expressing one’s beliefs. This holds true for just about any country, USA included.

          21. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

            I never said they were lovable, though I knew some in the Shah’s time who I liked a lot.
            As you point out, Americans are at least partly responsible for that part of our government not yet bought out from under us – though we could do as you suggest and might be able to change some things – but what I said about Americans is true as well. I don’t know if individual Iranians are ignorant or just foolish for not holding all Americans responsible for the sins of our government, including the Shah and the chaos and theocracy that followed his fall.

          22. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            The point you have completely missed is that the Russians are not religious fanatics. Fanatics who believe killing non believers give them a special place in paradise. The only thing keeping the Iranians from a better economy is their belligerent religious beliefs.

          23. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

            One thing you do not want is a government of elected officials that essentially act, talk and react like little mindless puppets. Without descent, without discussion, without any and all opinions expressed and acted upon, we will become another collapsing civilization. We will have a dictator and his cohorts in power, doing as they please. Look at most of Africa, the middle East, central Europe, even China. If that is the way you want to live and the life you want for your children keep on spouting your nonsense.

          24. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015


          25. hicusdicus July 17, 2015


          26. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

            Threat of war is preferable to the Demonuts giving fanatics the power and tools to destroy civilization? How could you be so naive to think that Iran will honor the deal hacked out by its enemies? The Ayatollah has already stated he agrees to the nuclear deal because it will be useful to Iran’s for destroying the USA.

          27. charleo1 July 24, 2015

            Your first myopic, and false assertion, is this issue is an entirely domestic Left, Right issue. It is not. Just as to impose effective sanctions there must be multilateral cooperation. Any threat of military action to be truly effective, would require the same. And that is clearly so not in the cards, it doesn’t meet the minimal standard of a good bluff. As to the oft quoted recent statements by the Supreme Leader. Both sides make bellicose statements. Ours goes like this. All options are on the table, with respect to Iran’s nuclear weapons program. His says, “Death to America!” And both sides equally non credible statements can be seen as being made primarily for domestic consumption to placate the hard core, fanatical elements within the body politic of each Country. As for those hardliners in this Country. What they need to understand, is we are no longer capable of ruling the World. That’s if we ever were. And it follows then, we should not go around acting as if we do. It makes us look like a bunch of war mongering idiots. Especially after the U.S. led fiasco in Iraq. So at the end of the day, what will govern the behavior of Iran, is if abiding by the deal serves their long term best interests. And it’s enforcement, or lack thereof, will be determined by the same dynamic for the five other signatory nations. And the fact is, there’s nothing in this interconnected, economically interdependent World, America alone can do about it. And the discussion needs to reflect this. Unless it is the intent of the Republican Right to create a situation where only they may negotiate matters of war, and peace. Where any treaty, or agreement so signed by a Democratic President is quashed immediately. Without first even having inspected, or read the document. Then, to expect our Allies, signatories of the agreement themselves. To at our insistence, turn and reject the agreement out of hand. Reinstate sanctions, which cost their struggling economies. And then, at a time determined by us, those sanctions are deemed insufficient to bring Iran to heel. We ask that our Allies build the political support within their own respective populations to a point that displays to the Iranians their willingness to follow us, the U.S., into yet another preemptive action against yet another Middle Eastern Country, over the WMD issue. And that Sir, is the facts as to the extent of the believability of your so called, preferable, “threat of war.” The question is, why do you, and others on the Right insist on such a reckless, and unrealistic strategy? As neither our Allies, nor Russia, and China, or the Iranians themselves, not stupid people in all this, clearly do not?

          28. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

            The issue most definitely is not right vs. left, nor did I say that. Unfortunately our beloved elected officials tend to follow party lines. Thus the Dems will end up supporting Obama whether they want to or not. The ‘Pubs will rant and rave, but will probably cave in enough to give necessary support to the debacle, excuse me, agreement. We are not the prominent power we once were and I am glad for that. The rest of the world can self destruct as far as I am concerned. The realty is that trouble over there can spill onto our shores. I always thought that bullys should be cut down as soon as possible, but politicians aren’t of that mind.

          29. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015

            I thought God would prevent the destruction of the earth. Obviously, that’s what you and the other right-wingers are counting on – if not the idiotic and totally unscriptural “Rapture” – to save you from the consequences of your own actions and the policies you support.

          30. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            Which God was it that is supposed to save the world? I really don’t follow that line of thought since I know there is no divine creator.

          31. Sand_Cat July 20, 2015

            One thing we agree on. I was just echoing (or lampooning) the claims of many of our “Christian” politicians and the poster to whom it was directed especially. The satire/irony wasn’t aimed at you, so your “answer” isn’t really necessary or pertinent.

          32. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            So! is that a problem??????????

          33. Sand_Cat July 16, 2015

            Not to you, maybe.
            charleo1 is primarily talking about how Netanyahu treats the Arabs in the the occupied territories, among other things stealing land from individual Arabs to settle more religious fanatics. That is certainly what concerns most critics of Israel, not anti-semitism, though of course that – like racism in this country – is still going strong, both here and elsewhere.

          34. hicusdicus July 17, 2015

            What happens to Arabs, who cares. What have they ever done for you? Bigotry is one of the main attributes of humans. Every human is a bigot in some form. You will soon be a bigot toward Hicus because you don’t agree with him. I don’t like him, he steals my socks and buries them.

          35. Sand_Cat July 18, 2015

            Speak for yourself.

          36. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            I thought that is what I was doing.

          37. itsfun July 16, 2015

            not for me

          38. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            With neighbors like Israel has who needs enemies. You are with out doubt anti Semitic. Why is that? They really did not kill Jesus because Jesus never existed.

          39. charleo1 July 16, 2015

            Did I say anything about Jesus? No. Did I say anything about Netanyahu that was untrue, or that I wouldn’t say about any other leader of any other Country demanding as he does? To effect the use of our military to carry out his hardline vendetta against the Arab? Or, to attempt as he does, to undermine the POTUS, and his policy. In order to corner this Country into a war by opposing without fact, the best possible option to avoid such a war. To characterize such an objection as somehow anti semetic, is ridiculous. What anti-Semitic? I’m anti-stupid war!

          40. hicusdicus July 16, 2015

            War is one of the basics of human nature. The only important thing is to come out on top. Another major war is coming and is going to be a baddie. You are anti Semitic so come to grips and quit denying it.

          41. charleo1 July 16, 2015

            You couldn’t be more wrong on your first assumption. Man can and must learn to co-exist, or he’s finished as a specie. And I could not be more hopeful that you are wrong on the second. There will be no, “coming out on top,” in the next major conflict. There will very likely be little if any, coming out at all. And I know you are wrong on the third. For, if strongly disagreeing with an Israeli hardliner make me anti-Semitic. Then the majority of Jews in this Country are anti-Semitic.

