• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: Politics & News... Have at it.

TheCountofMonteCristo said:
you want another four years of Harper? What has he done for Quebec?
Click to expand...

I'll take lower taxes yes. Don't think that Trudeau can expand government and increase spending in education/infrastructure without raising the gst. Also, keep in mind, Trudeau is so wish washy on multiple subjects that you will have a lot of conservative issues pass through anyways. Btw, Trudeau was quoted as saying he doesn't think balancing the federal budget is important, it will balance itself. Go ahead, vote for him, lol. That's exactly what you will get, a lot of trudeauisms that make no fkn sense and wonder how the hell this guy got into power. Oh ya, last name, I forgot.

It's not as if Trudeau will improve anything in quebec, we have a provincial government for that. Harper is pro pipeline which will benefit us slightly but tell me how Trudeau will change anything in this province? Btw, the carbon tax, another way to squeeze money to support larger government from turdeau. I just don't see how any business minded individual could support the NDP or Libtards. Both are so weak for running the economy it's almost a joke.
 
geez I hope this is scripted, otherwise they actually walk the streets.

[video=youtube;q_wlfQZe6L4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_wlfQZe6L4[/video]
 
Democrats prepared to buck White House on Iran nuclear deal
The damage from Tom Cotton’s letter has been contained, lawmakers of both parties say


Even as the White House ramps up pressure on Congress to stay out of its negotiations with Iran on a nuclear agreement, Republicans are on the brink of veto-proof majorities for legislation that could undercut any deal.

And that support has held up even after the uproar last week over the GOP’s letter to Iranian leaders warning against an agreement.

Though several Democratic senators told POLITICO they were offended by the missive authored by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), none of them said it would cause them to drop their support for bills to impose new sanctions on Iran or give Congress review power over a nuclear deal.

That presents another complication for the administration ahead of a rough deadline of March 24 to reach a nuclear agreement with the country.

Though the White House has seized on the GOP’s “open letter to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” in an effort to shift the politics of the nuclear negotiations in its favor on Capitol Hill, there’s no evidence it’s working so far. Nearly all of the 54 Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats in the Senate remain at odds with the president on the issue.

Meanwhile, the House will hold hearings this week to grill administration officials on Iran, a potentially troubling sign for the administration, considering the chamber passed a strict Iran sanctions bill in 2013 by a vote of 400-20 — far above the veto override threshold.
Click to expand...

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/democrats-prepared-to-buck-white-house-on-iran-nuclear-deal-116088.html#ixzz3UVHGzFLN
 
TheCountofMonteCristo said:
writing a letter to Iran saying they will scuttle whatever treaty is signed?
Click to expand...

They never sent the letter to Iran. Rather, it was an open letter posted on the internet. That's a distinction worth clarifying. And no it's not treasonous to outline the function of congress that Obama want's nothing to do with. Perhaps that's treasonous instead.

What that posted letter achieved, was to bait Obama and Co into a 'front page' outrage that has raised public awareness of what Imperial Obama is trying to do on his very own.
 
Count, the other thing regarding Israeli politics is how the next Gov't gets formed. You don't necessarily have to win the overall vote to form the next Gov't, which would have to be a coalition in any case.

Was reading that Yahoo might have had an inside track on that.
 
72% of voting age Israeli's turned out for this election. The largest turnout since 1999.

[video=youtube;-bRC2IRTth8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bRC2IRTth8[/video]

4226975851_Obama_Egg_on_Face_xlarge.jpeg
 
northernlou said:
They never sent the letter to Iran. Rather, it was an open letter posted on the internet. That's a distinction worth clarifying. And no it's not treasonous to outline the function of congress that Obama want's nothing to do with. Perhaps that's treasonous instead.

What that posted letter achieved, was to bait Obama and Co into a 'front page' outrage that has raised public awareness of what Imperial Obama is trying to do on his very own.
Click to expand...

There's nothing "imperial" about it. The Presdent negotiates treaties, not the Congress.
 
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou said:
There's nothing "imperial" about it. The Presdent negotiates treaties, not the Congress.
Click to expand...

he can negotiate a treaty but he can't ratify it. And none of this has to with Congress wanting to negotiate with Iran in place of the Executive.

Under U.S. law,

-treaties are equivalent in status to Federal legislation;
-a distinction is made between the terms treaty and agreement;
[the word treaty is reserved for an agreement that is made by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate (Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution);
-agreements not submitted to the Senate are known as executive agreements; and
-regardless of whether an international agreement is called a convention, agreement, protocol, accord, etc., if it is submitted to the Senate for advice and consent, it is considered a treaty under U.S. law.

https://law.duke.edu/ilrt/treaties_3.htm
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Obviously Congress has to ratify but they should require better reasons for voting against something besides the fact that they're still upset that Blackie McBlack got elected President.

The biggest mistake Obama made was right after his first election when he tried to build bridges with the GOP instead of using his majority in the House and Senate to ram through all of his legislation. he should have known that the GOP was never going to oppose every measure that came down the pike just because it came from him. He should have seen them for the bigots they are and just run roughshod over them while he held a majority in both houses. Now the GOP can prevent him from getting anything done and then blame him for not getting anything done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top