# White House snubbed



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this..   John Boehner and the GOP congress has bypassed the White House and invited Netanyahu to address Congress on why we shouldn't have nuclear negotiations with Iran.  Nothing about this plan was even mentioned to the Administration and completely puts at risk any chance of a peaceful control of Iran's nuclear program by placing Sanctions on Iran. 



> Boehner, R-Ohio, asked Netanyahu to address the threats posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions and the rise of the Islamic State. The invite came a day after the president's State of the Union Address in which Obama warned Congress against enacting new economic sanctions against Iran.




To which was responded:  



> "New sanctions passed by this Congress, at this moment in time, will all but guarantee that diplomacy fails, alienating America from its allies, and ensuring that Iran starts up its nuclear program again," Obama said Tuesday. "It doesn't make sense. That is why I will veto any new sanctions bill that threatens to undo this progress."




http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/21/netanyahu-address-congress/22103577/


Now correct me if I'm wrong.. but isn't it only the PRESIDENT who negotiates foreign policy?  Boehner's stunt seems to fly in the face of normal procedure. BUT... when it comes to embarrassing and demeaning this President.. who cares about protocol or even the Constitution for that matter. 





> The United States Constitution divides the foreign policy powers between the President and Congress so that both share in the making of foreign policy. The executive and legislative branches each play important roles that are different but that often overlap. Both branches have continuing opportunities to initiate and change foreign policy, and the interaction between them continues indefinitely throughout the life of a policy.





> This report identifies and illustrates 12 basic ways to make U.S. foreign policy. The President or the executive branch can make foreign policy through:
> 
> 1) -- responses to foreign events
> 2) -- proposals for legislation
> ...




http://fpc.state.gov/6172.htm


----------



## darroll (Jan 27, 2015)

It's fine when Obama bypasses congress?


----------



## WhatInThe (Jan 27, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this..   John Boehner and the GOP congress has bypassed the White House and invited Netanyahu to address Congress on why we shouldn't have nuclear negotiations with Iran.  Nothing about this plan was even mentioned to the Administration and completely puts at risk any chance of a peaceful control of Iran's nuclear program by placing Sanctions on Iran.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Seems like the guest speaker would fall under  5) informal advice.

True it would be preferred that the branches of government would coordinate their efforts but sometimes perhaps it is better that an issue get full disclosure and/or both sides of the story because in the end the American citizen and taxpayer winds up with the bill.

This also could a be planned distraction for negotiating. Obama could tell the Iranians look I can't hold the hardliners at bay any longer so what are you going to do-now.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 27, 2015)

WhatInThe said:


> Seems like the guest speaker would fall under  5) informal advice.
> 
> True it would be preferred that the branches of government would coordinate their efforts but sometimes perhaps it is better that an issue get full disclosure and/or both sides of the story because in the end the American citizen and taxpayer winds up with the bill.
> 
> This also could a be planned distraction for negotiating. Obama could tell the Iranians look I can't hold the hardliners at bay any longer so what are you going to do-now.



Part of the problem is that it's always been US policy to not engage with Heads of State within such close proximity to their elections.  Netanyahu's would be two weeks after coming here..   The President will NOT meet with him IF he comes to visit.  Judging from the flack he is getting from all sides.. my guess is that he will re-think the wisdom of accepting Boehner's request.  Boehner needs to hang his head on THIS particular fiasco.


----------



## Josiah (Jan 27, 2015)

There's no question that this snub is a world class insult for the American administration with Netanyahu and  Boehner equally guilty of reckless irresponsibility. We've learned in Iraq and Afganistan and Libya that there are no military solutions in the Middle East. So Obama's administration is endeavoring to deal with the problem of Iran's nuclear potential through negotiation. In this he is supported by most of our allies. But Netanyahu and the GOP aren't big fans of negotiations. So together they intend to sabotage the Iranian negotiations and they'll probably succeed. It's really tough being a Democratic president these days when the GOP's avowed and only goal is to sabotage everything you try to do.


----------



## BobF (Jan 27, 2015)

Well, sad news for you posters and the truth is that since we have been pulling back our troops and not talking sternly anymore the situation in the Arab states has been, and is, continually going worse and worse.

