Treason And Congress Letter To Iran - No One Undermines The US Like The Republicans

Language: JP EN DE FR
New Items
2025-11-14
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Treason and Congress letter to Iran - No one undermines the US like the Republicans
Treason and Congress letter to Iran - No one undermines the US like the Republicans
First Page 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 14 15 16
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-03-11 08:18:37
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Im jumping past all the back and forth and addressing the topic. Could someone tell me what Obama's deal is with Iran? I can't seem to find what he is proposing. Are we, as Americans, cool with him making deals that we dont know the specifics of? That Congress isn't getting a say in the matter? Should they (our representatives) get to vote on the deal he created?

I didn't get to keep my health insurance. I dont trust the guy to go make secret deals with Iran.

He is the dictator in chief put all your trust in him !
[+]
Offline
Posts: 13787
By Bloodrose 2015-03-11 08:28:31
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Sounds more like shady insurance company politics than governmental politics.

***, people have been losing their insurance coverage since the institution of insurance companies.

"Oh, we don't cover people who eat bananas, COVERAGE DENIED!" kind of thing.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-03-11 08:29:49
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I have a pro banana coverage. I demanded it !
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-03-11 08:35:12
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
[+]
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-03-11 08:37:09
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Not at all, but it is racist to accuse someone with a distinguished military and political career of voting based on race.

You really can just look at the language people use to describe Obama and other blacks.

Newt called Obama a "successful food stamp president". There was a GOP newsletter referring to Michelle Obama as "Mrs. Yo Momma". A representative called Obama a "tar baby" in a radio interview... Dude, if you don't see plenty of blatant racism among congressmen, you're not looking.

What, only blacks get food stamps? You're such a racist for suggesting that.

But seriously, I acknowledge that there is real racism there. A lot of it is just taking comments out of context to make it racism when it really isn't, though.

Perfectly said, and we'd not have a problem if people weren't looking to be as offended and as much of a victim as humanly possible. This is what you get when you raise a generation of narcissists.
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2015-03-11 08:40:39
Link | Quote | Reply
 
The majority of food stamp recipients are white.

So how exactly is it racist to call him the food stamp president because under his watch the number has skyrocketed?

Who Gets Food Stamps? White People, Mostly
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-03-11 08:41:02
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Cause white people have latent racism. It is in our DNA !

According to research the racism gene only exists in white people !
[+]
Offline
Posts: 753
By maldini 2015-03-11 08:48:20
Link | Quote | Reply
 
on topic, democrats grew a spine and responded. (Skip to 8 minutes and 40 seconds - the rest is just Genk kissing his own ***.
YouTube Video Placeholder
 Asura.Alexandero
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: jalexan4
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-03-11 08:50:29
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Im jumping past all the back and forth and addressing the topic. Could someone tell me what Obama's deal is with Iran? I can't seem to find what he is proposing. Are we, as Americans, cool with him making deals that we dont know the specifics of? That Congress isn't getting a say in the matter? Should they (our representatives) get to vote on the deal he created?

I didn't get to keep my health insurance. I dont trust the guy to go make secret deals with Iran.
Are you authorized by the United States federal government to negotiate with the government of Iran? No? Then, you don't need to know the exact specifics of the deal yet. Those specifics are currently only available to secretary of state John Kerry and Obama, per the Logan Act of 1799, as they are the only two with such authorization.
You should stop listening to your local radio talk show host. Nothing you just said is logical in anyway. Do we have the authority to pass laws? Do we have the right to know what the laws being considered are? The logan act does not prevent the president from discussing the iran deal with congress. They have to approve it anyway. Congress should know what deal the president is offering. I dont know where you got the idea that the Logan Act makes things secret for the president only. That's just goofy.
 Asura.Alexandero
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: jalexan4
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-03-11 08:55:43
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Im not pro-letter. No more than I think you should reprimand someone in front of their subordinates. However, Obama should still work with Congress to come up with a lasting deal. This back and forth undermining that is happening ON BOTH ends is ridiculous.
Offline
Posts: 753
By maldini 2015-03-11 08:56:26
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Im jumping past all the back and forth and addressing the topic. Could someone tell me what Obama's deal is with Iran? I can't seem to find what he is proposing. Are we, as Americans, cool with him making deals that we dont know the specifics of? That Congress isn't getting a say in the matter? Should they (our representatives) get to vote on the deal he created?

