Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul Not Worthy of Presidential Office

Obvious Reality | July 14th, 2015 | Self

[South40]

So do I.

[smokingfrog]

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-morris/levin-us-senate-just-capitulated-obama-and-rewrote-constitutions-treaty

[itsahoot]

I could see deceitful maneuvering to something along the lines of a plurality of votes, but 34? No way.

They worded the deal so that it automatically becomes law unless it is defeated, all it takes to keep it for coming up for a vote is 34. It is an opt out kind of deal, feel better now?

[MaxMax]

Yes, so Hillary is your choice. I get it. We don't need an election since
we have you to choose for us.

[Mariner]

"Is there a reason we should take your assessment as accurate?"

Because it is accurate.

Would you like to argue the facts and merits?

[skeeter]

The thinking was that Obama could’ve enacted the Iran deal as an executive action, and the Corker bill mandated that congress have some roll in its approval. Some is better than none.

[Mariner]

"Who was the one?"

Tom Cotton was the only one to vote against the bill.

He insisted it was an Unconstitutional bypass of Senate Treaty powers.

[itsahoot]

Let me guess, by the author’s lights, Barack Obama is EMINENTLY WORTHY of the Presidential Office? (OK got it).

Maybe you should read the deal before you go looking like a noobie. Tom Cotton is the lone Patriot that stood against this travesty.

[pgkdan]

Is there a reason we should take your assessment as accurate?

You mean other than the fact that he's right?

[Mariner]

Then perhaps you’d like top ask the good Senator why he voted fo the Corker Bill?

[Timmy]

The deal is not a treaty and, therefore, was never going to the Senate. That’s why Cotten wrote infamous open letter to Iran that bill is not binding and next President could end it. This bill forces the Senate to weigh in on it. Probably the best of the bad options available to a Senate being ignored by a lawless President.

[Gaffer]

NO, but I bet you do.

[RIghtwardHo]

There are a whole raft of GOPers for whom I will skip the POTUS vote. Quite unhappy with the entire slate though there are some for whom I would vote.

[Mariner]

"By your moronic way of thinking, Reagan was a traitor, too"

Reagan NEVER bypassed the Senate on two Nuclear arms Treaties he negotiated.

Try again with some FACTS.

[pgkdan]

I could see deceitful maneuvering to something along the lines of a plurality of votes, but 34? No way.

Geez...where were you people while this was being debated and passed this spring? The reason obama only needs 34 votes for this to pass is that because of the language in the bill the Congress...the GOP lewd Congress, passed this Spring this deal will not be considered a treaty. The Congress will have to pass a bill in both Houses opposing teh deal...which obama will veto and then BOTh houses will have to vote to override his veot. It takes 2/3 vote to override. Therefore, 34 votes will be enough to uphold obama's veto and put this deal in force.

[Mariner]

"Obama was opposed to it so that should tell you all you need to know"

Obama supported and signed the Corker Bill.

He was opposed to amendments that would constrain him.

[Mariner]

"We don't need an election since we have you to choose for us. "

Choose whomever you want.

[Mariner]

"The thinking was that Obama could’ve enacted the Iran deal as an executive action"

Anyone who made that argument was lying.

Congress has control over sanctions.

[Mariner]

"The deal is not a treaty and, therefore, was never going to the Senate"

Since when is a nuclear arms deal not a Treaty?

[Gaffer]

Then if it isn’t a formal treaty that cannot be controlled as stipulated in the Constitution, it is like any other bill. One that can be later rescinded by Congress and a sympathetic President. I’m not saying that would happen, especially with a Jeb Bush as President, but it might happen with a true conservative President.

If there is not this, then there is nothing else to banter about. We are lost - undone completely.