        2. Sand_Cat July 15, 2015

          Can’t you do anything but parrot talking points from the idiots who were wrong about practically everything else in the region?
          Obviously not.

    4. Daniel Jones July 15, 2015

      Once again, you go diametrically opposite from the point.

      The deal is going to help *prevent* an arms race, not provoke it and allow for Republican hand-wringing and glad-handing to promote a formerly avoidable war.

      All your lovingly, blindly, unthinkingly cribbed sources for these trollish shots are, as always, wrong. They know they’re wrong. They knew they were wrong last time, but they honestly think if they throw enough lives away they will make themselves right.

      Aren’t you ashamed of yourself by now?

      1. itsfun July 16, 2015

        Why should I be ashamed of myself? Do you actually believe that countries with money will not start to buy and stockpile nuclear weapons? They are not going to stand around and let Iran attack them with nuclear weapons.

    5. Insinnergy July 17, 2015

      Shhh the adults are talking.

  8. FT66 July 15, 2015

    Any voter out there, if you voted in 2008 being angry for taking the country to Iraq war, come 2016 you must come again to vote. This time will be preventing to go to Iran war. Lining up once again of these war mongers, wakes up us all. We are not going to let young lives, treasure be lost one more time without forgetting wounded soldiers who were left alone with no assistance. NOT ANYMORE. NOT ON OUR WATCH.

    1. Dominick Vila July 15, 2015

      In addition to bringing many of our soldiers back in body bags in the middle of the night, and thousands suffering in Vet hospitals, many veterans are among the homeless. The only thing that is more shameful than sacrificing so many of our young for no real reason, other than helping W politically and for economic reasons, the most embarrassing for us as a society is the way we have treated our veterans when they came home.

      1. Independent1 July 16, 2015

        And guess who is leading the charge at reducing SS benefits for even disabled vets – Rand Paul. And what he and his cohorts are trying to pull off could result in reduced benefits across the board for retirees on SS.

        Here’s some excerpts from an LA Times article on that:

        Rand Paul steps up the GOP attack on Social Security

        If Paul’s words truly represent the Republican Party’s approach to Social Security, then not just the disabled but everyone else with an interest in the program — taxpayers, retirees and their survivors and dependents — should start panicking now. We reported on the first shot fired at Social Security by the new GOP Congress here. Paul has now raised the stakes.

        The disability program is facing a fiscal crisis that could force a cutback in disability payments of about 20% starting next year; Paul and other Republicans have signaled that they won’t accept the customary remedy for similar situations, which involves reallocating some payroll tax revenue from the old-age fund to cover disability’s near-term shortfall. Instead, they’re demanding a full-scale fiscal rebalancing of Social Security, which in practice means benefit cuts for everyone — disabled, retirees and their families.

        A large proportion of Paul’s own constituents would be harmed by his approach. In 2013, his home state of Kentucky had the fourth-highest disability rate in the country — more than 225,000 residents, or 8.2% of the population — fostered in part by low educational attainment and lack of gainful employment opportunities. (What has Paul done to alleviate those conditions?)

        The most cynical aspect of this attack is that it comes from some lawmakers who were helped by Social Security in their own lives. The roster includes Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who received Social Security benefits during his college years, after his father’s untimely death, and now thinks that the nation can’t afford to keep paying them as currently scheduled.

        Another is Rep. Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), the sponsor of the House rules change, whose father died when he was 2 and then was raised by a single mother on Social Security and veterans benefits. Now he talks about Social Security going “bankrupt,” which is flatly incorrect, and promotes a measure aimed at cutting benefits for all. This is known as climbing the ladder and pulling it up behind you. If Reed, Ryan and Paul get their way, the only option left to the rest of us will be to hold tight.


        1. Dominick Vila July 16, 2015

          For a Republican, anything is better than asking those who can afford to pay a little more to help provide adequate funding to programs that are already substandard compared to similar programs in other industrialized nations. The simplest solution to solve the SS funding problem is to raise the contribution cap to $250K. Needless to say, that’s sacrilege to most Republicans who much rather take a few dollars from our most vulnerable citizens than asking the well off to pay a little more.
          This could change the dynamics of the 2016 electoral campaign if Democratic strategists know how to play the game. Seniors and the parents of the disabled vote!

  9. kingartie1 July 15, 2015

    How convenient that these history-ignorant politicos and pundits fail to mention the abysmal, corrupt, intractably hypocritical and ominous intervention of the “democratic, freedom-loving, human-rights” in 1953 by the USA and UK to overthrow the duly and legitimately elected president of Iran, Mossadegh, to install the Shah of Iran, Pahlevi. The reason? Mossadegh had announced plans to nationalize the oil industry–oil that was in and under Iran, so therefore, IRANIAN PROPERTY–and kick the Western oil lords out of his country. So Big Oil colluded with the CIA and Brit “intelligence” to remove him and, as in a dozen or more other nations–Congo, Vietnam, Honduras, Panama, et al–we betrayed the very We the People interests the U.S. has proclaimed for a century to be sacred. The Shah proved to be their Man in Teheran for 25 years: easy access to Iranian oil and territory, the ruthless suppression of all dissent, rigged elections, and so on. Brutal “realpolitik” was in full flower. The West enabled the Shah to rip away any true civil and voting rights and freedom of expression. Who but a jingoistic, ethically blind, intellectually warped and almost sociopathic persona believes, then, that Iran should have no doubts about OUR trust and honesty? Show me one Republican’t who for more than five minutes is smarter than a half-wit on these facts and I will admit there is a sliver of hope for these cretins. But you cannot show me because these subhumans are admitting that they are content to repeat policies that have failed utterly for the past 100 years. The impulse to repeat the same failures over and over and each time expect a different result is one definition of INSANITY.

    1. Dominick Vila July 15, 2015

      Excellent post. Thank you!

    2. GraceAdams830 July 15, 2015

      The only parties to profit from war are: makers and sellers of weapons, and natural resource extracting firms that covet natural resources belonging to the nation they want to attack.
      We need to fight anthropogenic global warming rather than any nation and can spend just as much money hiring those makers and sellers of weapons to make the equipment we need to fight anthropogenic global warming.
      We really need to leave all fossil fuels in the ground and recycle everything that can be recycled, which is most of the rest of natural resources.

      1. itsfun July 15, 2015

        What about the new ice age being predicted in the next 20 years?

        1. GraceAdams830 July 15, 2015

          I am convinced that for the next 20 years, world average temperatures are more likely to rise than to fall.

