Updated: Smartest Man in The White House, Boasts Of Fooling Voters, Taxpayers About Iran Nuclear Deal

Posted May 18, 2016 10:48 PM ET; Last updated May 25, 2016 5:11 PM ET


Updated May 25, 2016 5:11 PM ET

http://nypost.com/2016/05/05/playing-the-press-and-the-public-for-chumps-to-sell-the-iran-deal/

White House admits it played us for fools to sell Iran deal
By John Podhoretz
New York Post
May 5, 2016 | 8:39pm
* * *

http://nypost.com/2016/05/09/obamas-storyteller-backs-off-boasts-about-selling-iran-deal/

Obama’s storyteller backs off boasts about selling Iran deal
By David K. Li
May 9, 2016 | 1:40pm
New York Post

* * *

http://townhall.com/news/around-the-web/2016/05/10/state-dept-faces-questions-over-missing-tape-amid-scramble-over-wh-aides-iran-boast-n2160987

State Dept. faces questions over missing tape, amid scramble over WH aide's Iran boast
Townhall.com Staff
Posted: May 10, 2016 12:20 PM

* * *

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/10/state-dept-faces-questions-over-missing-tape-amid-scramble-over-wh-aides-iran-boast.html

State Dept. faces questions over missing tape, amid scramble over WH aide's Iran boast
Published May 10, 2016

FoxNews.com

* * *

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ex-obama-staff-laugh-at-you-can-keep-your-plan-pledge/article/2590943

Former Obama speechwriters laugh at 'you can keep your plan' promise
By T. BECKET ADAMS (@BECKETADAMS) 

5/10/16 4:45 PM

* * *

Posted May 18, 2016 10:48 PM ET
[From article]
What a surprise! It was revealed from the highest level that the Obama White House has been downright deceptive and had lied to the American public and media about the nuclear deal with Iran, as well as carrying on secret bilateral negotiations with Iran.
In spite of arguments by the Obama administration to the contrary, it has been clear from the beginning that the nuclear deal with Iran, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action signed on July 14, 2015, will not stop the Iranian effort to develop nuclear weapons.
[. . .]
In spite of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231 of July 20, 2015 that calls on Iran not to launch tests of ballistic missiles, this was the third test by Iran. One of the two missiles fired in March 2016 carried the slogan "Israel must be wiped out."
By chance, the ballistic missile testing coincided with the publication of the extraordinary revealing article by David Samuels in the New York Times on May 8, 2016 on Ben Rhodes, the Boy Wonder of the Obama White House, the single most influential voice next to the president shaping American foreign policy.



Rhodes is officially the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications in the Obama administration, but he is really the spin-doctor narrating or fabricating fantasies or half-truths to the mainstream media that he arrogantly seems to despise. The willingness of the media to consume and disseminate the inaccurate information given them has long been known, but the full extent to which the media was spun has now been revealed.
The main revelation was that Rhodes presented the story of negotiations on the nuclear deal with Iran as having started in 2013 due to the fact the moderates in Iran, led by Hassan Rouhani, had won the election and became president. The moderates therefore were influential and were willing to make a deal with the United States. The media believed this, though it was disputed by well-informed individuals such as Leon Panetta, former secretary of defense, who denied any such division between hard and soft Iranians. Rhodes, with evident contempt, regards previous decision makers on Iran and Iraq – the Washington foreign policy establishment, or The Blob, as he calls it, which includes Hillary Clinton – as "morons."


Ben Rhodes, Novelist, White House National Security Deputy

Rhodes's spin was false. The negotiations with Iran had in fact started earlier in 2012, before Rouhani was elected. The White House deliberately spun the view that Iran moderates wanted peace with the U.S. and with Middle East neighbors. What is important is his contempt for the media as well as for the Washington establishment. Rhodes observed that news bureaus today do not have foreign bureaus, as they used to have, and they therefore call the White House to find out what is happening.
The result is that most of the news outlets are reporting on world affairs from Washington. Rhodes said the average reporter he talks to is 27 years old and literally knows nothing. The White House therefore shapes the news and has particular journalists it can use for spreading it and validating what the White House gives them to say. As Samuels writes, "[t]he way in which most Americans have heard the story of the nuclear deal … was largely manufactured for the purpose of selling the deal."
The consensus in the U.S. today is that the Iran deal was a major political blunder. Of the two main adversaries during the discussion, most informed commentators would agree that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who opposed the deal, was right, and President Obama was wrong.
[. . .]



