Good piece from Greg Sargent at the WaPo (we don’t quote him or the Benenator 2000 near enough) about Democratic culpability if the Iran deal is rejected in Congress:
If the deal does go down, those Democrats — in addition to Republicans — will also own the consequences that follow. As Brian Beutler recently explained, Republican opposition to the accord is build on a foundation of evasions about what they think we should do instead if and when Iran continues on the course to a nuke, and false promises about how they would secure the “better deal” they claim to envision. But Democrats who end up opposing the deal should also feel pressed to explain why they, too, are not trafficking in the same evasions and false promises.
Obviously it’s possible for lawmakers to sincerely believe that the consequences of killing the agreement won’t be as dire as supporters claim; or that the deal carries such severe long term risks that the near-term consequences of killing it don’t justify supporting it; or that there are plausible alternatives other than war. But Democrats who oppose the deal — as well as Republicans — should feel pressure to justify their opposition with real arguments along these lines, and should expect that whatever arguments they do make will be subjected to intense scrutiny and skepticism.
Here’s the question that every wavering Democrat and every Republican: “If you choose to reject the deal and go against the rest of the world, how much will you raise taxes and how many kids from your district are you willing to sacrifice to go to war with Iran at the behest of AIPAC, the Likud party, Netanyahu?”
One estimate (on the low side, IMHO) suggests 15,000 American deaths and 90,000 seriously injured. So what’s that, 35 dead per district? How many trillions will the VA need to service all these seriously wounded. That’s a pretty big bill in both blood and gold. So how ’bout it, Senator Schumer? How much are you willing to raise taxes to pay for this? What High School senior class of kids are you willing to look in the eye and say “Sorry, but three dozen of you need to die.”
Brachiator
President Presumptive Trump insists it won’t cost us a dime because we’re going to take their oil and make them pay for the pleasure of our invasion.
War widows and widowers will get medals and bonuses for their dead.
War on the company expense account.
jl
Good questions. Thanks, Cole.
I would only add that your approach assumes that the response of the opposition would in fact be war to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons program. I might be that they would not in fact go to war to stop it. My understanding is that both US and Israeli intelligence and military think an Iran with a nuclear weapon would be manageable through deterrence, not a total apocalyptic disaster. The important consideration for reactionary politicians is to keep Iran isolated and its status as our Great Satan.
This approach to the issue is not mentioned all that much in the news media. Maybe because it is not scary enough, maybe because it is considered uncivil to discuss in the polite and refined corporate hack world of US news information product, since it reveals the opponents to be even bigger liars and more outrageous and unscrupulous people than commonly imagined.
The idea is that keeping Iran as the Great Satan would make it easier to gain support for (the US mainly paying for and waging? Maybe? ) an endless string of smaller wars required to maintain the status quo for Likud and the gulf oil states.
Marshall has a post at TPM that is relevant
The Real Argument
talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-real-argument
Emma
Today is a depressing day in so many levels that I think I’ll retreat to a evening of Midsomer Murders. Murderous housewives, psychopathic gardeners, and terror-filled church fetes sound good about now.
dedc79
Look, AIPAC, Netanyahu, Likud have all been absolutely awful in their effort to undermine ths deal, and they are undoubtedly responsible for bullying Schumer into what he did. But I think you’re missing a big piece of this when you make it all about the israel lobby.
I’m sure Republicans love having the “don’t stab israel in the back” talking point to use, but don’t think for a second their position would be any different if Israel approved or was merely ambivalent about this deal. Republican opposition is above all else a reflection of their determination to be against whatever Obama is for.
AIPAC certainly influences politicians, but it has a lot less influence over the voting public (it can’t even convince anywhere near close to a majority of jews to oppose the deal), and the poll results on the iran deal are depressingly mixed (granted, a lot of it is how the question is posed). If the voting public doesn’t come out in favor of the deal, politicians (republicans and democrats) don’t have to worry about their vote being used against them in the next election.
Right to Rise
It’s all coming together.
Clinton embroiled in scandal, her campaign in self-destruct mode.
None other than Bob Woodward is even comparing the Clinton Emails to the Nixon Tapes. Thousands of hours of secret conversation that she thought was private–but will soon be revealed. It could even be Putin or China that does the deed. She’s also increasingly seen as aloof and arrogant, trying to bully her way into the White House.
But the American people won’t let her.
Meanwhile, Sanders and Biden now lay in wait. They’re poised–one to her left, one to her right, both smelling blood.
Could we be seeing the end of the Clinton Dynasty before it even begins?
Meanwhile, on the other side, Jeb is holding steady respectability in the early going. Mild-mannered and ready to let others take the spotlight (and the heat that comes with it), Jeb is poised to peak at the right time as Trump, Fiorna, and now Kasich peak too early.
The Other Chuck
I’m sure our tireless fourth estate will keep the electorate informed in order to keep their political representatives accountable for their actions. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go hop on my unicorn and go shopping for dilithium crystals.
srv
Trump would just appeal to our Patriotism, restart the draft and send the fleet in.
Iranians would cave in weeks to a real threat. If not, nobody is talking about occupying Iran. Just showing them who’s boss and shutting down their nuclear program. We can take a few of their oilfields to pay for our efforts until they shape up.
As Admiral Fallon (no friend of Bush) said of Iran: “These guys are ants. When the time comes, you crush them.”
Mr. Twister
War with Iran, hmm… en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
Calouste
Is there any indication that the rest of the world gives a flying f if Knesset West rejects the deal?
CONGRATULATIONS!
The bolded part will never be asked. Never. Can’t let everyone know who is really driving the bus here.
Emma
@Right to Rise: Meanwhile, on the other side, Jeb is holding steady respectability in the early going. Mild-mannered and ready to let others take the spotlight (and the heat that comes with it), Jeb is poised to peak at the right time as Trump, Fiorna, and now Kasich peak too early.