I didn't get to keep my health insurance. I dont trust the guy to go make secret deals with Iran.
Are you authorized by the United States federal government to negotiate with the government of Iran? No? Then, you don't need to know the exact specifics of the deal yet. Those specifics are currently only available to secretary of state John Kerry and Obama, per the Logan Act of 1799, as they are the only two with such authorization.
You should stop listening to your local radio talk show host. Nothing you just said is logical in anyway. Do we have the authority to pass laws? Do we have the right to know what the laws being considered are? The logan act does not prevent the president from discussing the iran deal with congress. They have to approve it anyway. Congress should know what deal the president is offering. I dont know where you got the idea that the Logan Act makes things secret for the president only. That's just goofy.

Congress will have their opportunity to act. Once all parties have something to bring back to their people... if you think you can negotiate on behalf of the US send a letter to the Ayatollah, I'm sure he will take you seriously.
 Asura.Alexandero
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: jalexan4
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-03-11 08:57:48
Link | Quote | Reply
 
maldini said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Im jumping past all the back and forth and addressing the topic. Could someone tell me what Obama's deal is with Iran? I can't seem to find what he is proposing. Are we, as Americans, cool with him making deals that we dont know the specifics of? That Congress isn't getting a say in the matter? Should they (our representatives) get to vote on the deal he created?

I didn't get to keep my health insurance. I dont trust the guy to go make secret deals with Iran.
Are you authorized by the United States federal government to negotiate with the government of Iran? No? Then, you don't need to know the exact specifics of the deal yet. Those specifics are currently only available to secretary of state John Kerry and Obama, per the Logan Act of 1799, as they are the only two with such authorization.
You should stop listening to your local radio talk show host. Nothing you just said is logical in anyway. Do we have the authority to pass laws? Do we have the right to know what the laws being considered are? The logan act does not prevent the president from discussing the iran deal with congress. They have to approve it anyway. Congress should know what deal the president is offering. I dont know where you got the idea that the Logan Act makes things secret for the president only. That's just goofy.

Congress will have their opportunity to act. Once all parties have something to bring back to their people... if you think you can negotiate on behalf of the US send a letter to the Ayatollah, I'm sure he will take you seriously.
You either have reading comprehension problems or you simply aren't reading at all. Where the hell did I say I should get to negotiate? Sheesh...

Why the hell would Obama first negotiate terms with Iran and then tell Congress!? Heres an idea, work with Congress to create the terms, then negotiate the deal. You Obama fanboys are... Wow...
Offline
Posts: 13787
By Bloodrose 2015-03-11 08:58:39
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I think Australia should negotiate on Iran's behalf, and that Sweden should negotiate on the US's behalf.

Then we'd all get Swedish kangaroo meatballs.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 13787
By Bloodrose 2015-03-11 09:05:10
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Alexandero said: »
maldini said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Im jumping past all the back and forth and addressing the topic. Could someone tell me what Obama's deal is with Iran? I can't seem to find what he is proposing. Are we, as Americans, cool with him making deals that we dont know the specifics of? That Congress isn't getting a say in the matter? Should they (our representatives) get to vote on the deal he created?

I didn't get to keep my health insurance. I dont trust the guy to go make secret deals with Iran.
Are you authorized by the United States federal government to negotiate with the government of Iran? No? Then, you don't need to know the exact specifics of the deal yet. Those specifics are currently only available to secretary of state John Kerry and Obama, per the Logan Act of 1799, as they are the only two with such authorization.
You should stop listening to your local radio talk show host. Nothing you just said is logical in anyway. Do we have the authority to pass laws? Do we have the right to know what the laws being considered are? The logan act does not prevent the president from discussing the iran deal with congress. They have to approve it anyway. Congress should know what deal the president is offering. I dont know where you got the idea that the Logan Act makes things secret for the president only. That's just goofy.