          1. hicusdicus July 19, 2015

            You are convinced? I am impressed. Are you also convinced there is life after death? Are these things you are convinced of based on something you read? Written by someone who got their information from some mystical source.

        2. Sand_Cat July 15, 2015

          By whom and on what evidence?
          Obviously, we all know you’d prefer to spend the money killing and abusing people in this and other countries, so what about that?

        3. rustacus21 July 18, 2015

          What about it? Predictions are a conservative exercise. Facts are, we’re now over the threshold of safely backing down & away from fossil fuel use. We’re at the stage of emergency preparations for the inevitable calamity of blunt-force Global Climate Change. Our last best chance was the election of 2000 & while this doesn’t portend doomsday is upon us, we’re that much closer, as we don’t understand enuff about the environment & climate to accurately predict what will happen going forward…

      2. rustacus21 July 18, 2015

        I just posted to my blog (rustacus21@wordpress.com) – what’s really wrong & how people really need to see & realize how racism, sexism & environmental exploitation are ALL 1 & the same vendetta against the powerless, voiceless & isolated. We were blessed w/this Democracy, as a means of protecting ourselves from the beastiel savagery of the monied elites. Do we really not know how this works – this Democracy of ours? If so, the only excuse is not reading at length, the instructions contained therein… Afterall, wasn’t it Washington, all the way down to Eisenhower who warned us AND Kennedy about the ‘military industreal complex’? Some heard. Some ignored. The ‘profiteers’ – where do they stand? In the way of peace & our Democracy!!! What does that mean to we voters? I know what it means to me, if U care enuff to read all about it…

        1. GraceAdams830 July 22, 2015

          Almost everything more complicated than ordinary arithmetic on a finite set of numbers has many contributing factors rather than any single cause. I do NOT doubt that the bestial savagery and greed and jealousy etc of the monied elites. I do DOUBT that there is anything the 99% are able to do about it. Most of the 99% are too busy trying to juggle 3 part time minimum wage jobs to have any energy or money left for politics. Except those who lack jobs due to age etc. Those are just too poverty stricken to afford anything for politics.

        2. GraceAdams830 July 22, 2015

          All your link leads to is a blank email form addressed to you. I already told you below, why I can’t mess with politics.

    3. Sand_Cat July 15, 2015

      Show me a Republican who is smarter than a half-wit, period.

      1. LeviRast July 16, 2015

        And show me one who has EVER been RIGHT about ANYTHING since…oh say 1950. If you cannot think of one, don’t feel bad…I wracked my brain for a week and came up with nothing.
        Don’t say the Interstate Highway System under Eisenhower…Eisenhower had to fight his Republicans and use Defense Department funding to get started.
        The Republicans were all “oh, it will destroy small businesses along the ways like Route 66…” Of course, they were all in the pockets of the big then powerful railroads.
        What a bunch! Generation after generation…it is “deja moo” – the feeling that you have smelled that bullshit before….

        1. anothertoothpick July 16, 2015

          Conservatives opposed the Founding Fathers, and the American Revolution

          1. rustacus21 July 18, 2015

            … as in the royalist, crown scum that they are…

        2. Independent1 July 16, 2015

          And on top of “deja moo”, Ike really wasn’t a ‘True Republican’. You may recall, that for years, Ike never aligned himself with either the Democrat or Republican party (he didn’t feel military people should show political allegiance). But Ike wasn’t especially enamored with Truman, and he didn’t want Robert A. Taft to get the GOP nomination; and then the GOP put together a “Draft Eisenhower Movement” and Henry Cabot Lodge, who ended up serving as his campaign manager swayed his opinion and so at the end, Ike agreed to run for the presidency as a Republican.

          See this from wikipedia:

          Eisenhower had to be convinced that political circumstances had created a genuine duty for him to offer himself as a candidate, and that there was a mandate from the populace for him to be their President. Henry Cabot Lodge, who served as his campaign manager, and others succeeded in convincing him, and in June 1952 he resigned his command at NATO to campaign full-time.[105] Eisenhower defeated Taft for the nomination, having won critical delegate votes from Texas. Eisenhower’s campaign was noted for the simple but effective slogan, “I Like Ike”

          1. rustacus21 July 18, 2015

            I still get chills reading that collection of essays that I’m sure very few ‘real’ statesmen (& stateswomen) have read (Eisenhower, JFK, the Clintons (both), Obama) & seeing their policy-orientation being squarely centered in the logic of Civil Societal prioritizations – i.e., the Federalist Papers. U generally can tell who’s read it & who hasn’t, by the way they reason that our only true obligations are to protect our nation/citizens & help other nations master the ‘Democracy’ approach. Understanding that Cyrus the Greats’ Persia constructed the 1st outline of Democracies to follow, we owe it to our ancestors – AND theirs – to protect & covet the rational, peaceful outcomes possible thru the type of Democracy imagined by BOTH their forebearer (Cyrus the Great), as well as ours (Madison & Jefferson, etc., al.)…

        3. rustacus21 July 18, 2015

          … funny U should mention Eisenhower, since his VP (Nixon) learned nothing – absolutely NOTHING about state-craft, becoming as twisted & bitter over the years, as are ALL the pundits now discrediting this deal… makes us all wonder why we don’t understand, as voters, we don’t show up in overwhelming numbers & shut down the voices of the crazies & rendering meaningless, the massive money interests that keep them on the air… for NO GOOD REASON AT ALL…

      2. bikejedi July 19, 2015

        That is the funniest thing you have ever typed considering you guys have fallen for every lie that people like Obama and Gruber speak . Not only that you run around saying the same things they do as your talking points … that is freaking brilliant . Liberals have no room to talk after falling for all of those LIES TIME AND AGAIN,…. Oh and even after Obama and Gruber admit that they lied Liberals are still to this day repeating those LIEs … Too Funny …Liberals please try to remember that Obama thought that Obama thought Obamacare was a good deal , so if this Iran Nuke deal is anywhere near as wicked awesome as that train wreck you better build bomb shelters pop some corn and get ready for Obamageddon . You all are going to be oh so surprised when about 4 or 5 other Arab Middle Eastern Countries show you how confident THEY are in Obama’s deal that they all start building their own Nukes . I know you will all be surprised because the Gruber theory has proven correct time and again aand here you all are believing Obama’s LIES again while Rouhani is telling the World that Iran got EVERYTHING they demanded in the deal

        1. Marilyn July 19, 2015

          The ACA is not perfect but it is a better deal than what millions of people had before so quit with your bad-mouthing legislation that has enabled so may to have health care that they could not previously afford or that they were not allowed because of their pre-existing conditions. It is true that some people lost their previous coverage, often because it was a worthless policy in the first place, but I am tired of people who keep accusing the president of being a liar and all they can claim is that one statement about health care as though that is the largest falsehood ever perpetrated by a political figure in the history of our country..