Your drugs, I want them.
Calouste
@srv: Geography, how the fuck does that work? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#/media/File:CIAIranKarteOelGas.jpg
jl
@Emma: I still think its DougJ doing absurdist trolling performance art. Sure, commenters say it is subpar and can’t be him. But this cycle the GOP seems devoted to the ‘its so bad its good’ genre of political entertainment, so I figure he has to practice that.
gogol's wife
@Emma:
There’s nothing that can’t be cured by looking into Inspector Barnaby’s baby blues.
WaterGirl
@Emma: I laughed out loud at the comment at #5. It might be tempting, but I figure if you engage with a troll early in the thread, the whole thread turns to shit.
Brachiator
@srv:
A perfect imitation of Trump bluster.
And twice as ignorant.
dedc79
@Right to Rise:
Steady respectability is my favorite kind of respectability.
Emma
@gogol’s wife: Isn’t he just…. Soothing? Calm? Rational? Reasonable? Sexy in an understated way?
sukabi
@Brachiator: pretty sure the “take their oil and make them pay” was the exact same strategy Wrecking Crew took with Iraq
srv
@Calouste: Looks pretty easy, all those fields in the gulf or along the coast. We’ve got a Navy, they’ve got some silly boats. Not to mention friendly airbases in KSA, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Oman, well, everywhere but Iran.
Bush’s mistake was to go after Iraq. Iran was the real prize and Saddam would have gotten in line.
bystander
@Brachiator: Is it time for a “suck on this” reference?
I think it’s great to say that jerkbrains like Schumer should pay the price for their idiocy, but when do they ever? In a just world, Jebula, Wolfowitz, Dan Senor, Matthew Dowd and the whole cabal would be living in rush huts down by the river. But every time I turn on my tv, there they are with more great advice for the American people.
dedc79
@srv: You and your warmonger friends in the Republican party have learned absolutely nothing, have you? An eight-year timeout clearly wasn’t long enough. We’re gonna have to double it, at least.
gogol's wife
@Emma:
Oh, yes. He has a way with absurd dialogue that makes it sound like Shakespeare.
gogol's wife
@bystander:
If you make it “a van down by the river,” I hear it in Chris Farley’s voice.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
How understands the Moustache of Understanding when it comes to Iran?
Fred
Estimating the consequences of war if a fool’s game. War is the thing that is done when there is no other choice and even then there is usually another choice.
Isn’t America tired of getting our tits caught in the meat grinder? How many more kids, how much more treasure, how much more loss of world respect can America take before it all just comes apart at the seams?
But of course The Chicken Hawk Brigade will make the brave vote to send somebody else’s kids. It’s always somebody else’s kids that have to go kill somebody else’s kids.
I remember the time some smug SOB in a “Mellon Group” jacket was informing me how profitable war is. No shame. He was proud of it. May his dick fall off.
Archon
@srv:
I go back and forth on whether you’re serious or not, but today I’m convinced you’re a brilliant satirist.
CONGRATULATIONS!
If we are going to have a serious conversation about going to war – and I’m not seeing that yet – then Democrats MUST adopt a strategy of talking about the government having no choice but to enact tax increases to pay for it, and that conversation and nothing else must be had 24/7. They change the subject, change it back. No exceptions. Make the GOP the party of higher taxes. Force it on them. They want the war, they want the taxes.
Not doing so was a serious tactical mistake we made back in 2002/2003 that must never be allowed to happen again.
kindness
Schumer and Menendez are being too cute by a half and the real stinker is neither of them is cute at all.
@Right to Rise: Damn Trolls suck.
Turgidson
@Right to Rise:
Still think this is DougJ.
JPL
CBS nightly news is going to cover the Amazon work conditions.
srv
@dedc79: American will never be great again until we have a leader who will show this world what we are capable of.
No more half-measures. No more bending over to China, Mexico, Russia, etc. Tens of millions of Americans, Republican and Democrat see Trump as their last chance, and he probably is.
@Fred: We don’t have to estimate the consequences of doing nothing – they are all around us now. Look at Russia. Look at Syria. Look at Iran. They’re laughing at us. This has got to stop.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
sort of on-topic, if our media and political world were run by adults, this would hurt Kasich
Also, he’s not “revising”, he’s either stupid or flat out lying. Those are the choices.
NonyNony
@jl:
I mean, look at the quality of candidates he has to work with. If the trolling is subpar it’s only because the candidates he has to work with are so subpar.
Botsplainer
For the last 40 years, Americans have paid an Israeli aggression tax at the gas pump, in military aid to the Saudis, in foreign aid across the Muslim world.
An Israeli attack on Iranian facilities will cause a near $2 increase at the pump immediately along with a massive economic slump and equity sell off. In the end, the world might find itself with some smoking, glowing craters where Israeli cities representing high concentrations of Israeli conservatard voters, and refugees crowding ruined docks in Haifa.
This is what Bibi risks. I’m not sure that the number of fucks I’d give would be large.
Sourmash
@Right to Rise: seriously, dude, you kill me, you absolutely slay me! I’m dyin’ here!! A 40% drop in a week is steady!! I can’t wait to see what you call the speech when he folds his “campaign”!!
JPL
@Sourmash: Depends on the definition of steady doesn’t it.
gogol's wife
All kidding aside, I do still expect Jeb to be the nominee. They’re that desperate. And I don’t think Trump is serious about running anyway.
pete
@Sourmash: Um, mission accomplished?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Brent Scowcroft, Bush I consigliere and sad mentor to Condi Rice, endorses Iran agreement.
jl
@NonyNony: DougJ cannot fail, he can only be failed?