Two factors are involved in the White House attempt to prevent Netanyahu from speaking. The first expressed by the media was on the wisdom of the invitation, because Netanyahu was going to criticize the Obama policy. Though most of Congress expressed opposition to the negotiations, there was a genuine difference of opinion on them. President Obama believed and still appears to believe that a deal in which Iran agreed to limit its nuclear program in exchange for relief from sanctions was the way to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Netanyahu disagreed on the whole idea and believed that Iran was not negotiating in good faith. Iran has a record of secret uranium enrichment facilities, and Israel was in danger. Netanyahu argued that the sanctions on Iran, the removal of which was the real reason for Iran's willingness to negotiate, should not be removed – in fact, should be increased.
The second factor was the White House spin, which the media highlighted, that the invitation was unconstitutional. Either Rhodes or someone else in the White House invented something called the "presidential protocol." The White House spokesperson on January 20, 2015, slightly off the point, informed the media that the typical protocol would suggest that "the leader of a country would contact the leader of another country when he is traveling there." The media, though few of whom if any were constitutional lawyers, claimed that such an invitation had no precedent in American history.
One may disagree on whether the invitation was unwise or inopportune, but it was not unconstitutional. There was no breach of any constitutional provision.
[. . .]
The New York Times incorrectly reported that Netanyahu had accepted the invitation to speak before the White House had been informed. This was not true, and the NYT had to issue a correction. Netanyahu did not formally accept the invitation until after the White House had been informed. It was not true, as Earnest had said, that the White House did not know about the invitation until Boehner announced it publicly. The spin converted the difference of opinion on an important issue into a diplomatic row with constitutional implications. In reality, Boehner had earlier in 2011 invited Netanyahu to speak and had informed the White House, which never responded.
Many in the media bought the White House spin and deception that to oppose the nuclear deal was to support Israel against the Obama administration. That made the State of Israel a partisan issue, while in the past support for Israel has been overwhelmingly bipartisan. The White House and the mainstream media owe Netanyahu an apology for their fallacious and dishonorable presentation of a controversial issue.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/when_obama_lies_to_the_media_and_laughs_doing_it.html

May 11, 2016
When the White House Lies to the Media, and Laughs Doing It
By Michael Curtis

* * *



[From article]
Ben Rhodes is perhaps the weirdest foreign policy adviser in the history of the White House. His path to his current position as deputy national security adviser for strategic communications was, as this New York Times profile informs us, "perhaps not strictly believable, even as fiction."
Forget his title. Ben Rhodes is "the single most influential voice shaping American foreign policy aside from Potus himself," according to the Times. What makes that so bizarre is that Rhodes has no background in foreign policy at all. He was a failed short story writer who wandered into the orbit of Obama aides almost by accident and served as a speechwriter during the campaign.
But he helped the administration identify friendly reporters and nonprofits who could be counted on to carry a completely false and misleading "narrative" about the Iran deal.
And it worked.
[. . .]



What the Samuels piece shows is that the Obama administration chose to attempt to get its way not by winning an argument but by bringing an almost fathomless cynicism to bear in manipulating its own clueless liberal fan club.
It's amazing how Rhodes sees himself and his role. He refers to the foreign policy establishment as "the blob," and at bottom, he believes he and Obama are the only smart ones in the room.
Samuels's profile is an amazing piece of writing about the Holden Caulfield of American foreign policy. He's a sentimental adolescent with literary talent (Rhodes published one short story before his mother's connections won him a job in the world of foreign policy), and high self regard, who thinks that everyone else is a phony. Those readers who found Jeffrey Goldberg's picture of Obama in his March Atlantic profile refreshing for the president's willingness to insult American allies publicly will be similarly cheered here by Rhodes's boast of deceiving American citizens, lawmakers, and allies over the Iran deal. Conversely, those who believe Obama risked American interests to take a cheap shot at allies from the pedestal of the Oval Office will be appalled to see Rhodes dancing in the end zone to celebrate the well-packaged misdirections and even lies—what Rhodes and others call a "narrative"—that won Obama his signature foreign policy initiative.
[. . .]
All you have to do to discover the extent of their flim-flamming is to look at the talking points about the agreement after the preliminary deal was agreed to in April and compare it with the final agreement in July. The dishonesty in selling this deal to Congress was so profound that we still don't know yet how Iran is interpreting parts of it.
Samuels's profile is very long and, at times, strains credulity that such a creature could become a top adviser to the president. But it also unintentionally reveals how easily the Washington press corps can be manipulated into doing the president's bidding. There was very little objective analysis of the Iran deal, nor any attempt to reconcile what was in the deal with what the administration was claiming in public.
If there had been, it's doubtful that the deal would have gone through Congress.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/05/ben_rhodes_admits_administration_lied_to_sell_iran_deal.html