          1. bikejedi July 20, 2015

            You have to be kidding me …One Lie ????.Seriously ??? See you aren’t even paying attention ….If you like your Dr ? LIE …If you like your plan ? LIE ..These plans will save you $2500 …LIE . That’s 3 off the top of my head without trying . Now obamacare has caused the mass exodus of Full Time workforces to Part Time as employers get around the Part Time exemption .This is causing large employers to transition employees from Full Time with benefits to Part Time with no benefits . It is the leading reason we now have the greatest number of Americans and the greatest percentage of Americans now working Part Time Jobs …These people no longer get company supplied plans and are being forced to come out of picket for way more expensive Obama plans with $6000 deductibles which make them useless for most people …These people are paying way way more than they should have to just to subsidize the free plans Obama gave his Victim Entitlement Voters . Is that ” affordable ” to them ? Is it fair ? They are now working part time making less money and are being forced to come out of pocket for worthless plans …It is a Train Wreck …Now the Iran Nuke Deal is worse because it will result in a Middle East arms race and then Obamageddon …its as if he went there bent himself over and asked the Iranians to do the sex to him and in effect the World …No one with a functioning brain thinks its a good deal and everyone thinks the World just got a whole lot more dangerous …Watch how bad the world thinks it is by how fast 4 or 5 other Countries over there start their own Nuke Programs to counter the threat of Iran
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          2. Marilyn July 20, 2015

            It is not Obama’s deal with Iran in the first place. It was negotiated by 6 of the most powerful countries in the world. The extreme hatred of the RWs for everything associated with Obama makes it impossible to have any intelligent discussion about any policy.. I am waiting for the day for Obama to say something totally innocuous such as “the sun rises in the east each day” and then watch the RWs twist themselves into knots trying to find a way to disagree with him without showing how twisted with hatred they really are.

          3. bikejedi July 21, 2015

            The US Obama and Kerry were the main negotiators in the deal. Yes , other countries had some side interest and they were involved in the negotiations but those countries have vested interest and agendas that arent in this Nations interest . And yes we’ve all heard that talking appoint about Obama could say the sky is blue and we would disagree with that and that’s childish nonsense
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          4. bikejedi July 21, 2015

            I noticed you didn’t try to discount anything that I said

            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

        2. Sand_Cat July 20, 2015

          As opposed to those of you who believe every scurrilous and fact-free lie about the Obama administration as if it came from heaven.
          The nuclear deal is what could be had. No one is saying it’s perfect, but the predictable GOP criticisms I’ve heard are – as usual – fact free, issued by those who hadn’t read the deal and who have spent the last seven years opposing everything the administration proposed, included GOP ideas like the ACA.

          Sorry, the statement was a flippant joke, but more true than i think you’re prepared to admit.

          1. bikejedi July 21, 2015

            This deal is a joke and nowhere near what obama had promised nor what should be acceptable to even you or any other lefty …Your kids lives lie in the balance so you might want to speak up against it like the rest of us sane people …Why its as if Obama went to the Iranians bent over pulled his panties down and said please do the Sex to me …and they said pay us for doing that we are busy making a Nuke ….So he paid them to do the sex to him and in effect the whole World ..He gave up his negotiating advantage by eating the same since before the negotiations even started. Now you never give up to negotiate and straight before negotiation starts but Obama probably thought this gesture would make the Iranians of us a equals . They did not. Muslims much like the Klingons of Star Trek is weakness and then they started making their demands Obama bent over and capitulated to each one of those demands. We went from no nukes ever full unfettered access to inspections anytime anywhere and no centrifuges tu no nukes within 10 years no inspections without 24 day notice and thousands of centrifuges. Liberals will find out exactly how bad the rest of the Middle East views this deal when they all start their own nuclear programmes touching a Middle East nuclear arms race don’t worry it will probably all end in Obamageddon . So maybe you start worrying more about your family and less about defending this bad bad deal …Unless your loyalty to Obama trumps the future of your children .
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          2. Sand_Cat July 21, 2015

            Your entire response is simply a lot of empty rhetoric. Why specifically is this a bad deal? What is your plausible alternative? What is a JOKE about this, other than all the BS spouted by GOP spokespersons who hadn’t read a word of it? Do you think we should become the personal servants of the Prime Minister of Israel, who obviously thinks that’s what we should be? Do you think playing it macho and bombing is a wise solution? I thought you were a Christian, or you claimed to be, but somehow all that stuff about loving one’s enemies never seems to come from your type of Christian. Sorry, but I can answer empty rhetoric and fact-free emotionalism as well as anyone; if you haven’t noticed, that’s what I take especial pleasure in doing. I have no loyalty to Obama other than that he is president, and a far, far better one than his predecessor, and looks to be a shoo-in as better than any of the jokes put forward by the GOP for 2016. Every day, with every petty, vicious, and dishonest statement made by his opposition, he looks better and better. The same goes for Hillary. I must admit to having had some unrealistic enthusiasm for Obama early on, but I have little for Hillary, except when I see her GOP opponents, at which time I want to cheer her on with more enthusiasm than her deepest admirers could muster. I’ve said it again and again: I did not support him, but John Huntsman – alone of all the 2012 GOP contenders – would likely have made a pretty good president, but he never had a chance against the ignorant demagogues he had to beat just to get the nomination. Show me somebody better than Obama and Hillary, and we can have a rational discussion, but not while you wallow in the slime with the ignorant and bigoted and the chickenhawks who never met a war they didn’t love to send someone else to fight.

          3. bikejedi July 22, 2015

            Did you even read my response or do you know anything about this deal ? We went from Obama promising that any deal would include no Nuke for Iran EVER to no Nukes for 10 years when most experts think that with the way Iran used the catbird seat to delay this deal that they could be a month or two away from having enough material to build a bomb . Obama promised no centrifuges and capitulated to 1000’s ..Why do they even need those unless they are enriching ? Obama promised anytime anywhere inspections and capitulated to Iran and we end up with 24 day notice before an inspection …I have to ask you two questions what do you like about this and have you lost your mind . Alternatives there were many before Obama eased the sanctions before negotiations began and in so doing gave up his negotiating advantage . Sen Kirk one of the leading experts on this situation thought we were a month or two away from crippling Iran’s Central Bank with the sanctions and that would’ve stopped their Program . Both he and Democrat Menendez wanted the sanctions increased . By the way try to remember it was only those sanctions that brought them to the table to begin with . Then there was the fact that Bebe was willing to go in there alone and do the whole World a favor that even Jordan Syria Egypt and the Saudis agreed with . All he wanted was some of our latest bunker buster munitions for us to push a satellite and a White Noise plane ..That is all that is speculated that he wanted . Next option would have been a joint strike . The one thing you needed to avoid was Iran getting a Nuke at any cost . As I said …The rest of the Countries over there will show you how bad a deal it is when they all start their own Nuke programs in response to this bad deal . As Iran is the largest State sponsor of Muslim Terrorism and they are celebrating in the Streets whole Rouhani is saying they got everything they wanted how can anyone think any if this is good …On top of that we get to pay for their program …If you have family that you care for you can’t logically think this deal makes them safer so why are you more concerned with defending it and Obama rather than telling him to scrap it and come up with a better alternative. Meanwhile the Iranians are still chanting death to America death to Israel. That should show you their peaceful intentions
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          4. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