@Sourmash: Jeb! won’t be able to drop out, he will completely flub his drop-out announcement and everyone will think he is still running. Then Jeb! will intentionally try to sabotage his campaign, at which point he will start winning! RtR is correct, Jeb! will prevail.
Jeb! is an ‘opposites’ type of guy, and you libs just can’t see that.
Edit:
@gogol’s wife:
Trump is serious about building a ground organization for the Iowa caucus. That is not serious enough for you?
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
It may not have been necessary since I’m in California, but I faxed firm letters to my rep and both senators telling them to back the deal. Why is it that the right wing loves them some Churchill until you remind them that he said, “Jaw-jaw is better than war-war.”
gogol's wife
@jl:
He’s a performance artist. He’s seeing how far he can take it without really committing.
srv
@jl:
You people. You of all people should know that’s crazy talk.
beltane
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: A poignant reminder that sane Republicans, like Woolly Mammoths, once roamed the planet.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@beltane: makes me thinks of a few weeks back, before the end of the negotiations, as in, before the details were announced, Andrea Mitchell hectoring Ernest Moniz about all the national security professionals, of both parties!, who are skeptical of this deal! Both parties! I haven’t seen her talk about it since, but I’m sure she’s still Very Concerned.
Kropadope
@Mnemosyne (iPhone):
I don’t know about your Senators, but I saw a lot of CA reps on the list against the deal. I’ll try to find the list right now.
Roger Moore
@dedc79:
I don’t think the opposition is primarily to Obama. The same people who hate this deal also hated it when Reagan negotiated with Gorbachev. They simply don’t like the idea of negotiating. They think we’re supposed to get what we want by bullying other countries around and forcing them to take what we offer. Actually engaging in give and take is way beyond the pale.
beltane
@Mnemosyne (iPhone): Your Senators are voting for sanity. Your Rep, even if a Democrat, may not have decided or may even have decided the wrong way.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Watching clips of Trump from MTP. I thought he was gonna be in the studio. Did that pathetic buffoon Chuck Todd actually bring the show to Trump’s plane?
beltane
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: If there are any Democrats without AIPAC ties opposing this agreement, Andrea Mitchell has yet to produce them. She has always been one of the worst hacks out there, but this is hackery of the worst sort.
Bobby Thomson
@Emma: on further reflection, this has to be DougJ. I mean, Damn.
David Koch
Funny how Schumer got out of the draft and didn’t go to Viet Nam when his lottery number was called, yet wants to send other kids (not his and his colleagues’ children and grandchildren) to die in another quaqmire in Asia.
22over7
@Right to Rise: Lighten up, Francis.
Roger Moore
@bystander:
FTFY.
jl
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Some say, Trump’s plane is the new tire swing and BBQ.
I liked the part where Trump is going to keep families together but send all the undocumenteds home.
There is no talk like crazy talk to pass the time!
Phil Perspective
@dedc79: AIPAC certainly influences politicians, but it has a lot less influence over the voting public (it can’t even convince anywhere near close to a majority of jews to oppose the deal), ….
That’s the key!! It influences politicians. The hell with what the public thinks. Just like with most other issues.
beltane
Even the unquestionably pro-Israel NYT concedes that any Democratic opposition to the Iran deal is being waged at the behest of AIPAC: nytimes.com/2015/08/18/world/middleeast/lobbying-fight-over-iran-nuclear-deal-centers-on-democrats.h…
PurpleGirl
If Congress doesn’t back the Iran deal, what will be the response of the other countries who are a party to the deal? I see the US losing a lot of face and standing in the world community. Has anyone said what the response will be from our allies?
PurpleGirl
@Emma: I may spend the evening listening to Castle. No new TV yet, some other purchases became more important at this time.
Kropadope
@Kropadope: Hmm, I can’t find the article I originally read about which Congressional Democrats plan on rejecting the Iran deal. However, my current research suggests that the author of that article disliked the Iran deal and may have overstated opposition to it, as this article from today states that only 11 Reps and 1 Senator have so far announced their opposition. The article lists five Congressfolk, I’m having trouble determining who the rest are.
Jparente
@Emma: Excellent show! I retreat to the same places. “Prime Suspect” is another of my go to shows.
beltane
@PurpleGirl: From everything I’ve read, the response will be to proceed with the agreement as if the US doesn’t exist. Schumer’s argument to this is that the US should seek secondary sanctions against any country who lifts their own sanctions, but this seems it would be unworkable in practice.
Ruckus
They don’t care about the cost of war, monetary or physical. It’s by far not their kids that will die or be mutilated for life. And the one’s whose kids do go will be heroes. And it’s not them that intend to pay for the aftermath of it either. Cole, you as a vet should know this better than most. They don’t give a shit about you or me, they never have and never will. it’s the cost of doing business. I thought that was one reason you left their tribe.
Ruckus
@beltane:
unworkable in practice
A short, very true description of conservative policies, all of them.
rikyrah
On point.
Absolutely on point.
raven
@Ruckus: fuckin a
pseudonymous in nc
Right To Shite is funny.
Tree With Water
The democratic party survived the debacle and disgrace of so many of their elected officials having supported the Bush-Cheney plot to war (and the cover up), that it’s hard for me to believe an equal percentage will feel any qualms whatsoever to once again ally themselves with the same bad cast of characters.
Kropadope
@Tree With Water: One encouraging sign I keep seeing is that so far none of the 150 Representatives who signed an open letter supporting the negotiations has come out against the final deal. If that holds, that’s more than enough to sustain a veto, which would require 145.
Emma
@Bobby Thomson: You know? You have to be this stupid on purpose.
Roger Moore
@beltane:
That’s putting it mildly. The chances of us implementing sanctions against the UK, France, and Germany are negligible. The only way somebody would propose such a thing is if they know it will never come to pass.