May 6, 2016
Ben Rhodes admits administration lied to sell Iran deal
By Rick Moran

Hiroshima Bomb Decried Again

Using the A-bomb to save lives was an unquestioned decision. Japan refused to surrender after three hundred, then five hundred B-29 bombers left devastation and death. Okinawa fighting without an A-bomb, left 48,000 US deaths and injuries, 110,000 Japanese and 150,000 civilians dead. Invading Japan was estimated to cost 220,000 to one million American lives. Aug 6th Hiroshima. Aug 10th Nagasaki, when Japanese military were meeting, refusing to end the war, wanting to lure American troops onto their mainland. Aug 11th the emperor decided to surrender unconditionally. Aug 14th Japan formally surrendered. From David McCullough, Truman. It was a decision to sacrifice fewer people. Easy to object in 2016 to that decision. Seen any pictures of women abused by Islamic State?

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/news/20160216/letter-still-time-to-catch-hiroshima-talks-at-cambridge-library

Christie Dennis, Cambridge resident, volunteer for Massachusetts Peace Action
LETTER: Still time to catch Hiroshima talks at the Cambridge library
Posted Feb. 16, 2016 at 3:29 PM
Updated at 3:31 PM
To the editor:

 

Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal Violates Two US Laws

[From article]
Some senior U.S. officials involved in the implementation of the Iran nuclear deal have privately concluded that a key sanctions relief provision – a concession to Iran that will open the doors to tens of billions of dollars in U.S.-backed commerce with the Islamic regime – conflicts with existing federal statutes and cannot be implemented without violating those laws, Fox News has learned.
[. . .]



In short, this means that foreign subsidiaries of U.S. parent companies will, under certain conditions, be allowed to do business with Iran. The problem is that the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act (ITRA), signed into law by President Obama in August 2012, was explicit in closing the so-called “foreign sub” loophole.
[. . .]



What’s more, ITRA contains language, in Section 605, requiring that the terms spelled out in Section 218 shall remain in effect until the president of the United States certifies two things to Congress: first, that Iran has been removed from the State Department’s list of nations that sponsor terrorism, and second, that Iran has ceased the pursuit, acquisition, and development of weapons of mass destruction.
Additional executive orders and statutes signed by President Obama, such as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, have reaffirmed that all prior federal statutes relating to sanctions on Iran shall remain in full effect.
[. . .]



As the Iran deal is an “executive agreement” and not a treaty – and has moreover received no vote of ratification from the Congress, explicit or symbolic – legal analysts inside and outside of the Obama administration have concluded that the JCPOA is vulnerable to challenge in the courts, where federal case law had held that U.S. statutes trump executive agreements in force of law.
[. . .]



Likewise, in a speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy last month, Adam Szubin, the acting under secretary of Treasury for terrorism and financial crimes, described Iran as “the world’s foremost sponsor of terrorism” and said existing U.S. sanctions on the regime “will continue to be enforced….U.S. investment in Iran will be prohibited across the board.”
[. . .]



One administration lawyer contacted by Fox News said the re-opening of the loophole reflects circular logic with no valid legal foundation. “It would be Alice-in-Wonderland bootstrapping to say that [Section] 601 gives the president the authority to restore the foreign subsidiary loophole – the exact opposite of what the statute ordered,” said the attorney, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations over implementation of the Iran deal.
[. . .]
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the G.O.P. presidential candidate who is a Harvard-trained lawyer and ardent critic of the Iran deal, said the re-opening of the loophole fits a pattern of the Obama administration enforcing federal laws selectively.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/08/exclusive-us-officials-conclude-iran-deal-violates-federal-law/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fmost-popular+%28Internal+-+Most+Popular+Content%29