            This was called a negotiation; as someone pointed out, “anytime, anywhere” has never been achieved except when dictating to a defeated opponent. Would the US agree to anytime, anywhere? Not likely. Why should Iran?
            It is extremely unlikely if not impossible that Iran could remove evidence of violations in 24 days.

            No nukes ever was never a realistic goal.
            The negotiation was not about Muslim or any other type of terrorism; if it were, the US would have plenty to answer for, including various war crimes against Iran itself, Iraq, Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, Angola, and a host of other countries. The negotiation was about ending Iran’s nuclear program.
            I do not know Senator Kirk, but Senators – especially GOP Senators – have a long record of underestimating opponents. Wrecking Iran’s economy to the degree you imagine, assuming that’s not just a pipe dream, would likely guarantee that they would accelerate the program. And don’t tell me they couldn’t. WW2 Germany should provide many lessons for what a completely devastated country can do.
            Not sure how “we” get to pay for the program, but even if so, it can’t be much worse than the ruinous inflation of the US “Defense” budget even further beyond reality promised by the GOP, Iran nukes or no.
            Bebe (are you talking about Bibi?) does no one any favors by his policies except himself and other fanatic Fascists in his party who are – like him – looking for Lebensraun and regards the US as his personal assistant in achieving it.
            Despite your claims, and those of others not party to, and noticeably ignorant of, such negotiations, the “better” deal would likely be none at all, which many in the GOP seem to relish, especially if it gives them an excuse to send other people’s children off to die in yet another pointless war likely to result in, or hasten, the national bankruptcy all the same people were and are screaming about.

            Americans are chanting more and more crap about all sorts of things, most notably all the nasty things they want to do to their fellow citizens who disagree with them; who cares? One thing most small countries have no doubt about is that the US has nothing resembling “peaceful intentions,” or at least one of the two parties fighting for dominance doesn’t.

          5. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

            Your words: “No nukes ever was never a realistic goal”. So why then, did we even try to negotiate a deal with Iran? All we have done is open the door to a treasure chest of resources so that Iran can continue and accelerate its mad program to destroy us. Iran has never backed down on what it wants to do and now we have rolled over for them.

          6. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

            Because risking nukes in ten to fifteen years is better than nukes in six months. Who can say what will have changed?
            Sorry you feel the deal constitutes “rolling over for them.” Perhaps you’re in the Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran crowd that is guaranteed to keep our enemies our enemies forever, and make them even more determined to destroy us.

          7. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

            I have no desire to have my government wage war on any other country. But your attitude is nothing more than the classic “head in the sand’ thinking that actually causes wars. Give a tyrant an inch of leeway and they will be in your face all the more. Rather than address the issue at hand you want to postpone it to a later time, when Iran will be a stronger country, with a bigger military and actual working nuclear weapons courtesy of the fraidtodos in charge. What a ghastly legacy to leave our children. Your thinking is the same as parents who refuse to discipline their bullying child by saying, “Oh, don’t worry, he will out grow it. He really is a good little boy”.

          8. bikejedi July 24, 2015

            Anytime anywhere was promised by Obama and it has been achieved in many negotiations . I worked in the Nuclear industry and it would be easy to remove evidence in 24 days . If no Nukes ever was never the goal them why did Obama promise it and if you are conceding that is unachievable shouldn’t we be taking out their sites today before they have Nukes ? Wouldn’t that be logical ? And Muslim Terrorism should be considered because Iran is the largest exporter of Muslim Terrorism . In this deal Obama is agreeing to fund their Nuke Program as well as them to fund other Muslim Terrorist groups . Unless you are so naive as to think Iran is going to suddenly change their Muslim ideology …And this has nothing to do with comparing some of our missteps with a Terrorist Nation …and to equate our defense budget in any way with funding the largest State sponsor of Muslim Terrorism is crazy …Since you usually post somewhat rationally I have to ask if they are spiking the water with LSD or something where you live . I mean the I hate America stuff from a liberal I guess is expected but some of the other stuff not so much
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          9. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

            Because just “taking out their sites” is an action much like those that made them our enemy in the first place and exemplifies the arrogance and short-sightedness for which many of our enemies hate us. Because it’s an action we would expect from them.

          10. bikejedi July 26, 2015

            They are the leading sponsor of Muslim Terrorism in the World so you think we and the rest of the World should just let them have Nukes ? And I really don’t care for your …” I hate America ” ” we are so Evil ” rhetoric because making sure these Muslim Terrorists never get a bomb would be the right thing to do Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          11. bikejedi July 22, 2015

            Also what does the Iranian Nuke deal have to do with your fawning over your candidates ? Now I can cite chapter and verse about why Hillary would be a Train Wreck but that has nothing to do with what we are discussing and Obama was recently rated the worst President in the modern era behind even Carter …that says it all… Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          12. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

            Did you read MY response?
            “Fawning” is not, and never has been, my reaction to any Dem candidate for any office; as I recall, you did a lot of what I would take to be fawning over George W. Bush. Don’t know who rated Obama as worst president, but I suspect there was just a tiny bit of political bias in the sample. I think those working with facts rather than the opinion of the moment would rank George W. Bush as one of the worst presidents in the nation’s history, not just the modern era. He would also be rated as the most dishonest, which is clearly why all the GOP hacks are desperate to inflate every minor inaccuracy of the current administration into some kind of turning point in human history.
            And it has a very great deal to do with what we’re talking about. Those whining loudest about this deal are the very same criminals and idiots who lied us into a war destabilizing the entire Middle East after being caught with their pants down for the most successful attack on the continental US in history, excepting only the extermination of its original inhabitants.
            As long as you’re going to try to inflate overpromoting the ACA after it was already the law of the land and failure to use GOP-approved bombast in describing the Benghazi tragedy into something even in the same universe as killing hundreds of thousands at huge financial cost to “get back” at the wrong nation and to remove non-existent WMDs for the purpose of improving one’s “political capital,” we have nothing to discuss, which pains me.