Cheryl Rofer
@PurpleGirl: Beltane at #39 is right. US loses a lot of credibility, the rest go ahead. Plus they get to do business with Iran, and the US doesn’t.
On sanctions, here’s a good article from the Treasury Secretary. Short version: it’s a great way to irritate the rest of the world and crater the economy.
Emma
@Jparente: I love Prime Suspect too but it can be very intense. When one visits Midsomer, one knows that the murders will be bizarre, the villain caught at the end, and all will be well.
Elizabelle
@JPL: ABC’s segment on Amazon absolutely sucked. No context; ended with some reporter bimbo suggesting Sheriff Jeff Bezos is going to ride in and clean up the mess. Cuz he wrote that memo, which Bimbo and Muir are taking at face value.
NBC did a better job, having a few former Amazon peeps say it was a challenging environment.
Elizabelle
@Emma: I find “Law & Order” kind of soothing, if repetitive sometimes.
Emma
@PurpleGirl: Castle can be good but I only follow it sporadically. Still, it works.
NotMax
@PurpleGirl
Just a passing thought (if $$ tight) – have you checked craigslist?
Found a new home for a still perfectly functioning older 30″ set (having bought a much larger size as a holiday present for myself in Dec. – craved a plasma screen and they’re being phased out, so was forced to take the plunge) via the free listings.
beltane
@Kropadope: This is not 2002. In the years since the AUMF vote, the Democratic portion of the electorate has become much more skeptical about military intervention in the Middle East. In 2008 we even chose a presidential nominee partly on the basis that he did not support “stupid wars”, as opposed to the other main candidate who voted for the AUMF.
Villago Delenda Est
@Brachiator: We’ve heard that story before. Didn’t work out that way. Amazing, that.
magurakurin
@Ruckus:
amen. “they only answer more, more, more”
TTT
@Botsplainer:
Find some.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
Tree With Water
@Roger Moore: Shumer (et.al.) are the same breed of cats that torpedoed the League of Nation, and still seek the destruction of the the very concept of a United Nations. The difference being measured in mere decades, the players all but interchangeable for their malignant stupidities.
PurpleGirl
@NotMax: Or I could Freecycle, which I did once before. Then I’d have hold onto the ‘old’ set until September 19th to take it to a NYC recycling event (by taxi)(Or find a neighbor who could drive me).
Comrade Scrutinizer
@Ruckus:
NotMax
@PurpleGirl
Or perhaps an accommodating local BJ-er with a vehicle?
Weekly e-cycling here. Surprised not at least the same frequency in NYC.
Tree With Water
@magurakurin: Which was also the answer Humphrey Bogart fed Edward G. Robinson in the great movie, Key Largo. The question asked Robinson was, “What is it you really want, Rocko?”.
Calouste
@Elizabelle: There are objective measurements that show that Amazon sucks for white collar workers compared to other tech companies that were mentioned in the NYT article and that Bezos must be well aware of. For example, Amazon doesn’t offer paid paternity leave, Netflix offers a year.
Bobby Thomson
@Cheryl Rofer:
What’s not for a Republican to love?
JPL
@Calouste: The turnover rate surprised me. CBS mentioned that Amazon was correct that most companies don’t offer paternity leave but left unstated their turnover rate. After reading comments at The Seattle Times, it’s common knowledge that working at Amazon sucks.
All Bezos needs to do, is rid the company of stacked rating and anonymous emails. They could also improve their sick leave so people don’t feel penalized if they get cancer or deliver a stillborn child. Maybe fire managers who email employees at home after nine.. Doing those things would be a good start.
I can’t shop there in good conscience.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I can’t remember a political statement less sincere than Trump saying, as I just heard on the Hayes show, “I love children”. Then he took them up in a helicopter. The whole sequence was… unsettling.
ETA: Christ, MSNBC fires half their on-air staff, and Michael Fucking Steele is still on their air five times a day.
JPL
Will President Trump set up a system where you can report possible illegals, anonymously? Maybe there will be a reward. That would be cool.
btw .. snark
Elizabelle
@JPL: Yup, yup, yup.
Striking to me that neither Bezos nor Carney has refuted the particulars of the NY Times story. They’re just shocked, shocked to not recognize the workplace they think exists.
Obvious this fish rots at the head.
Sounds like CBS might have done the best reporting package. Although this story is far from over.
Roger Moore
@Tree With Water:
I have a different take on Schumer. I think he understands that the deal is good, but he thinks opposing it will help him politically, and he feels comfortable doing so because he knows there isn’t enough opposition to override Obama’s veto. It’s a totally cynical take on the whole thing.
PurpleGirl
@NotMax: There is weekly recycling of things like plastic bottles and paper, small stuff. Larger things like electronics can be taken to specific places but again you need transportation. They hold periodic “events”. The September 19th one is at Astoria Park. About two miles from me but, again, you need transportation. Oh, they did one at my complex but they ended it early when their truck filled up faster than they thought it would; it was also held only during the hours of 1 pm to 5 pm but they ended it at 4 pm. I was at a doctor’s appt during those hours.
Tree With Water
With a whimper then, and a feeble one at that, one man’s career gasps its last, and expires before my eyes:
“Bob Woodward, the Washington Post reporter who famously helped break the news of the Watergate scandal, said Hillary Clinton’s private email server reminds him of Richard Nixon’s secretly recorded Oval Office conversations”.
Cheryl Rofer
@Bobby Thomson: I wish this blog had a “like” button.
JPL
@Elizabelle: Did you listen to this … It’s from USA Today tech talks
I buy frontline and coffee among lots of other stuff from Amazon. I’m going to Costco on Wednesday and as long as they have those product, I’ll but them. If not, I’ll pay more.