EXCLUSIVE: U.S. officials conclude Iran deal violates federal law
By James Rosen

Published October 08, 2015

FoxNews.com

Iran Increases Funding For Terrorism After Misguided Nuclear Weapons Deal With White House

[From article]
Since the [nuclear] deal was signed, Iran has significantly increased its financial support for two of the largest terror groups in the region that have become political players, Hamas and Hezbollah. In the years before the deal was signed, the crippling sanctions limited this support, which had significantly diminished along with Iran’s economy. But Tehran’s belief that tens, or hundreds, of billions of dollars will flow into the country in the coming years as a result of sanctions relief has led to a decision to boost the cash flow to these terror organizations.
 
http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/09/21/iran-increases-funding-to-hezbollah-hamas-with-support-from-nuclear-deal/

Iran Increases Funding for Hezbollah, Hamas in Anticipation of Nuclear Deal Windfall
SEPTEMBER 21, 2015 11:39 AM

Iran Nuclear Weapons Treaty Is Laughable, Except For Its Dangerousness

[From article]
Born out of the realization that the Iran deal similarly does little good and has countless lasting side-effects was Zucker’s latest ad, which mirrors most closely the commercials for erectile dysfunction pill Cialis and portrays President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton negotiating with Iran’s “death to America”-shouting Mullahs.
Thus was born this uproariously funny video that mirrors drug ads in tone and content:
The president's obsequiousness toward the Iranians, Kerry fumbling and bumbling, Hillary's apparent eagerness to please - good satire captures a germ of truth and exaggerates it to painful dimensions. And satire doesn't get any better than this.


Published on Sep 10, 2015
Hollywood comedy legend David Zucker (“Airplane,” “Scary Movie,” “Naked Gun” films among many others) has written and produced this hilarious spoof on the disastrous Iran Nuclear Deal. In his trademark style, Zucker skewers the deal’s primary architects – President Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry warns of the possible “Side Effects” that may result from the absurd agreement.

https://youtu.be/qNvHAjcHAvs



http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/09/call_your_doctor_and_ask_about_side_effects_from_the_iran_deal.html

September 20, 2015
Call your doctor and ask about 'side effects' from the Iran deal
By Rick Moran

Support For Nuclear Weapons Treaty Is Flawed

Saying "the alternative to this agreement with Iran [. . .] is an attack on Iran." is a false argument, propaganda. Alternatives include but are not limited to maintaining sanctions and not giving Iran $150 billion, which can be used for terrorism. Saying "Iran [. . .] would be prevented from developing one [nuclear weapon] by this treaty." is not true. It delays does not prevent. He admits it is a treaty here, which requires 2/3 approval of the US Senate. Saying "none of the threat of nuclear war [. . .] will come from Iran." has no basis in fact, no evidence. Iran threatens to destroy the US and Israel. Shannon cites unnamed U.S. officials defending possession and threats to use nuclear weapons. Do words have any meaning when they come from Washington DC officials? He cherry picks statements and organizations for support. His arguments are talking points promoted by the White House. No recognition of alternatives. Nonsense and propaganda. Iran gets 24 day notice for inspections. No Americans can be inspectors. No concern about procedural violations by the White House forcing the treaty on a reluctant congress and population. If this treaty is so great why is it secret with even Congress being denied access to details, side deals? Is this a position paper of the AFSC? Shannon does not recognize the role of the Cambridge Nuclear War and Peace Commission which prevented nuclear war in Cambridge, Italy and South America for 29 years.

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20150918/NEWS/150916206

Guest column: Getting things straight about the Iran deal
By Paul Shannon, AFSC
Posted Sep. 18, 2015 at 10:08 AM
CAMBRIDGE Chronicle

How Friends Negotiate

Washington DC Directs Assisted Suicide of the United States

Communist Party took over the Democratic Party. Unable to defeat the U.S. economically and militarily, they infiltrated and continue to do so. Notice any weak Republicans? Surprise! Voters elected Communists. Journalists are their useful idiots. US taxpayers and voters need to learn propaganda to survive.

[From article]
President Obama’s legacy to America: a Middle East in chaos, radical Islam ascendant, a nuclear Iran with a $150 billion dollar terror fund, Israel demonized as a warmonger, Europe flooded with Muslims. This Iran Deal is so bad, so dangerous, so traitorous, it is hard to believe. That is one reason the Democrats can get away with it. Their loyal voters assume their party leaders and beloved first black President would not do something this traitorous.
[. . .]
Have no doubt this “deal” is a national security disaster. In an unprecedented move, motived by alarm and a sense of their responsibility, 245 (and the number is growing daily) retired generals and admirals, including the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President Clinton and the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the Gulf War, have written a stiff letter that was hand delivered to every member of Congress.
Their message to Congress: kill the Iran Deal.
[. . .]