          13. bikejedi July 24, 2015

            You have Obama ” the Lying King ” and you want to talk about Bush and dishonesty ???? Really ….You just lost any credibility Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          14. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

            I don’t “have” Obama, but I guess you will never accept that.
            If you choose to believe the alleged lies of this administration even come close to those of criminals of the Bush administration, then we have nothing to talk about. Sorry.

          15. bikejedi July 26, 2015

            Why yes Obama the Lying King is your guy and you are trying to illogically defend him
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          16. bikejedi July 24, 2015

            And no these aren’t the same voices that are decrying this bad deal ..The Bush admin is long gone …This is Democrats and Republicans denouncing this deal ….
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          17. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

            Most of them are the same scum who declared in the middle of national crisis that their priority was political revenge, and they have stuck by it. All the manufactured “scandals” and crises of this administration don’t add up to as big a scandal as that alone, not to mention mass murder and torture, which is why these partisans are so anxious to incredibly overinflate every error or misstatement. I’m sorry you have chosen to join them.

          18. dpaano October 19, 2015

            Not sure where you got your information, but it’s not true….President Obama has NEVER been rated the worse president in the modern era (except by FAUX News). GWB is listed as one of the worst, after Taft. You need to get your facts straight and quit believing EVERYTHING you hear from the GOP idiots!

          19. bikejedi October 19, 2015

            How about I got it from the liberal Washington Post … http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/2/obama-worst-president-wwii-new-poll-shows/?page=all

            Powered by Cricket Wireless

            ——– Original message ——–

          20. bikejedi October 19, 2015


            Powered by Cricket Wireless

            ——– Original message ——–

          21. bikejedi July 22, 2015

            If this deal is so great why is this sheet going on .. http://www.timesofisrael.com/us-mulling-unprecedented-arms-package-to-israel-after-iran-deal/
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          22. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

            As long as everybody realizes the deal was the way to end dead-end talks with a country that openingly advocates our destruction and wants our money and resources to do so.

          23. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

            Unfortunately, most people were waiting for any excuse to condemn it because of who made the effort, and seem to think that anything short of Iran swearing off enmity forever and becoming our BFF (or better yet, surrendering and becoming our slave) is unacceptable, at least if Obama agrees to it. We should be able to discuss issues with our enemies, and did so with the Soviet Union, a far greater threat than Iran.
            Lots of people say lots of things for public consumption that they don’t really mean. The Iranian theocracy is not to my liking, but neither is the American one many seem to be trying to bring about. Hopefully dealing with one another can ease tensions at least a bit.

        3. dpaano October 19, 2015

          Who the hell is Gruber and what does he matter in the scheme of things?

          1. bikejedi October 19, 2015

            Gruber was one of the architects of obamacare. He admitted they lied about almost every key aspect of obamacare and that they knew they could get away with it because it’s supporters are stupid . He told you he lied and then called you stupid . These are the types of people defending this deal …So let me ask you the same question I have now asked over 400 liberals . Can you name one single thing in this deal that is good for America ? And please don’t spin to what are the alternatives ? Going to war ? Let’s see if you can name one good thing in this deal ? If you can’t why would you support it ?

            Powered by Cricket Wireless

            ——– Original message ——–

          2. dpaano October 20, 2015

            I could name quite a few reasons why the program works, at least for me. First of all, my doctor is extremely pleased with Obamcare….he is able to see more patients and has no problems getting paid for it. Secondly, my insurance is purchased through my company. Although prices have gone up each year, they have gone up at least 2-3% each year anyway, so no change there. I have friends who have enrolled in Obamacare, and they are also thrilled with the services they are getting and the cost they are paying. As for “Gruber” telling “me” that they lied and calling me stupid…guess I missed that because I had NO idea who Gruber even was or is. Nevertheless, again, I know many people who are ecstatic to finally be able to have health insurance, so not particularly distressed at your ridiculous comment….talking to “400 liberals” means nothing to me! I can probably talk to as many conservatives and get the totally different response from what you “say” you got from your 400 liberals.

          3. bikejedi October 20, 2015

            What does that have to do with Iran ? Also on your experiences with Obamacare I’m happy for you .This year in illinois most are seeing their costs go up 30 to 40 % . A lot of Americans are being transitioned from full time jobs with benefits to part time with no benefits thanks to the part time exemption the Dems purposely put in that law to make more Americans dependent on Government . When you’re working part time it’s hard to turn down free Obamacare. Course this is born out by Labor Statistics showing that we have never had as many part timers as as a percentage of our workforce is we do today. This year alone walmart has transitioned over 500,000 people from full time to part time. This is also borne out by the fact that average incomes are down 4000 to $5000 a year . So you see for most people Obamacare is not been good . They are being forced to buy expensive plans that have $6,000 deductibles making them totally useless. But once again what does that have to do with Iran

            Powered by Cricket Wireless

            ——– Original message ——–

        4. dpaano October 19, 2015

          I vividly remember the lies told by the Bush Administration as to why we got into the war with Iran in the first place….some BS about WMD that never came to past! Who’s lying now?

          1. bikejedi October 19, 2015

            One has nothing to do with the other . I will say that Bush was lied to by now Democrat Colin Powell who believed his Intel was correct . Also there is newer evidence Iraq did have WMDs and were building them . First off you can quickly bury chemical agents in the desert in a matter of minutes never to be found . Couple that with the fact that Hussein used chemical weapons against his own people and I have little doubt he had them …Still what does that have to do with this ?

            Powered by Cricket Wireless

            ——– Original message ——–

      3. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

        Show me a politician that is smarter than a half-wit and I’ll show you someone not in office.

        1. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

          Fair enough, though we’d all like to think otherwise. The post was snark in any case, though unfortunately it brought more passionate response than it deserved from a guy I’d rather not exchange insults with, but that’s how it goes.

    4. Daniel Jones July 15, 2015

      I have mentioned this on occasion, that the United Uniteds and Big Oil basically set the stage for the the rise of the Mullahs and the Ayatollah. Everyone ignores this fact, even as they piss off the Middle East to the point of ISIL coming into being.

      I agree with you and Voss Montenegro. This is insanity. These pundits are sociopaths, they have no regard for the lives of anyone that isn’t part of their clique. The refuse to even acknowledge the facts or the meaning of those facts.

      For the love of all that is truly sacred, don’t throw good lives after bad money yet again.

    5. Ran_dum_Thot July 24, 2015

      It’s a good thing that the Shah was run off. Things are so much better in Iran now.