Another surprise today was when the Democrat side of Congress also decided to tell Obama to quite pussy footing around and get Iran to make a real commitment to stop any nuclear activity.   They also gave Obama a dead line of March this spring in 2015.   They also want action just as the Republicans have been asking for.   New York Senator Chuck Shumer made that speech.

So who are we going to blame now?


----------



## WhatInThe (Jan 27, 2015)

Don't trust Iran but in reality we can't be telling another country what they can do with in their borders or if we try to keep them in the dark ages ie deny them technology that they won't "binge" on it once they do get it. And a "binge" for Iran might very well be a nuke and/or wmd attack on someone.

That being said perhaps it is time to ease some sanctions or negotiate hopefully pulling in some moderates. But the second we find a wmd, I mean really obvious not even a spy photo needed for then a preventive strike or even harsher embargo could be ordered. I still think there is some good cop bad cop going on here.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 27, 2015)

Prosecute Boehner for violating Federal Law? http://www.politicususa.com/2015/01...eaker-john-boehner-violating-federal-law.html

When Boehner conspired with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress to campaign and “send a clear message to the White House” about how Israel will set America’s foreign policy in the Middle East, he violated a 216 year old law.

 A law, by the way, devised and enacted by America’s Founding Fathers that Republicans claim are their exemplars. It is now time to finally call for Boehner to be charged, tried, and convicted for violating the law and put a stop to his career-long abrogation of long-standing ethical and legal provisions to send a clear message that no-one in America is above the law.

The Speaker of the House openly violated the so-called Logan Act that was signed into law and enacted in 1799 by President John Adams and codified in 18 U.S. Code § 953. 




> 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.​




The Code addresses precisely what Speaker of the House John A. Boehner did in conspiring with Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress to defeat the measures of the United States in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States.
​The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “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.”

 The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “_all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not_.”

 Boehner just does not, and Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “_all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President_;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.

Boehner violated the Logan Act just by “_directly commencing or carrying on any correspondence with a foreign government, or agent thereof_” with his admitted and explicit intent of influencing measures of the United States.

 Boehner did say publicly that his reason for illegally corresponding with Netanyahu was to “_specifically ask him (Netanyahu) to address Congress and send a clear message to the White House about our commitment to Israel_.” 

Boehner’s hubris, defiance, and obvious disregard for longstanding U.S. law was when he publicly said, “_Congress can make this decision on its own_.” No matter what Boehner says, or thinks, Congress cannot make that decision on its own according to a 216 year old law and reiterated by the 79 year old ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

 Boehner needs to be fully prosecuted under 18 U.S. Code § 953 to teach him that no American is above the law regardless what he thinks. Obviously, throughout Boehner’s political career he has considered himself above the law.


This is not Boehner’s first offense without facing any legal action or congressional ethics violation repercussions to remove him for various acts. He was caught red-handed, and admitted to handing out corporate bribes for favorable votes on the floor of the House that garnered expulsion for another Ohio congressman guilty of corruption.

 Boehner openly, and continues to, lie about the number of jobs the KeystoneXL pipeline will create since he bought stock in seven Canadian tar sand companies in 2010; a few months before becoming Speaker of the House. In 2013 the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) began an investigation into campaign finance violationsand like Boehner’s other instances of malfeasance; nothing is done to put a stop to his criminality; likely because he is white.


It is difficult for regular Americans to understand how unarmed African Americans are gunned down in cold blood, and then tried and convicted in absentia (because they were murdered) by a hostile justice system when men like Willard Romney openly violated SEC and bankruptcy laws with impunity. 

Or, how seditious malcontents like Cliven Bundy can defy federal court orders and summon armed militias to confront and aim their weapons at federal officials in the commission of their duty; a federal offense and sedition, and face no charges.

 Every year across the nation evangelical clergy violate the conditions of their tax-exempt designation, videotape their illegal acts, and dare the IRS to take punitive action. 

 Former president George W. Bush and his co-conspirator Dick Cheney proudly boast that they authorized torture of captive enemy prisoners of war, many innocent, and nothing happens. Now, the Speaker of the House of Representatives blatantly violates an over-200 year old law, boasts about it, and the Justice Department and congressional ethics committees turn away in what; fear?