Democrats in Congress are willing to betray their country rather than stand up to a rogue President. What is more important to the liberal politicians? The favors and threats that we know have been emanating from the White House, or decades of bi-partisan support for our national security? Easy answer for these career politicians: first their careers, then their perks, then their Democratic Party. American national interest is no longer on the list.
[. . .]
Our President has a lifelong affection and affinity for Islam, the religion of his father and his step-father, and of the country where he was raised as a child.
Obama also has his own version of American history, in which we are not a Judeo-Christian nation, not exceptional, have many reasons for remorse and few for pride. These are the values that led him to his dream of a Middle East where Iran, not America and not Israel, is the dominant military power.
[. . .]



Because of his Moslem father and stepfather and where he grew up, Obama has an emotional affinity for Islam that few Americans share. The sound of the Islamic call to prayers is the “one of the prettiest sounds on earth” our President told the New York Times. He then recited the Moslem call to prayer in a “first-rate accent.”
Nicolas Kristof, the Time’s reporter, was too lazy to look up the Muslim call to prayer, or its significance. Recite it aloud in front of a witness three times, and you are a Muslim for life. Leaving the religion is punishable by death.
[. . .]
In his twisted moral universe, the mullahs are on the side of the right and America and Israel are the bad guys.
That’s our President. What is Congress’s excuse? What is the excuse of all those Democrat voters who like to swallow easy lies, even at the cost of betraying our country?

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/09/why_are_democrats_willing_to_strengthen_iran_and_hurt_israel.html

September 6, 2015
Why are Democrats Willing to Strengthen Iran and Hurt Israel?
By Karin McQuillan

White House May Win Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal Vote By Manipulation, But It Will Not Stand and Threatens National Security

[From article]
By enlisting Barbara Mikulski as the 34th Senate vote for his disastrous nuclear deal with Iran, enough to sustain his veto of a resolution of disapproval, President Obama has scored a political victory — but a hollow one.
That’s because his agreement, the most important foreign-policy measure in decades, will take effect with the support of only a third of Congress — and a similar minority of the American people.
The president won’t win approval of his odious deal; a majority of Congress remains firmly opposed. He’s simply manipulated the process by demonizing his opponents as warmongers.
Yes, Obama’s rallied enough Democrats to back him in a show of blind partisan loyalty. But his “supporters” all stress their serious misgivings on the deal.
It’s an agreement about which no one — save Obama, John Kerry and the rulers in Tehran — is enthusiastic.
[. . .]
As House Speaker John Boehner noted, getting just enough Democrats to help him put over a bad deal, over the objections of a solid majority of Americans, is no victory.
If Democrats insist on this charade on the American people, Republicans have a duty to force them to debate the issue — and put themselves squarely on record.

http://nypost.com/2015/09/02/obamas-political-win-on-the-iran-deal-is-a-hollow-victory/

Obama’s political win on the Iran deal is a hollow victory
By New York Post Editorial Board
September 2, 2015 | 7:43pm

Prediction For Congressional Vote on Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal

[From article]
The state is a cold monster, said Gen. De Gaulle.
Which brings us to Iran. Should we accept a deal, with a regime as abhorrent as the Ayatollah’s, that would deny that regime a nuclear weapon for 10 to 15 years?
For many of the moral arguments against such a deal also applied to the Soviet Union and Mao’s China in the Nixon-Kissinger era.
What are Iran’s crimes against America?
[. . .]
There is good cause for bad blood between us.
Yet, compared to Mao’s nuclear-armed China in the madness of the Cultural Revolution in 1972, and Leonid Brezhnev’s USSR, Iran, as a strategic threat to the United States, is not even a 97-pound weakling.
[. . .]
We have enemies in common.
Moreover, as the largest Shiite nation in the Middle East, and most populous nation in the Persian Gulf, Iran, absent a ruinous war, is going to become a regional power. When Bush 43 smashed Iran’s great rival, overthrew the regime of Saddam Hussein, then disbanded the Sunni-led Iraqi army, “W” guaranteed it.
[. . .]
While the GOP may muster the votes to reject it, they lack the votes to override an Obama veto of their rejection.
[. . .]
How the GOP handles its coming defeat will tell us whether they have learned from the failures of Bush and can now run the country.