JPL
@Tree With Water: You mean the guy who wrote the nice book about Bush?
sukabi
@srv: pretty sure there have been folks that have taken that approach in the past. Ask Germany and Japan how that worked out for them.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Tree With Water: Didn’t Norma Desmond convince herself that DeMille wanted her to star in a talkie?
“I’m still big, Mika. It’s the scandals that have gotten small.”
Calouste
@JPL: Amazon might be correct that of all companies overall, most don’t offer paternity leave, but most of the companies that they compete with for talent, do. And of course that’s only one example.
The Thin Black Duke
@Tree With Water: Bob Woodward has been a Dead Journalist Walking for a long time.
Iowa Old Lady
@JPL: Snark, yes, but more of plan than Trump seems to have. His is we will find them and they will leave. Ooookay, then.
The man is preposterous.
@Roger Moore: That’s how I read Schumer too.
Tree With Water
@Roger Moore: Our takes on Schumer are not mutually exclusive. There is plenty to criticize about his trivial yet monstrous ambition. Suffice to say, the man’s usefulness to the party’s rank and file has been compromised. He has definitely proved himself unfit to succeed Harry Reid, as Elizabeth Warren damn well knows. Her response to his profound and misguided treachery will provide a big clue about which direction the democratic party will be heading in the near future.
.. lest we forget, the schmuck also supported Bush-Cheney’s plot to war..
JPL
@Calouste: As a parting gift to Amazon, I might order something that costs $7.00 for stocking gifts. I would like three. Since I have prime, I’ll order one a week.
srv
@sukabi: We beat both of them. At the same time.
JPL
@JPL: Actually that might be a good idea. If you have Amazon Prime, order items that cost under ten dollars separately. Do not order multiple items.
Chris
@Brachiator:
I wondered how long it would take one of them to realize that their “no taxes” fetish and their “more military” fetish were inherently contradictory… unless the military became funded by its own conquests. And then to start calling for that.
Elizabelle
@Tree With Water: What doesn’t remind Woodward of Watergate? It’s the last time he was relevant and genuinely performed a service.
Omnes Omnibus
@Roger Moore: I think your take on Schumer is correct.
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@Kropadope:
I moved last year, so I don’t know my new rep very well, except that he’s a Democrat in a very blue area. My previous rep, Adam Schiff, has already come out in favor of the deal, so I’m hoping my new rep, Brad Sherman, is following suit. FWIW, there was an open letter from Jewish activists in Hollywood supporting the deal, so he really doesn’t have any excuse not to.
Chris
@Fred:
I’m struck by the fact that out of the five major conflicts we’ve been in since 1945 (Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq), we’ve won exactly one (Kuwait) – and tied one more (Korea) – and yet conservatives remain absolutely and positively certain that The Military Can Solve Anything.
Chris
@srv:
Thank you for confirming that the reason you want to go to war isn’t because you perceive a danger, but because you’re furious at the thought that foreigners are laughing at the size of the American penis.
Chris
@srv:
Thank you for confirming that the reason you want to go to war isn’t because you perceive a danger, but because you’re furious at the thought that foreigners are laughing at the size of the American weiner.
Calouste
@Chris: That already more or less happened a century ago: Banana Wars
Calouste
@Chris: And even Kuwait wasn’t won in the same vein as WII, i.e. the unconditional surrender of the aggressor. More along the lines of WWI, and hey presto, just like with WWI, the Kuwait war also got a sequel.
Roger Moore
@Mnemosyne (iPhone):
Unfortunately, it looks as if he’s one of the defectors. My rep, Judy Chu, hasn’t come out for or against yet.
Baud
@Chris:
We won Grenada!
Omnes Omnibus
@Chris: @Calouste: Actually, the US military is very good at defeating other armies on the field of battle. It is not good at occupying a hostile country afterwards.
Lavocat
Let me mix a few metaphors.
This is a Shakespearean tragedy with Obama as Woodrow Wilson and the Blue Dog Democrats as a collective Judas Iscariot.
So, I ask you, Chuckles The Clown And Company, how many pieces of gold has AIPAC paid you to betray your leader?
chopper
@Right to Rise:
worst. fanfic. ever.
Chris
@Calouste:
I’d consider Kuwait a win. The objectives of the war were achieved – the friendly government Saddam kicked out was put back in place, and as an added bonus, Saddam’s army was beaten two thirds to death. He may have kept misbehaving afterwards, but it was in his own country – another war of conquest wasn’t in the cards.
The war getting a sequel wasn’t inevitable. It only happened because America changed its minds, decided it wasn’t happy with the outcome after all even though the outcome was exactly what it had wanted a decade earlier, and going back for seconds. Less “World War One => World War Two,” and more “Second Punic War => Third Punic War.”
Kropadope
@Mnemosyne (iPhone): It’s unfortunate that Rep. Sherman doesn’t support the deal (thanks for the link Roger Moore @ 117). Have you called him? Perhaps with enough constituent pressure he may see the light.
I need to follow up with Joe Kennedy, whom I wrote two or three weeks ago regarding the matter and he hasn’t responded. Here’s a list of phone numbers for all Representatives that was provided by (I believe) Tom Levenson the other day. I’ll put the Senators in a separate link per FYWP’s link limit.
Kropadope
@Kropadope:
List of Senate office phone numbers.
Tree With Water
@Lavocat: Very funny. And yeah, something very much like that. This nuclear accord is a cosmic piece of business, vital to both the United States and planet, and just as the senator did in 2003, he’s once again throwing in with the same crowd that plotted and unleashed that war. I called him a schmuck when I could as easily called him a Judas. So let’s make it, “Judas Schmuck”. Yeah, I like the sound of that. It fits the man to a T.
Ruckus
@Roger Moore:
I’ve emailed her and haven’t heard anything back. Don’t really expect to.
