It's Here. The Iran Deal. Start Those 'Duck and Cover' Drills Again, Kids.
Obama has his deal with Iran . . . and he won't let Congress have any say in it. Here's how the White House is touting the deal: Under the new nuclear deal, Iran has committed to extraordinary and robust monitoring, verification, and inspection. International inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will not only be continuously monitoring every element of Iran's declared nuclear program, but they will also be verifying that no fissile material is covertly carted off to a secret location to build a bomb. And if IAEA inspectors become aware of a suspicious location, Iran has agreed to implement the Additional Protocol to their IAEA Safeguards Agreement, which will allow inspectors to access and inspect any site they deem suspicious. Such suspicions can be triggered by holes in the ground that could be uranium mines, intelligence reports, unexplained purchases, or isotope alarms. Basically, from the minute materials that could be used for a weapon comes out of the ground to the minute it is shipped out of the country, the IAEA will have eyes on it and anywhere Iran could try and take it: Ambassador John Bolton: "The Iran deal is a diplomatic Waterloo, it will pave the way for a #NuclearIran." Josh Block, president of The Israel Project: Today's announcement of this nuclear agreement with Iran is a realization of the deepest fears and the most dire predictions of skeptics who have, for two years, been warning against exactly this outcome -- a bad deal that both enriches this tyrannical regime and fails to strip Iran of nuclear weapons capability. The deal will give Iran billions in cash and sanctions relief to fuel its terror and war machines, shred the hard-won sanctions regime beyond repair, and enable the Iranians to get away with hiding the full extent of their nuclear work, infrastructure, and know-how. It will not have an enforceable inspections regime or a workable way to re-impose pressure on Iran when it cheats. And then, after just over a decade, most of this deal will expire, and Iran will be allowed to have a full-blown nuclear program-- a screw's turn away from a nuclear weapon. It is important to ask: if a 3-month nuclear breakout by Iran is a problem today, why are we giving the Mullah's in Tehran hundreds of billions of dollars, all so Iran will have a zero break out time, according to President Obama himself, in just over a decade? Representative Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), Chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security and a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs: This Iran deal gives Ayatollah Khamenei exactly what he wants: billions of dollars in sanctions relief, validation of the Iranian nuclear program, and the ability to stymie inspections. It even lifts sanctions against Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani, who is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers during the campaign in Iraq. The deal will further destabilize the Middle East, allow Iran to foment more terrorism, and aid Iran's rise as the dominant power in the region. By paving Iran's path to a nuclear weapon, the deal harms American national security and effectively stabs our close ally Israel, which Iran has threatened to wipe off the map, in the back. Congress needs to move swiftly to block this dangerous deal. Hillary Goes Green by Recycling Obama Campaign's Ideas from 2008 If Hillary Clinton's economic agenda sounds familiar . . . it's because it is: Yesterday Clinton proposed an "infrastructure bank that can channel more public and private funds, channel those funds to finance world-class airports, railways, roads, bridges and ports." In 2008, then-candidate Obama pledged to create "a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments." Yesterday Clinton urged the country, "Let's build those faster broadband networks." In 2008, on the campaign trail, Obama declared, "As president, I will set a simple goal: Every American should have the highest-speed broadband access, no matter where you live or how much money you have." "These ideas strike me as insane, in light of what we're seeing in Europe, but you don't see a leopard changing its spots," said Dan Mitchell, a senior fellow in fiscal policy at the Cato Institute. "I don't think there's anything new or out-of-the-box here. The only difference between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton is that Sanders wants to get us to the condition of Greece at 90 miles per hour and Clinton wants only 65 miles per hour." Republican pollster John McLaughlin, whose past clients have included Fred Thompson and Bibi Netanyahu, sees the speech and the unveiled agenda as a tool to keep progressive discontent to a minimum. "Right now, she's hugging Obama, and she's going to do that until she's past the stage where she can't lose the nomination," McLaughlin said. "At the point next spring where she can no longer lose the nomination, she'll run so far from Obama it will give you whiplash," pointing out that Obama's job approval remains underwater and that the country is broadly dissatisfied with his leadership. Finally Hillary Clinton, the fundraising darling of Wall Street, beat the populist drum at one point by declaring "the current rules for our economy reward some work -- like financial trading -- much more than other work, like actually building and selling things -- the work that's always been the backbone of our economy." One can't help if she ever said that to her son-in-law, hedge fund co-founder Marc Mezvinsky. And You Thought We Had Seen the Last of Charlie Crist . . . "Listen, and understand! Charlie Crist is out there! He can't be bargained with! He can't be reasoned with! He doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear! And he absolutely will not stop, ever, until he's elected to some office in Florida!" He'll be back . . . or at least, he wants to be: The Florida Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling last Thursday calling for eight Congressional districts to be re-drawn. One of the districts, currently held by U.S. Rep. David Jolly (R-Indian Shores), covers Crist's hometown of St. Petersburg and would almost certainly have to be reconfigured as a Democratic-leaning seat. As a Democrat with broad popularity in Pinellas County, Crist is seen as a formidable contender should he decide to run. "You saw a big groundswell in 2014 to make sure that Charlie Crist was the Democratic nominee for governor. You've had some folks talk to him about the United States Senate this election cycle, but this race, being redistricted into his hometown, makes all the sense in the world for Charlie Crist and his return to public service," said Crist adviser Kevin Cate. In a sign that many Republicans view their chances of holding a reconfigured Pinellas County district greatly diminished, Jolly next week will announce his candidacy for Florida's open U.S. Senate seat. By declining to defend the Congressional seat, Jolly's move may make Crist's decision easier. In Tallahassee, however, Republican legislative leaders are weighing their options, including appealing the high court's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. Under the ruling, the Legislature would have to re-draw the Congressional districts, something Republicans loathe to do given the potential electoral consequences, including the possibility that Crist, reviled by many on the right as a traitor, might find his way back to public life. As recently as November, House Speaker Steve Crisafulli (R-Merritt Island) referred to Crist in thinly veiled terms when he told his chamber that voters had "rejected slick politicians who believe in nothing and will say anything just to get elected." Seeing as Crist has lost past statewide bids as a Republican, an independent, and as a Democrat, does he want to try some new party this time? Green? Libertarian? Socialist? ADDENDA: In response to the people complaining about yesterday's Corner post, asking tongue-in-cheek if Wisconsin governor Scott Walker moonlights as a romance-novel cover model . . . Are we allowed to have a little fun? Or are we determined to be just like the Left and whine about anything we determine to be too frivolous or insufficiently serious? You want analysis of Walker on immigration? Here's analysis of Walker on immigration. You just have to Google it or use the little search window in the upper right hand corner of the NRO site. | 
Comments
Post a Comment