Congress will have their opportunity to act. Once all parties have something to bring back to their people... if you think you can negotiate on behalf of the US send a letter to the Ayatollah, I'm sure he will take you seriously.
You either have reading comprehension problems or you simply aren't reading at all. Where the hell did I say I should get to negotiate? Sheesh...

Why the hell would Obama first negotiate terms with Iran and then tell Congress!? Heres an idea, work with Congress to create the terms, then negotiate the deal. You Obama fanboys are... Wow...
The same, in a strange and spooky twist of fate (as I am aware you have already expressed) should also be working with the president for the good of the people.

Has not even attempted to do so since he took office. So, the one time Obama uses his presidential authority under the US Constitution to hammer out details of a deal, before getting congress to vote on it (which is part of the due process) is witchcraft!

Disclaimer: This was made primarily in jest - do not take it at face value, as it is laden with hyperbole.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-03-11 09:06:31
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-03-11 09:35:11
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
The current argument would be all well and good, were this a mere matter of perception. It's not, however. It's a matter of United States federal law. Specifically, the Logan Act of 1799, which the 47 congressmen are all in violation of.
I quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Quote:
The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was intended to prohibit unauthorized United States citizens from interfering in relations between the United States and foreign governments.[2] The Act was passed following George Logan's unauthorized negotiations with France in 1798, and was signed into law by President John Adams on January 30, 1799. The Act was last amended in 1994, and violation of the Logan Act is a felony.

953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

1 Stat. 613, January 30, 1799, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 953 (2004).

In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), however, Justice Sutherland wrote in the majority opinion: "[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it." Sutherland also notes in his opinion the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations report to the Senate of February 15, 1816:

The President is the constitutional representative of the United States with regard to foreign nations. He manages our concerns with foreign nations, and must necessarily be most competent to determine when, how, and upon what subjects negotiation may be urged with the greatest prospect of success. For his conduct, he is responsible to the Constitution.[14]

The Southern District of New York in Waldron v. British Petroleum Co., 231 F. Supp. 72 (S.D.N.Y. 1964), mentioned in passing that the Act was likely unconstitutional due to the vagueness of the terms "defeat" and "measures," but did not rule on the question.

In a memorandum dated September 29, 2006, and entitled "MEMORANDUM FOR ALL MEMBERS AND OFFICERS", from the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the United States House of Representatives, regarding the subject of "Post-Employment and Related Restrictions for Members and Officers", members of the House who were leaving office were cautioned regarding activities that may implicate the Logan Act: "Members should further be aware of a permanent federal statutory restriction that prohibits any U.S. citizen acting without authority of the United States from: 'Directly or indirectly commencing or carrying on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government, or any officer or agent thereof, with the intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States.'"[15]

The House memo goes on to state that the Logan Act "has never been the basis of a prosecution, and this Committee has publicly questioned its constitutionality. House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, Manual of Offenses and Procedures, Korean Influence Investigation, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 18-19 (Comm. Print 1977). Members should be aware, however, that the law remains on the books.

PRIVATE correspondence with foreign governments... these are public figures sending an open letter. It's a little nuanced, but they are riding the line, they haven't violated the logan act.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-03-11 09:39:41
Link | Quote | Reply
 
The Logan act has never been successfully prosecuted. It's pretty funny to watch everyone here salivate so hard over this.
Offline
Server: Balmung
Game: FFXIV
user: Yatenkou
Posts: 314
By Cecilia Charl 2015-03-11 09:47:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Not at all, but it is racist to accuse someone with a distinguished military and political career of voting based on race.

You really can just look at the language people use to describe Obama and other blacks.

