Why would the NY Post Editorial Board recommend this?
The obscene drive to avoid any Senate vote on the Iran deal
Whether to approve the disastrous nuclear deal with Iran is the most important question to face Congress in years — yet the president wants to stop the Senate from even debating it.
He’s pushing Democrats to use the filibuster rule to stop the question from making it to the Senate floor — and Minority Leader Harry Reid’s rallying the votes to do it.
Of course, President Obama never wanted Congress to have a say here. But Congress voted itself an oversight role anyway — by 98-1 in the Senate.
Now Reid’s rounding up Democrats to derail the process they helped set up to “ensure the American people — through their elected representatives — a voice on any deal with Iran.â€
As noted in the editorial, solid majorities in the House and Senate, along with the American public, are against this deal. Poll after poll after poll show that the American people do not want it. Democrats are the majority who want the deal, which is bad for America, bad for Israel, bad for the Middle East, gives Iran protection and money, doesn’t stop their ballistic missile program, and only kicks Iran’s nuclear weapons aspirations down the road. Provided they do not cheat. They’ve already stated that they will cheat. Hence, Obama and Democrats do not want to be on record as voting for the deal. Obama does not want to have to veto any measure.
Nor do they want any visible debate on the Senate floor.
This is an obscenity. The Senate calls itself “the world’s greatest deliberative body.†And the Constitution requires Senate consent for the approval of treaties.
Obama’s already done an end-run around the treaty rules. Will Senate Democrats enable even worse — a total mockery of Congress’ role?
It’s time for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to go nuclear: To do just what Reid threatened when he ran the Senate, and change the rules for the filibuster.
Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option for most Obama nominees in 2013: McConnell can use it for this one case. Force Democrats to debate the Iran Deal, force them to vote, force Obama to veto it.
Of course, Leftist supports of Iran, er, Obama, will screech “what’s your better deal?” Which is really besides the point, meant to deflect attention from this terrible deal in the first place. If a deal is bad, you walk away. If it fails to achieve the initial goals in any manner (eliminating Iran’s nuclear weapons program, “anytime, anywhere” inspections, etc), you walk away. If a Republican had negotiated this deal, Democrats would be dead set against it, both because they would be against the Republican and because they would acknowledge that it is a historically bad deal.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
For some reason the media are only reporting polls that show Americans in opposition, yet other polls show support. For example, the CNN poll that is widely reported as 56% opposing – had a similar question where 50% favored the deal! The University of Maryland survey is described in detail below. Again, a majority of voters surveyed favored the agreement.
http://vop.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Assessing_the_Iran_Deal_Report.pdf
Once again our lazy media are doing a horrific job of reporting – they are not trying to explain the agreement – they are reporting whichever partisan is shouting the loudest – and they misreport the results of polls.
[…] debate. The NY Post’s editorial board was among those who have already recommended McConnell implement the nuclear option for this issue. If Democrats did it when it came to Obama judicial nominees, it would be […]