Republicans Write a Letter; Liberals Go Insane

Our liberals have insta-amended the Constitution – now, instead of treason being defined as adhering to America’s enemies or levying war against the United States, it is now defined as “writing a letter Obama doesn’t like”. Our liberals have gone very deep into Deal Leader devotion on this.

The letter, itself, is not much – just noting to Iran’s leadership that any deal made with President Obama will not be held binding on future American Presidents. That is just a statement of fact – because if Obama does get a treaty, then it is a dead letter unless ratified by the Senate, which simply will not happen. If Obama gets some sort of executive agreement, then it is something which has no force of law and the next President can ignore at will (and likely will ignore because no President – not even Hillary – is going to want to be bound by what Obama did 2009-2017). To me, this was a wise thing to do – we don’t want the Iranians thinking that the entirety of the United States is whatever Obama says it is – he’s gone in less than two years and other people in the United States have other ideas. Indeed, enough people have other ideas to ensure that no treaty negotiated by Obama regarding Iran’s nuclear program has any chance of ratification (this is because Obama’s ideas on how to deal with Iran are so mind-bogglingly stupid that even a lot of liberal Democrats won’t sign off on them). But, a lot of liberals are just beside themselves over the Republican letter.

It is best seen, so far, with the #47Traitors hashtag on Twitter. Yes, they are really calling the Republican signatories traitors! I guess their memories don’t stretch back even to 2007 when then-House Speaker Pelosi went to the Middle East in an essay of foreign policy in direct contravention of Bush Administration foreign policy. I won’t even bother with the Democrats’ 1984 “Dear Commandante” letter to the communist dictator of Nicaragua, nor Ted Kennedy trying to work with the Soviets to defeat Reagan in the 1984 election; anything prior to, say, 2000 is ancient history and not at all relevant.

What I think is making the liberals really mad here is that the letter exposes the hollowness of Obama. Obama cannot get anything concrete done – everything he does especially in his last two years is subject to immediate reversal by whomever takes over on January 20th, 2017. And, rely on it, a very large amount of Obama’s actions will be immediately undone after he leaves office. Why should any President – even a liberal President – just keep an Obama order alive? Out of respect for Obama? Please. Liberals are in a shrieking conniption fit because they just got told that their Dear Leader is actually not all-powerful.

INSANE UPDATE: Democrats start petition to jail the 47, get 140,000 signatures.

9 thoughts on “Republicans Write a Letter; Liberals Go Insane

  1. Retired Spook March 12, 2015 / 8:00 am

    I’ve watched a lot of coverage on this in the last couple days, and one very astute analyst noted last night that the main purpose this letter served was to educate the Iranians on how our Constitution works. Too bad it didn’t have the same effect on Democrats.

    • M. Noonan March 12, 2015 / 9:29 pm

      The Senate called Obama’s bluff – everyone now knows, in advance, that his Grand Agreement isn’t worth the paper it will be printed on.

  2. shawny2011 March 14, 2015 / 5:20 am

    I know they were trying to send a strong message, but why a letter from a minority of only one side and does that indicate an actual lack of consensus? Why to Iran instead of Obama? Why not within the scope of Congressional powers like the resolution for all to vote on as they did in support of the Iranian protesters against their totalitarian regime? It didn’t do anything either, but it was a clear majority message vote from both House and Senate. I’m not really sure what this is.

    • Retired Spook March 14, 2015 / 9:31 am

      Shawny, I suspect the letter would have had the same effect on the Iranians and ruffled fewer feathers here at home if it had simply been an open letter in the New York Times, but regardless of the way in which it was presented, it served to make, not just the Iranians, but the public who doesn’t read the NYT is not aware of the fact that what the administration is proposing IS NOT A BINDING AGREEMENT. Kerry said so publicly. What’s the point in a NON-BINDING AGREEMENT? Symbolism, (the hallmark of the Left) nothing more, and way less than is needed to deal with the largest sponsor of worldwide terror who is bent on building a nuclear weapon. As several prominent people have said, no deal is better than a bad deal.

      • M. Noonan March 18, 2015 / 11:12 am

        The #47Traitors stuff was pretty much nonsense – the real thing about the letter is that it exposed the fraudulent nature of Obama’s efforts with Iran. I don’t really know why he’s even pursuing it…it won’t be binding. Even if Hillary gets elected, she won’t consider herself to be bound by it…to be sure, she’ll hold it to more respect than a Republican President, but when push comes to shove no one is going to bend over backwards to preserve a non-ratified deal that Obama made with Iran.

  3. Retired Spook March 14, 2015 / 10:21 am

    And from someone who did THIS, any criticism of this letter by John F’ing Kerry rings pretty hollow.

    • shawny2011 March 14, 2015 / 5:06 pm

      You’re right on target there! Kerry being appointed SOS was a huge red flag of just how UN-American this administration is. Surprised Jane Fonda doesn’t have some high level position. Just the folks we need negotiating for us or representing us in any way. I wasn’t criticizing the content of the letter sent to Iran, only surprised by the method, what they thought it would accomplish and how few actually were signatories on it.

Comments are closed.