http://buchanan.org/blog/can-the-gop-deal-with-iran-16469

Can the GOP Deal With Iran?
Tuesday - September 1, 2015 at 1:04 am
By Patrick J. Buchanan

Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal Provisions Which Harm The United States

Almost 200 Generals Oppose Iran Deal; 35 Support It

[From article]
President Obama last week trumpeted that he was able to find 36 retired flag officers who supported his agreement to "give diplomacy a chance." The media explained away this paltry number of signers by saying that "retired brass avoid firm positions on Iranian nuke deal."
Four to five volunteers from around the country in less than a week got 190 generals and admirals to sign a letter that urges Congress to reject the JCPOA because "this agreement will enable Iran to become far more dangerous, render the Mideast still more unstable and introduce new threats to American interests as well as our allies."
[. . .]
And the opposition is not limited to these 190. The names keep pouring in, asking,

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/08/190_generals_and_admirals_sign_letter_to_congress_reject_the_defective_iran_deal_.html

August 27, 2015
190 generals and admirals sign letter to Congress: Reject the defective Iran deal
By Carol Greenwald

Is It Likely Congress Will Stop Destructive Iranian Nuclear Weapons Deal? All Votes For Sale?

[From article]
Frontpage Magazine has published a bombshell report that has been met with total silence by the media. Daniel Greenfield’s piece is entitled “Traitor Senators Took Money from Iran Lobby, Back Iran Nukes.”
Our politicians bought by Iran include not just a list of senators and congressmen about to vote on the Iran deal. Recipients of Iran’s largess for their campaigns include President Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton.
[. . .]
Iranian-American activists against the mullahs’ regime in Iran correctly described IAPAC as a "lobby group for a terrorist regime.”
[. . .]
President Obama himself accepted $50,000 from one of the Iran Lobby founders.
[. . .]
Point of interest: the Israel Lobby, AIPAC, does not make direct campaign contributions.
Some on Greenfield’s list of traitors are no surprise. Senator Markey got the maximum campaign contribution from the Iranians and has announced his support for the Iran deal. So did Al Franken. Senator Jeanne Shaheen did it for half price.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/08/iran_is_buying_democrat_congress_they_already_bought_kerry_clinton_and_biden.html

August 27, 2015
Iranians are buying Democrat Congress (they already bought Kerry, Clinton, and Biden)
By Karin McQuillan
* * *

[From article]
Obama will get his veto-proof vote. He will be allowed to capitulate to Iran, with $120 billion thrown in for them to splurge on terror to their heart’s content. We will allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons and purchase ICBM missiles that can reach America. We will give birth to a Shi’ite-Sunni nuclear arms race. We will sow this whirlwind and live with the consequence for years. Because Democrats in Congress will give Obama their votes.
I understand Obama very well – he is a leftist hater who wants America (and Israel) punished and whittled down to size. But almost half our nation are Democrats. Not every Democrat in Congress is as radical as Obama. Few of them share his personal history and characterological problems. Why aren’t they standing up to him?
[. . .]
They lived through Obamacare and saw how Obama survived the citizens’ wrath just fine, while Democrats throughout the country saw themselves booted out of office, from State House to the Governor’s office to Congress. Yet they are willing to jump off the cliff for Obama again. What is going on? Is it just desperation to keep blacks voting as a block for Democrats? Are they being bought off by Obama and the Iranians?
[. . .]
The entire Democratic Party from top to bottom is made of niche interest groups who are bought off by having their narrow self-interest promoted above the interests of the country. The feminists get abortion without limit at the price of infanticide. The gays get gay marriage at the price of religious freedom. The teacher unions get lifetime job security at the price of lousy schools. The government bureaucrats get outsize salary/benefit/pension packages at the price of bankrupting the country. The race hustlers get the President fomenting racial hatred, at the price of people’s lives. Those dependent on the government teat get more and more stuff and a blind eye to fraud, while the economy sinks under our debt. The environmentalists and Silicon Valley get subsidies for green energy and EPA attacks on our energy industry, at the price of energy security and blue collar jobs. The Hispanic activists get illegal immigration, at the cost of good salaries and jobs for citizens. Hollywood and liberal Jews and academia get entry to the jobs and cocktail parties controlled by punitive, blacklisting, fellow liberals. And they all get to feel superior and sanctimonious at the same time by libeling conservatives as uncaring, racist, morons.
[. . .]
Each Democrat voting block cares only about themselves. That is the essence of the Democratic Party.
No wonder Democrats easy to buy off on Iran. Not one part of the Democrat voting bloc cares about national security, stability in the Middle East, Israel, or the dangers of a Sunni-Shite arms race. For most of them patriotism is so passé, so flyover country. They only care about getting their own perks. They are dreamers who believe their own B.S. about how beautiful the world will be once America stops being aggressive. So why should their representatives in Congress care about Obama’s insane handing over of the Middle East to Iran?
[. . .]
We can’t wait for Democrats to step up and stop the Iran Deal. They don’t care enough about America to do it. We can’t wait for our Republican politicians – as they did with Obamacare, they console themselves the world will go up in flames and tens or hundreds of thousands die, but Democrats will be punished at the polls next November. That is not good enough.
Tragically, the public is asleep as an Iranian nightmare is being loosed upon the world by our own fellow citizens and politicians.
[. . .]
Sen. Ted Cruz has invited Donald Trump to Washington next month for a rally against the Iran nuclear deal.
The two Republican rivals are set to appear at an event organized by the Tea Party Patriots, the Center for Security Politics, and the Zionist Organization of America, according to the Cruz campaign.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/can_the_iran_deal_be_stopped_the_chance_is_slim_to_none.html