And she really has no reason to object, given her district. I get the impression she is a bit of a climber and this is just a rung up the ladder for her.
Keith G
If the whip counts start to go south, I certainly hope that the president finds a forum, or several, to repeat those words many times. And he can’t be alone in communicating how important the agreement is for diminishing the near-term risk of armed conflict.
Dr.McCoy
@22over7: Stripes was my go to Drive-In movie while living out a Bob Seger classic.. Plus just classic Murray. HaHa-Sean Young. Wow, thanks.
Patrick
@chopper:
He sounds like Baghad Bob’s son.
Roger Moore
@Chris:
Yeah, except the Third Punic War with
Gaius Terentius VarroBiggus Dickus as consul instead of Scipio Africanus Minor.Roger Moore
@Ruckus:
Even if she’s a pure climber- and I think she has some genuine progressive instincts on top of whatever ambition she has- she doesn’t have much chance for climbing except within the House Democratic Caucus. That says she should focus on party loyalty on any issue where there isn’t an overriding local reason for going against it.
Patrick
@beltane:
He wants to implement sanctions against allies such as Germany and France? And he wants to be the next Senate Majority leader? I think I just want to scream. Why not have Trump as Senate Majority leader then?
beltane
@Patrick: Schumer and Trump and Cruz and the rest of the nuts are of one mind when it comes to foreign policy. That is a scary thought.
Patrick
@beltane:
Schumer reminds me of Dick Gephardt when Gephardt so “wisely” joined Bush in the Rose Garden in 2002 to proclaim his support for Bush’s war in Iraq.
beltane
@Patrick: Well, Chuckie will have to wait for a Republican president if he wants a joint appearance in the Rose Garden.
Kropadope
@beltane:
Peale
@Patrick: the Swiss have already eased their sanctions. Please, let us begin the freak out about Swiss laughter.
Elie
All this anti agreement chest beating and threatening that the US is going to kick Iran’s ass is such bullshit. Everyone in the world knows we CAN’T do that and won’t do that now, anyway. The Us has other fish to fry to make money, etc. The arms industry aint what it was. The tools of war are changing and morphing to different industries configured differently. Coercive power may become different, sneakier, not about tanks, guns, etc. Only the terminally stupid don’t get that. (thankfully (sneer), we have plenty of third world people who don’t know that yet that will buy this shit to use against their own)
If the deal is rejected, just watch what happens to the US prestige and power internationally. It will affect our markets, our relationships in Europe and even the ME. Not saying that we are still not powerful — in defense of ourselves, we would be fierce beyond words. Not this ME thing. Not now. We are done with the cowboy thing in the current economic and strategic environment. No. Europe cant and won’t “help” us. Israel? Its like having the patient with smallpox help in the outpatient clinic… everyone runs for the exits. BTW, if Israel thinks anti-Semitism is bad now, just wait if the deal is turned down…
The US cannot afford to NOT pass this. Fk our little neo-cons and their cocktail weeny weenies… it will pass. The Republicans will have to think of some face saving way to exist… after this and Trump
Ruckus
@Roger Moore:
I don’t think she’s pure climber, just already has her eye on the next rung. I have nothing against someone wanting a career, and I think she is a democrat first, which is good, but I like a job well done as that gets a better return on my vote than if my vote just helps provide another rung on a politician’s ladder.
Tree With Water
His name did not register when I saw his NY Times obituary just now, but this man was a giant in music (although I did read Bob Dylan’s autobiography, and apparently Bob mentioned him). I mean, this guy produced classic albums:
nytimes.com/2015/08/18/arts/music/bob-johnston-83-dies-produced-bob-dylan-and-johnny-cash-albums.htm…
redshirt
PANAMA!
BBA
@Botsplainer: We’ve been through this. The center of Netanyahu’s support is in Jerusalem, which nobody would dare bomb. Tel Aviv and Haifa are coastal enclaves of the decadent left.
pluege
schumer’s opposition, and likewise any other Democrat’s opposition should disqualify them for any leadership position in the Democratic party: pandering to a tiny, rich, vocal minority constituency is just the opposite of what leadership should be on important and grave matters.
BobS
Watch this whole video if you can stomach it, or just jump ahead to the 49 minute mark and decide exactly what state Schumer represents in the United States Senate:<A HREF="c-span.org/video/?292643-5/senators-graham-schumer-remarks-aipac-annual-policy-conference"<C… Schumer (D- Israel)
sukabi
@srv: my point was, THEY took that attitude at that time and it wrecked them.
Ruckus
@efgoldman:
I’m almost as old as you, I don’t remember who would actually qualify. Are you talking national or local and do you have a name or two?
Omnes Omnibus
@Ruckus: Ike? Javitts? Brooke?
BobS
@Ruckus: John Anderson, Paul Findley, Pete McCloskey
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus: Ike wasn’t in his or my voting age range. Efgoldman was 8-9 when he took office, 16-17 when he left. That’s why I asked the first part of the question. Should have stated presidents, elected or running. But on the national front I imagine there are a few good names, just interested in what they might be.
ETA IOW they’d have to be in play 1965-66 or later
Omnes Omnibus
@Ruckus: Javits and and Brooke then.
Roger Moore
@Ruckus:
Wasn’t Jerry Ford more or less sane?
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
Don’t know the name Brooke politically.
ETA Edward Brooke?
Javits OK I’d agree on that.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ruckus: Edward Brooke.
Ruckus
@Roger Moore:
He wasn’t a ragging wingnut, I’ll grant that one. As republicans of the last century go probably have to give him that. I’d have to say though that if that’s your criteria then do we have to put Bush senior in there? I wasn’t enthused about him at all but in the repub president sanity race where did he fall?
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
Should have checked before I hit submit rather than after. I figured that’s who you meant after reading the first graph at the link.
