[don-o]

Good Morning, AB and all.

I like to lurk on the thread, but I wish to solicit opinion on the “deal” that Corker brokered with the WH. My initial opinion was that I was glad that the Congress was pushing back. Then, I heard Mark Levin go ballistic and opine that the deal destroys the Senate’s responsibility to advise and its power to consent (2/3 to ratify.) So, I am willing to rethink.

When the deal is submitted to the Senate for review, should it not be subject to the requirement of being approved by 2/3 of the members present? Obama insists the agreement with Iran is not a treaty.

Why can’t the Senate say, “Oh yes, it IS a treaty.” ?

[okie01]

Why can’t the Senate say, “Oh yes, it IS a treaty.” ?

Because they have tacitly agreed it is something else -- by passing the Corker Bill.

[rodguy911]

We have perhaps the weakest Senate majority leader in modern times. Mc”Con”nell. He could have nuked the Senate and all we would need on many issues is a simple majority. but he's to weak,dumb or already compromised to do it.