August 28, 2015
Can the Iran Deal Be Stopped? The Chance is Slim to None
By Karin McQuillan

White House Out Of Ideas, Calls Dissenters, Crazies

The president was elected as the great black hope. He brought his degrees from Columbia University and from Harvard Law School. No one seems to know him from Columbia. One alumni who says he was a classmate of Obama works in Las Vegas. He reports that Obama was a militant Muslim when he was at Columbia. At Harvard he was president of the Law Review without writing or publishing any legal treatise. He brought promises of lowering the oceans. He was going to heal the racial divide and bring hope and change to the nation. What he brought was division. Lies. Rhetoric. Speeches with nothing behind them. Pure hot air. He began calling anyone who disagreed with him racists. Then he added they were bitter clingers to religion and guns. He added they were haters. Now into his penultimate year in office he is calling people who disagree with him the crazies. That is an improvement? He is slandering persons with disabilities as well as making clear his belief that crazy people are not to be believed, and that no one should pay any attention to them. He shows more and more of his bigotry as the more he speaks with his support teleprompter.



[From article]
Just back from his annual summer vacation at Martha’s Vineyard, President Barack Obama has returned to disparaging his political adversaries and anyone who happens to disagree with him on policy.



According to a report in Politico, the president has taken to describing opponents of the hugely controversial Iran deal as “crazies.” The so-called “crazies” now include a majority of members of the House and Senate, a large chunk of the American electorate according to opinion polls, and the government of Israel, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
It is significant that several leading figures in the president’s own party have declared their opposition to the Iran deal, including Charles Schumer, the senior senator for New York, and Eliot Engel, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Relations Committee from New York.

http://dailysignal.com/2015/08/25/memo-to-obama-its-not-iran-deal-critics-who-are-the-crazy-ones/

INTERNATIONALCOMMENTARY
Memo to Obama: It’s Not Iran Deal Critics Who Are the ‘Crazy’ Ones
Nile Gardiner / @NileGardiner

August 25, 2015

Rally Against Dangerous Iran Nuclear Weapons Sunday, August 30, 2015

U.S. Rep. Clark Supports Nuclear Weapons Plan For Iran

Rep. Clark omits the $150 billion gift which Iranians can use to sponsor terror attacks anywhere in the world. Also that Iran controls inspection timing, 24 day notice, by whom, no American inspectors permitted. In 1933 a small group of Germans began a political party, which the establishment ignored saying they were rude and of no consequence. They were elected to control the country attacking other countries and killing millions. What is different from the current atmosphere in Iran which promises to destroy Israel. Russia is selling missile technology to Iran. What is the deterrent to Iran breaking any agreement they make and acting on their threats? Why was release of American hostages not part of this "agreement?" If it is the most rational agreement, why is it secret? Why did the White House bypass Congress and go to the UN first?