Newt called Obama a "successful food stamp president". There was a GOP newsletter referring to Michelle Obama as "Mrs. Yo Momma". A representative called Obama a "tar baby" in a radio interview... Dude, if you don't see plenty of blatant racism among congressmen, you're not looking.

What, only blacks get food stamps? You're such a racist for suggesting that.

But seriously, I acknowledge that there is real racism there. A lot of it is just taking comments out of context to make it racism when it really isn't, though.

I'm a racist.
Offline
Posts: 13787
By Bloodrose 2015-03-11 10:01:02
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Kei Nagase said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Not at all, but it is racist to accuse someone with a distinguished military and political career of voting based on race.

You really can just look at the language people use to describe Obama and other blacks.

Newt called Obama a "successful food stamp president". There was a GOP newsletter referring to Michelle Obama as "Mrs. Yo Momma". A representative called Obama a "tar baby" in a radio interview... Dude, if you don't see plenty of blatant racism among congressmen, you're not looking.

What, only blacks get food stamps? You're such a racist for suggesting that.

But seriously, I acknowledge that there is real racism there. A lot of it is just taking comments out of context to make it racism when it really isn't, though.

I'm a racist.
I've seen you run, you're not that fast! HEYO!
[+]
 Asura.Alexandero
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: jalexan4
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-03-11 10:05:42
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
The Logan act has never been successfully prosecuted. It's pretty funny to watch everyone here salivate so hard over this.
I agree. Which is why I wont dignify it anymore with a related response. Congress needs to be working with the president on this and the president should be working with congress. Both of them are being children. Im a libertarian so dont color me in red Candle. I dont like any of them. The difference between us is that I dont wear glasses with a certain tint. Your Logan point is moot.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-03-11 10:21:00
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-03-11 10:46:34
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
The Logan act has never been successfully prosecuted. It's pretty funny to watch everyone here salivate so hard over this.
I agree. Which is why I wont dignify it anymore with a related response. Congress needs to be working with the president on this and the president should be working with congress. Both of them are being children. Im a libertarian so dont color me in red Candle. I dont like any of them. The difference between us is that I dont wear glasses with a certain tint. Your Logan point is moot.

Eh, The president has thrust his own "my way or the highway" edict for the last 6 years now. He does not compromise, and given that Obama is a much larger threat to libertarianism (to which I also identify) than congress is, I hope the GOP grows a pair and freezes (nearly) everything he does.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-03-11 11:02:43
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
[+]
 Asura.Alexandero
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: jalexan4
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-03-11 11:05:22
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
The Logan act has never been successfully prosecuted. It's pretty funny to watch everyone here salivate so hard over this.
I agree. Which is why I wont dignify it anymore with a related response. Congress needs to be working with the president on this and the president should be working with congress. Both of them are being children. Im a libertarian so dont color me in red Candle. I dont like any of them. The difference between us is that I dont wear glasses with a certain tint. Your Logan point is moot.
You need consent from the State Department in order to take part in negotiations with foreign countries. The 47 congressmen involved, however, do not have consent. Therefore, not authorized to partake in the negotiations until the time the U.S constitution deems appropriate, at the end of negotiations, to ratify any deals or treaties the president may wish to make with foreign countries. They are not to intervene or interfere with said negotiations, as per the Logan act of 1799.
By the way, "I'm a libertarian" is only a dressed up way of saying you're a teabagger terrorist. Don't deny what you truly are.

I'm sorry. Could you re-quote me where I said that Congress had the authority to partake in negotiations without the president? I'm loving how you are taking what I say and twisting it so that you can make some imaginary point in which a dispute never existed. Also how you resort to the emotional response of name calling, which I can only assume, is via your knowledge that you are throwing up strawmen and actually have no point.

Congress and the President are both needed to execute a long lasting, standing treaty with a foreign body. The president can exercise his role in two ways. He can bypass Congress and go create what amounts to a short term simple agreement. Or, he can work with Congress to come up with an agreement everyone likes. Are you really that absorbed with this president and naive enough to think that by keeping Congress in the dark and coming up with "his own thing", that he will get support from them when it's time?