Mnemosyne (tablet)
@Roger Moore:
Feh. Well, hopefully faxing letters to both his local and DC offices helped. I do kind miss Schiff, though. He started as a Blue Dog when he was first elected a decade ago, but he has made a very satisfying shift to the left.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ruckus: I’ll note that these guys are pretty much before my time politically. In my era of political involvement, Bob Dole is about the best one can get.
Mnemosyne (tablet)
@Kropadope:
I can’t make personal calls from work (no privacy). That’s why I fax instead.
redshirt
@Omnes Omnibus: In Maine, Senator/Secretary of Defense William Cohen was a totally awesome Republican. An actual real person with real thoughts and feelings and such. So strange for a Republican today!
Omnes Omnibus
@redshirt: Yeah, Cohen was sane. Good point.
ETA: And the Chafees.
redshirt
@Omnes Omnibus: Maine used to have lots of sane Republicans. Sadly, their numbers have thinned of late.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@BobS: Jim Jeffords, David Souter, William Roth, John Chaffee. John Warner (he went along too long with Bush-Cheney, but they eventually drove him out of the Senate, and probably the party, similar half-credit to Chuck Hagel), William Cohen (though he gave us Susan Collins), Lowell Weicker. Mark Hatfield? I’m sure there were Representatives, but they tend not to be on the radar as much. Amo Houghton?
@Roger Moore: in his book (Fat Man in a Middle Seat) Jack Germond says that in the early Reagan era– I believe it was–, he knew something was going on when people like Ford and Dole, who had once been considered pretty conservative, were starting to be referred to as moderates. It may specifically have been a reference to the Religious Right. It’s been a long time since I read that book.
@Ruckus: a complete sell-out who loosed his idiot son and Karl Rove on the world. His entire national career proved there was nothing he wouldn’t stoop to, from “Voodoo economics” to flip-flopping on abortion to “card-carrying member of the ACLU”, the Pledge of Allegiance, Willie Horton… David Souter was who he was, Clarence Thomas was what he was willing to do achieve/stay in power. And look which one is still with us.
Roger Moore
@Mnemosyne (tablet):
Yeah. I was in his district when he first unseated Jim Rogan, and that was a big enough step up that I was happy even to have a Blue Dog. I assume some of his shift to the left reflects him moving along with his constituents. I got shifted to Chu’s district for the 2012 elections.
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
They were republicans, no doubt about that but they weren’t batshit crazy. Both of their records were somewhat mixed. Bush did what I thought was a good job with the first gulf war. He gathered world support, stopped an invasion of a friendly nation, and then didn’t continue on to oust Saddam. IOW what he was supposed to do. He caught a lot of flack for that from the neocons.
Both served in the navy during WWII and saw action, Bush a little closer up than Ford.
I’d say neither would be considered much of a republican by today’s standards, but then today’s standards include some I’d consider insane even if they weren’t running for president.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I will grant you that Bush was a republican, through and through, I’ll grant you that the world was not a better place because of him or the detritus that he left behind, but he was saner than his predecessor.
The question was were they sane, not good presidents or even humans. I did have to think about it from this stand point and remembering the time, which was one where I was trying to build a business and survive not pay a lot of attention to politics. I’d give a cautious and calculated yes but will fully understand any disagreement and on Bush could probably be swayed. ETA After all look at his spawn/legacy. He’s responsible for that and that’s a big part of why I could be swayed.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ruckus: I didn’t talk about Bush or Ford. And Dole was army.
redshirt
Even if I disagreed with HW Bush I didn’t doubt that he was sincerely trying to govern the country. Which is more than I can say of any Repuke today.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
To be political about it, Ike would be the last decent republican president of the last 60+ yrs maybe the last 115 at least. IMHO.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Ruckus: I think the old man was politically sane, in his heart a patrician, Rockefeller Republican. I think the two things he did (domestically) that he actually believed in were Souter and agreeing to increase (Edited, d’oh!) taxes (IIRC the greatest opposition to Kennedy’s tax cuts were from old school, north-eastern Republicans like Prescott, back when “deficit hawk” meant something). But HW was both gutless and calculating, thinking he could ride the tiger to the White House and then put it back in its cage (not unlike those, in their party and ours, who assumed they could vote for the Iraq War, and Uncle Colin, with some help from Poppy, Uncle Brent and Uncle Baker, would rein in Junior before he actually broke anything). He also wasn’t a good enough actor to pull it off completely, which is why Buchanan was so damaging to him. I see a lot of that in Jeb: Too smart to believe half the crap he spews, a bit put off at having to say it, and too weak to stand up for what he believes in (which is far enough to the right). Immigration is the issue I’m thinking of. I doubt Jeb is distinguishable from the rest on other issues.
Mnemosyne (tablet)
@Roger Moore:
We’re, like, the one street in our part of Burbank that’s in Sherman’s district. The rest of the neighborhood is in Schiff’s district. It’s a little weird.
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
Wasn’t intending that one had to serve to be elected just that they did. Others on their side of the isle didn’t.
And was just filling in a bit as you stated they were pretty much before your time.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Don’t disagree.
Bush did sign a tax increase after running on not doing so. With a republican congress he probably would have been a far worse president.
Like I said I probably could be swayed that he’s insane but given the criteria of today’s insanity, he doesn’t make the cut.
BobS
@efgoldman: He was against the Vietnam War, he called for the impeachment of Nixon after the Saturday Night Massacre, and he was/is a critic of Israel. He also opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq, something many of our “moderate” Democrats supported.
Ruckus
@efgoldman:
Thanks for the list.
And yes earmarks. They sounded like a bad idea but you are correct they were the lubricant that made compromise possible and while they did get abused they also allowed people to spout off and then take home some bacon. No bacon, nothing to take home unless you win.