[From article]
Experts in nuclear science found that the JCPOA’s dismantling of the Iranian nuclear machine and inspections and verifications will halt Iran’s nuclear weapons capability for at least 15 years. Iran’s agreement to never develop a nuclear bomb will put it under world scrutiny and non-proliferation agreements forever.
[. . .]
With weakened leverage, we are not likely to obtain more concessions from Iran nor halt its march to a nuclear bomb.
[. . .]
we should resolve to hold Iran to strict compliance — being quick to impose consequences if Iran strays from the agreement.
[. . .]
This agreement provides an unprecedented ability to look into Iran’s facilities and capabilities, monitor their compliance, and establish a solid path for the United States and the world to prevent Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear bomb.

http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20150819/NEWS/150816498

Guest Column: Why the Iran nuclear deal is the best option
By Katherine Clark
Posted Aug. 19, 2015 at 10:38 AM
CAMBRIDGE Chronicle

Yank Cord Now

U.S. Secretary Of State, Pre Crash

[From article]
Secretary of State John Kerry said in late July that he was not sure if the Iranians were serious about wanting to destroy Israel; this after years of insisting that they do. [. . .]
In his book he calls Israel an “infected cancer,” which was the language about Jews used by Adolf Hitler.
Khamenei declares that the salvation of the Muslim world to be dependent on defeating Israel. “The Zionist occupiers are antihuman and their state must be annihilated.”
[. . .]
On the very day, July 14, the deal was signed, there were tens of thousands of demonstrators in Iran organized by the regime chanting “Death to America!” and one has the right ask, “Have Obama and Kerry and those who support their deal lost their minds?
Obama and Kerry, spiritually speaking, seem to have emerged from the putrid afterbirth of the lunatic 1960s and 70s. Kerry was one of the most despicable Americans in that period. He went to Viet Nam with a movie camera to be photographed as a soldier “in country” with a view to his future political career, and the medals that he came home with -- there is reason to believe -- were fraudulently awarded.[. . .]He made himself famous by badmouthing and betraying his former comrades-in-arms by calling them war criminals. He was the male “Jane Fonda” of the day who flew off to Paris to shake hands with the enemy Communist Viet Cong.
As for Obama who was a boy at that time, the Communist Franklin Marshall Davis and Saul Alinsky, father of seditious “community organizing,” were his political mentors. As an adult, he then befriended two others among the more reprehensible public figures of the age, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, both domestic, violent opponents of the American way of life.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/08/yank_the_emergency_cord_now.html

August 12, 2015
Yank the Emergency Cord Now!
By Sha'i ben-Tekoa

Protest August 19, 2015 Against Dangerous Iran Nuclear Weapons Agreement

Protest Iran Nuclear Weapons Agreement Wednesday August 12, 2015

There's a meetup at Coolidge Corner
regarding Iran this 
Wednesday August 12, 2015 
6-8:pm.
Please spread the word!

US Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) Answers White House Claims on Iran Nuclear Weapons Agreement

  Schumer vs Obama

For those in the House and Senate who remain undecided about the deal’s merits, little could be more instructive than a side-by-side comparison of Schumer and Obama’s statements,

[From article]
When Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced that he would vote against the nuclear deal with Iran, he didn’t just take a position -- he rejected every major argument President Obama has made on the agreement’s behalf. Schumer argues this is not a deal that prevents Iran from getting nuclear weapons, but one that brings it to the threshold of nuclear weapons capability. He states that its verification and enforcement mechanisms are flawed. Finally, he points out it provides Iran with tens of billions of dollars it could spend on subsidizing terrorism and other violent pursuits.
If Schumer’s goal were to lose the fewest friends possible, he could have provided a tepid rationale for his position that did not lend so much credibility to the arguments made by the deal’s opponents. But Schumer also makes his arguments in a thoughtful, even courtly manner-- in sharp contrast to President Obama, who insisted in a mean-spirited address on Thursday that the merits of the deal are so obvious that one should dismiss any criticism as “knee-jerk partisanship” or mercenary opposition bought and paid for by wealthy donors.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/schumer-dismantles-obamas-iran-rhetoric-point-point_1007940.html

Schumer Dismantles Obama's Iran Rhetoric, Point By Point
12:29 PM, AUG 9, 2015

BY DAVID ADESNIK