  10. Udom July 16, 2015

    This is my take on this; I wish we the people were enlightened enough to question authority. We are pretty passive politically-speaking. These so-called learned and wise conservatives have constituents that fail time and time again to question their positions on vital issues. We fail to learn from history and consequently fall into the same trap. Over fifty years of a failed Cuban policy because of fear. The same fear of Iraq. Is Iraq a bigger threat to us than ISIS? Evey single major threat to this nation comes from self-serving ignorant merchants of fear and scare tactics, who are mostly political pundits peddling their wares on national t.v., to an equally naive base devoid of intellectual curiosity.

    1. DumpDemLiars July 18, 2015

      Only national base I know of devoid of intellectual are the liberal fools that elected the idiot who now occupies the WH. Cuba is a commun ist country that supports and funds terrorism, their human rights have gotten worse since the annointed one has opened relations with them. Any idiot that really believes a 24 day advanced notice of inspection is going to yield any results other than what Iran wants the world to see is a complete idiot. Iran has sworn the complete destruction of Israel and death to the United States yet idiots like you believe negotiation and diplomacy will work with these terrrorist heathans. Keep living in your self made liberal utopia and we will sse who is right on all of the above fool.

      1. Udom July 18, 2015

        It’s obvious you skipped classes the semester World History was taught. Google Iranian history. While you are at it find out where most of the 9/11 terrorists, ISIS and Bin Laden originated from. Are you getting the picture? Don’t hurt yourself now. Ignorance is bliss.

      2. anothertoothpick July 19, 2015

        Is there anything in this agreement that stops the United States from bombing Iran? Whenever we want to?

        Five decades of failed policy in Cuba means it is time for change. The embargo did nothing but punish the people of Cuba. Last I looked it did not defeat the Castro Regime.

        1. DumpDemLiars July 19, 2015

          The people of Cuba are being punished by the Castro brother and no one else. Obama snuggling up to Cuba has not and will not change how the castros treat Cubans or stop them from funding terrorists.

          1. anothertoothpick July 19, 2015

            No doubt those Castro Brothers have been bad guys. You don’t make peace with your friends, though — you make it with your enemies. It often involves compromises and tradeoffs that, in a perfect world, wouldn’t be needed. In case it bears repeating: We’re not living in a perfect world.

            Peace with the Cuban regime is nonetheless worth seeking. Why? Because a half-century of desperate U.S. attempts to dislodge that regime have failed miserably. Fidel Castro is still alive. Raul Castro is still in power. Maybe it’s time for a different approach.

          2. DumpDemLiars July 19, 2015

            NeedIi repeat, everything Obama touches turns to sheet, cuba and Iran will be no different.

          3. anothertoothpick July 19, 2015

            Got it.

          4. DumpDemLiars July 19, 2015

            About time.

          5. Marilyn July 19, 2015

            A similar suggestion to that proposed by Udom is that while you are studying world history be sure not to miss Cuban history and find out a little about the dictator that the Castro brothers ousted.

          6. dpaano October 19, 2015

            Yeah, like the fact that he’s paid down the deficit that your buddy GWB left, has put more people to work than any president EVER, has done more for this country than any GOP president EVER has and has done it DESPITE the “Party of NO” blocking as much as they could get away with! If that means that everything he touches goes bad…..I hope he continues reaching out! It’s a hell of a lot more than the GOP has done in the past 7 years! They can’t even get along within their own party!

      3. gococksri July 19, 2015

        You didn’t read the article did you? Had you read it, you would have noticed that the neocons and chickenhawks of the GOP—Kristol, Krauthammer, Scarborough, Cheney, Bush et al were dead wrong about Iraq. “We’ll wrap it up in a couple of weeks,” they said. “They’ll throw flowers at our troops in the streets of Baghdad,” they said. Instead, Cheney/Bush lied us into the war and the others were cheerleaders for it. Worse, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. But the Bush family holds hands with Saudi royalty as they tour the ranch, so they couldn’t admit where the terrorists came from.

        As to Iran, you offer nothing as an alternative to diplomacy. Nothing. We are thus left to believe that you agree with Tom Cotton that we could get “the Iran job” done with “two or three days of strategic bombing.” First, we couldn’t. Second, that would finish the Bush destabilization of the entire middle east. Third, it would cost us our European allies, who are smart enough to realize that diplomacy is better than “boots on the ground” and “bodies in the ground.”

        Cuba? You’re an idiot. When you reduce the distance between an isolated country and the rest of the world, its people always benefit. Fifty years of the present policy have produced no change. Are you saying we should continue that policy? If so, you fit the definition of insanity. Maybe you and Rubio and the other rubes who make up the GOP foreign policy group can be housed together in the Thorazine wing.

        That “idiot” who occupies the White House is going to leave this country in far better shape than he found it, despite what will be eight years of obstruction by the “cut taxes for the rich” and “cut out the middle- and working-classes” Republicans.

        1. DumpDemLiars July 19, 2015

          How in the world do you ever get the tastee out of your mouth from licking Obama’s backside? Your are a effing idiot, everything Obama touches turns to sheet.

          1. gococksri July 20, 2015

            I didn’t think you’d be able to respond to the issues. You’re nothing but another visceral right-winger who, when he can’t remember the right-wing talking points, just starts calling people names.

            Did you understand what I just said? I said you didn’t respond to the issues. I said that the sure sign of someone who has no argument is that they start calling people names.

            Got it?

          2. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

            Ah, yes. The brilliant intellectual response to actual facts by one whose “philosophy, if we can dignify it by that term, is based on insecurity, ignorance, and fantasy.

      4. bikejedi July 19, 2015

        Yes…Liberals please try to remember that Obama thought that Obama thought Obamacare was a good deal , so if this Iran Nuke deal is anywhere near as wicked awesome as that train wreck you better build bomb shelters pop some corn and get ready for Obamageddon . You all are going to be oh so surprised when about 4 or 5 other Arab Middle Eastern Countries show you how confident THEY are in Obama’s deal that they all start building their own Nukes . I know you will all be surprised because the Gruber theory has proven correct time and again aand here you all are believing Obama’s LIES again while Rouhani is telling the World that Iran got EVERYTHING they demanded in the deal

      5. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

        you obviously don’t know very much.

  11. Bren Frowick July 19, 2015

    Right wingers keep on CLAIMING that “Oh no, we don’t really want WAR; we just don’t like this DEAL. We should keep on negotiating until we get EVERYTHING we want!”, as if that makes any sense in the Real World. The simple truth of it is that Iran was likely to be able to build a bomb as early as September, and continued negotiation had zero chance of accomplishing anything but to allow that to happen. Would the right wingers be happy with that outcome? Perhaps…. It would have made their case for war that much stronger. The pious hypocrisy of their arguments grows wearisome and, frankly, transparently stupid.