Roger Moore
@efgoldman:
They serve a somewhat similar role in intra-party squabbles; leadership can dole them out to keep the back benchers in line. I assume that’s a big reason the Tea Party made such a big deal about eliminating them, since at a Congressional level the Tea Party has largely turned out to be a revolt by the back bench.
Ruckus
@BobS:
You know who else seemed to be against the Vietnam war?
Nixon. It was of course bullshit but still he won an election based on it.
Pete McCloskey was considered a conservative in CA. By today’s standards he would had to have switched parties decades sooner than he did but that shows that not all of republican party was completely insane even towards the end of the 20th century.
Peale
I wonder if the Romans looked back so fondly on the Huns when they met the Vandals and Visigoths as we’re doing about republicans of yore.
Omnes Omnibus
@Peale: I wonder a bit about the extent of your historical knowledge.
Ruckus
@Omnes Omnibus:
LOL
NotMax
Might add Nelson Rockefeller and Dick Lugar to the list of relatively reasonable Rs mentioned above.
BobS
@Ruckus: McCloskey “seemed” to be against the war by calling for a repeal of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, challenging Nixon for the Republican nomination in 1972 by running on a pro-peace platform, and calling what the US did in Cambodia “evil” after a tour of that country in 1975. You’re right — he’s exactly like Nixon.
Ruckus
@BobS:
Are your comprehension skills in need of a tune up?
I never said that Nixon and McCloskey were alike, nor from the comment should you even be able to infer that.
Get a grip man, read the entire comment before you jump. Call it advice from another jumper.
BobS
@Ruckus: You’re right, of course — when you wrote “You know who else seemed to be against the Vietnam war? Nixon. It was of course bullshit but still he won an election based on it”, I shouldn’t have inferred anything of the sort.
Sherparick
@Brachiator: Actually, watching Chris Hayes last night doing extracts of the Trumpenator’s interview on the Meet the Press, Trump indicated that if was President, he would accept the Iran deal and carry it out while trying to negotiate a better one down the road. After all, “a deal is a deal” to quote the Trumpenator.
By the way, Trump is the one Republican candidate who is really trying to execute the Sean Trende strategy of getting that part of the white northern working class, more motivated by economic issues then by tribal white affinity then their “Southern” (e.g. no matter where born, they have the “Southern” attitude on race, patriarchy, and “Murican” culture) to vote Republican, thereby getting the Republicans to the magic 65% level of the white vote, and thereby overcoming the Democrats taking 90% of the black vote and 70% of the Hispanic vote and 70% of the Asian vote (since about a 1/3 of illegal immigrants are from Asia, Asian Americans also know who is going into the concentration camps nor do they appreciate all the China and Japan bashing). Besides going full deportation on the immigrant issue (not just deporting the illegal immigrants, but their U.S. citizen spouses and children, perhaps even adult children, of illegal immigrants – as Trump says they “all have to go,”) Trump has also been anti-NAFTA, anti-TPP, and anti-China trade, all issues that play well with white northern working class voters who feel economic insecurity and who have seem their real incomes drop the last 15 years. And since Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levine, Ann Coulter, and Laura Ingraham are all having orgasms about a candidate promising to make America once more the country by, for, and of White People, they are overlooking his lack of orthodoxy on trade and blowing up the Middle East some more. (Also, it is almost refreshing in its amoral honesty that Trump just says he wants to use military force in the Middle East to steal the oil, to hell with the people – none of the lies about “bringing democracy” and “freedom” that neo-conservatives, Bush, and Cheney like to peddle to justify their war crimes.
Sherparick
@BobS: Nixon campaigned in 1968 claiming he had a “Secret Plan” to end the war. I think Ruckus could have been a little clearer on what he wrote since it appeared that he was comparing the moral and principled McCloskey with the amoral Nixon. Nixon (read “Nixonland” for a more complete account) sabotaged the Paris talks to prevent LBJ from negotiating an agreement in the fall of 1968 to end the war. Nixon then started a drawdown of U.S. forces in 1969 called Vietnamization. Nixon had multiple goals with the Vietnam War during his first term, and it ending soon in 1969 would have frustrated them (the terms he negotiated in 1973 were basically the same he could have gotten in 1969), but I believe his primary strategic goal was to reduce U.S. casualties as much as possible while continuing the war to the end of his first term because he believed would help his reelection by keeping the Democrats divided on the war. This means Nixon was willing to get 25,000 Americans killed, hundred of thousands wounded, hundred of thousands of Vietnamese killed and millions wounded, primarily to get himself reelected in 1972. Yes, Nixon was that evil and Dick Cheney is his spawn. McCloskey reacted in horror to this and thus began his quixotic anti-war campaign in 1972 against Nixon. The Republican Party still had traces of TR and Lincoln in the 1964 to 1976 period, but Nixon had gone the full “Southern Strategy” and the Neo-Confederate and Ayn Rand prion diseases were about to eat its brain as a result.
It should also be noted that today, The Democratic Republic of Vietnam, is a de facto U.S. ally and about to become a major trade partner through TPP. Again, someone needs to explain to me why that war was fought in the first place.
Ruckus
@Sherparick:
Again, someone needs to explain to me why that war was fought in the first place.
No reason, none at all. OK maybe some didn’t feel that their way of life was secure enough that they had to have anyone who disagreed killed so that they could wake up in the morning and not shake in fear the entire day. But they had no reason to do that directly so they chose a substitute country, one with a history of warfare, on which they figured they could roll over and show the world their might.
That seems as good a reason as any I’ve heard in the last 50 yrs, I’m going with that one.
CONGRATULATIONS!
@JPL: Amazon’s corporate turnover rate is right in line with what I’d expect from store management in a second or third-tier retail outlet. 15% is appalling.