If they are crucial to a long standing agreement, and they are, he is gone in two years, then he needs their support to make any deals that are worth a ***. He can't even remove the sanctions without congressional approval, wtf is he going to offer Iran? A golf trip and a weekend in Hawaii? He can suspend some of the sanctions, but only while he is president, and thankfully, his *** is on the way out the door.

What you are saying is unreasonable, irrational and illogical. I think you know that though since you've now resorted to name calling. You can call me anything you want, I really don't care. I don't think that there is any reasonable person here that would argue against the importance of the coordination and cooperation of both branches in order to successfully pull this Iran thing off. Except you, of course.
Offline
Posts: 13787
By Bloodrose 2015-03-11 11:06:03
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Caitsith.Shiroi said: »
Define compromise.

(Note: We pass the budget if you gut out X, X, X and X isn't a compromise)
You're asking Nausi to define compromise? Might as well be asking for Jesus to bring Christmas presents to you in the middle of a July snowstorm.
Offline
Posts: 13787
By Bloodrose 2015-03-11 11:09:54
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Asura.Alexandero said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
The Logan act has never been successfully prosecuted. It's pretty funny to watch everyone here salivate so hard over this.
I agree. Which is why I wont dignify it anymore with a related response. Congress needs to be working with the president on this and the president should be working with congress. Both of them are being children. Im a libertarian so dont color me in red Candle. I dont like any of them. The difference between us is that I dont wear glasses with a certain tint. Your Logan point is moot.
You need consent from the State Department in order to take part in negotiations with foreign countries. The 47 congressmen involved, however, do not have consent. Therefore, not authorized to partake in the negotiations until the time the U.S constitution deems appropriate, at the end of negotiations, to ratify any deals or treaties the president may wish to make with foreign countries. They are not to intervene or interfere with said negotiations, as per the Logan act of 1799.
By the way, "I'm a libertarian" is only a dressed up way of saying you're a teabagger terrorist. Don't deny what you truly are.

I'm sorry. Could you re-quote me where I said that Congress had the authority to partake in negotiations without the president? I'm loving how you are taking what I say and twisting it so that you can make some imaginary point in which a dispute never existed. Also how you resort to the emotional response of name calling, which I can only assume, is via your knowledge that you are throwing up strawmen and actually have no point.

Congress and the President are both needed to execute a long lasting, standing treaty with a foreign body. The president can exercise his role in two ways. He can bypass Congress and go create what amounts to a short term simple agreement. Or, he can work with Congress to come up with an agreement everyone likes. Are you really that absorbed with this president and naive enough to think that by keeping Congress in the dark and coming up with "his own thing", that he will get support from them when it's time?

If they are crucial to a long standing agreement, and they are, he is gone in two years, then he needs their support to make any deals that are worth a ***. He can't even remove the sanctions without congressional approval, wtf is he going to offer Iran? A golf trip and a weekend in Hawaii? He can suspend some of the sanctions, but only while he is president, and thankfully, his *** is on the way out the door.

What you are saying is unreasonable, irrational and illogical. I think you know that though since you've now resorted to name calling. You can call me anything you want, I really don't care. I don't think that there is any reasonable person here that would argue against the importance of the coordination and cooperation of both branches in order to successfully pull this Iran thing off. Except you, of course.
You must be under the delusional assumption that Congress has ever made any effort to actually compromise with the President, or that they had offered any kind of support since... ever.

That aside, I am sure the Ayatolla would appreciate a round of golf that isn't in the middle of the world's largest sand trap.

Also, if we're resorting to name calling, can I call you Billy Jim-bob McDuff?
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-03-11 11:18:53
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2015-03-11 11:20:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
If Obama has 47 republican senators arrested, forgot what they did for a moment, and realize the shitstorm that will cause though.
[+]
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-03-11 11:22:29
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2015-03-11 11:24:18
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I would not want to be around for it. Glad I'm not.
[+]
First Page 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 14 15 16
Log in to post.