  12. bikejedi July 19, 2015

    Liberals please try to remember that Obama thought that Obama thought Obamacare was a good deal , so if this Iran Nuke deal is anywhere near as wicked awesome as that train wreck you better build bomb shelters pop some corn and get ready for Obamageddon . You all are going to be oh so surprised when about 4 or 5 other Arab Middle Eastern Countries show you how confident THEY are in Obama’s deal that they all start building their own Nukes . I know you will all be surprised because the Gruber theory has proven correct time and again aand here you all are believing Obama’s LIES again while Rouhani is telling the World that Iran got EVERYTHING they demanded in the deal

    1. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

      please try to remember that the ACA is the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation, though “Conservatives” conveniently forgot that as soon as Obama adopted it, probably on the basis of his own conservatism as well as an appreciation that it was the best he could do with the American political climate being what it was and is.
      Most of those Arab countries you mention – particularly the Saudis – amount to being our enemies, anyway.
      But – once again – you have failed to specify what is so bad about this deal, and what the viable alternative was, other than starting yet another war in the region to eat up more of our people and treasure. And Putin – that guy all you conservatives were so hot on not long ago – approved this deal, too, as well as the Germans, some of the more hard-nosed of the Europeans. Do you entertain some fantasy about an idyllic deal that one of the GOP mental and moral midgets would have negotiated, or do you just want another war because it’s the “manly” thing to do?

      1. bikejedi July 24, 2015

        That plan has little to do with the Heritage model as they differ wildly in the way they would’ve done their funding but it makes a good if totally unfounded talking point for the left Obamacare is wealth redistribution for votes …Working people are getting really screwed …A lot of them are being transitioned to part time jibs with no benefits and that is born out by the fact we now have the greatest number and the greatest percentage of Americans working part time jobs . Thank you part time exemption …That has also helped double the number of people dependent on Govt and Food Stamps . The working people still fortunate of keeping their full time jobs are losing their company supplied plans or are facing ridiculously high co pays …obamacare plans are rising 30 to 40% in its first full year of real implementation …The working people are being forced to pay more for plans with $6000 deductibles to fund plans for victim entitlement voters who get free plans with no deductibles …real fair to working people right ? Of course Conservative have been telling you this stuff for years and we have been proven right ( I mean even a liberal who took their blunders off couldve seen this coming ) but here you are still trumpeting Obamas and Gruber’s lies
        Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

        1. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

          The working people are getting screwed by all those executives you asserted should be paid whatever amount they can weasel out of corporate boards of like-minded executives, not by the ACA. It is companies that choose to cancel insurance plans and lay off full-time employees to avoid helping them get insurance. The number of unemployed and on food stamps and uninsured is a direct result of the decisions of such people and the support they have received from American governments over a number of years. Destroying American businesses and jobs for money has been all-too much a bi-partisan activity.
          As is usual with those who condemn “Obamacare,” you assert the ACA is completely different from the Heritage Foundation’s plan on which it is based, but are a little short on the specifics. But don’t worry, I don’t need them to know the preferred GOP healthcare plan for the poor, working, and and middle classes remains that articulated by a congressman from Florida: don’t get sick, and if you do, die quickly. In the meantime, every other industrialized nation in the world has a national health plan which came without all the dramatic disasters promised by the GOP, and most of them seem to be doing at least as well as we are otherwise, and are not nearly so desperate to have a war with every nation in sight as we seem to be, have lower murder and crime rates, etc.

          1. bikejedi July 25, 2015

            That is ridiculous …The CEO pay is a desperate issue than Obama Ares negative impact on employment consuming power and the economy …Those CEOs had no input into the Part Time exemption nor the Corp opt out nor the cost of Obama plans and their deductibles …That is 100% on Obama and the Dems ..No one else wrote that Tax Law except for Justice Roberts …It is solely on them CEO pay or your perception of greed has nothing to do with the rule book the Dems gave them .. Now this is what the Democrats ( who should change their name to the Communist Party of America ) wanted all along . Look at Marxist principle what Hitler did what Stalin did and compare that to Aljnskys rules for radicals where he outlines what you need to do to build a Communist Dictatorship . A few of those principles were to take over health care √ increase dependence on Govt √ increase debt √√√√ and increase poverty √√√√√√√………Obama and the Dems have doubled dependence and poverty in six short years …Now do you want to explain why the Party you support is following Communist policies ? Read Rules for Radicals or write your thesis on it like Hillary and tell me why they hold him as their hero and why they are following his blue print …I can’t wait to hear your spin and defense knowing all along you know I am right .
            Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

          2. bikejedi July 25, 2015

            As I said …I was specific in the way they differ …methods of funding ..and it seems Obamas death panels will be deciding who dies and when …If their IRS targeting is any indication when they find out you are a Conservative you are going to be sentenced to die Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

      2. bikejedi July 24, 2015

        I already told you what is bad about this deal and what the alternatives were but let me repeat myself we went from full access anytime anywhere inspections no nuclear weapons ever and anytime anywhere inspections to inspections after a 24 day notice … Nukes after 10 years and thousands of centrifuges. We also are letting them buy ICBM technology and we’re going to help them defend their nuclear sites. What were the alternatives? To increase the sanctiins and crippled their central bank in a month or to let Netanyahu go in there and do the world a favor. Another option would be for us to form a coalition with the Saudi’s the Israelis the Egyptians Jordan and go in there take those sites out. Now you have a bad deal and you are going to have a wake up call when five other countries in the Middle East all start a nuclear arms race… Are you ready for Obamageddon ? Can you say Obamageddon ?To liberals it seems the only alternative is to believe everything Obama says when he’s a flat out liar and to let them start a Middle East arms race . Great choice. When will liberals start worrying more about their families and their country and stop worrying about defending Obama’s bad deal
        Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

        1. Sand_Cat July 24, 2015

          Since everyone I can think of in the GOP is even more of a flat-out liar than Obama could be if he tried – among their many lies are the inflation of his “lies” – but no, I don’t believe everything Obama says. Notice how – despite your complaint about my “fawning” over Obama and Clinton, about both of whom I have serious reservations – you have clearly dived into what is one of your favorite topics with a will.
          We’re not going to agree on this, and I can’t see any point to further inflaming each others’ emotions.

          1. bikejedi July 25, 2015

            Sand you are not dealing in intellectual honesty …I could break down all of Obamas lies the Grubers bought but I don’t have the time …You know as well as I that you could add up every lie by every elected Republican and Obama’s alone would eclipse them by miles …Please don’t ruin any credibility you have Sent from my ZTE Sonata 4G, a Cricket 4G smartphone

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.