One often hears politicians, including President Obama proclaim with authority that “no-one in America is above the law.”  Americans certainly understand that is undoubtedly one of the biggest lies, and farces, being parroted time and time again with no chance in proverbial Hell of ever changing. John A. Boehner is a sleazy, crooked politician, and although handing out corporate bribes for votes, lying to manipulate tar sand share prices, and taking illegal campaign donations are crimes, they pale in comparison to conspiring with a foreign nation’s leader to “influence and defeat foreign policy measures of the Unite States.


John Boehner’s most recent crime is not up for debate, or opinion; he deliberately and with substantial malice aforethought violated the Logan Act and Americans must demand that he be charged, tried in federal court, and convicted with his own confession that he defiantly “carried on any correspondence or intercourse an officer of a foreign government to defeat the measures of the United States” because Israel has a dispute with the United States of America’s Middle East foreign policy.


----------



## BobF (Jan 27, 2015)

As it has been told for several years now, we are not telling Iran they can not have nuclear energy for health, power, what ever they desire.   What the UN and many other countries than the US, we want real assurance there are no bombs being planned.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 27, 2015)

So the White House has been snubbed, is that Obama, or our whole government?  Snubbed, is that supposed to mean that someone didn't include them on a list to be invited somewhere, or what?  I mean, if someone "snubs" someone I've always been told not to take it personally.

Now, is there something we should be upset about?  If so, someone mind filling me in?


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 27, 2015)

Snubbed? More like given the finger.
What good, if any, is likely to come of it?


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 27, 2015)

I know, it doesn't sound like a big deal.  Maybe it's the wording of the OP.  It doesn't seem news worthy.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 28, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Snubbed? More like given the finger.
> What good, if any, is likely to come of it?



And in violation of the Constitution.  Only the President can negotiate foreign policy.  The congress wants to derail any successful negotiations with Iran regarding their nuclear program by placing sanctions on them... This will naturally cause Iran to walk away from the talks with the Administration and go full speed ahead with their program... So I have to wonder why Netanyahu doesn't want peaceful negotiations to continue?  Does he WANT the US to go to war with Iran?  Probably so... so WE can fight his war for him.. with OUR blood and treasure.   

Fortunately the President can veto any Sanctions Bill.. and NOW the Democratic Senators who supported Sanctions have pulled back.. so the veto will not be over-ridden.    But this whole thing is just nasty business and more evidence that the GOP will go to ANY means to demean and oppose this President no matter what.. even if it hurts our country and sends our troops back to war.   Man... they love war.


----------



## rkunsaw (Jan 28, 2015)

Congress has the authority to invite whoever they want to address congress. Obama has been repeatedly illegally snubbing congress and you love it. Now it went the other way and you can't stand it.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 28, 2015)

rkunsaw said:


> Congress has the authority to invite whoever they want to address congress. Obama has been repeatedly illegally snubbing congress and you love it. Now it went the other way and you can't stand it.



Not quite the same.... This is dangerous stuff... AND what the President has done... he has had the authority to do.. Boehner may have the authority to invite anyone to speak, but this quite obviously has one purpose.. to undermine the President and the peace negotiation.   I suspect Netanyahu will reconsider this folly..... and he should if he continues to expect the US to be his sugar daddy.   Boehner should hang his head... he is getting dangerously close to being a traitor.


----------



## BobF (Jan 28, 2015)

Standing independent of the President is one of the Congresses activities, it is their job to protect the people wishes.   Also, the President does not have permission to start wars as some have suggested.    The President can only declare war for a short period of time and then the Congress must come on and approve if they agree with the Presidents actions.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...gress-shall-have-power-to-declare-war/379189/

              	                         [h=1]'The Congress Shall Have Power ... to Declare War'[/h]                                President Obama is compelled to get permission before  striking Syria, but if he violates the law by unilaterally ordering a  strike it won't be the first time.        
Conor Friedersdorf        Aug 27 2014, 8:53 AM ET     

Conor Friedersdorf        Aug 27 2014, 8:53 AM ET     







 


 






                                                           Kevin Lamarque/Reuters                                                                        Senators Bob Corker, Rand Paul, and Tim Kaine agree: Congress  should be consulted before President Obama takes any more military  action in Iraq or Syria. "This fight, and the threat posed by  ISIL, is serious enough that Congress and the administration must be  united on U.S. policy going forward,” Kaine said in a statement.  “I urge the administration to use the next two weeks to clearly define  the strategy and objectives of its mission ... then bring it to Congress  for a debate and authorization vote.”


  President Obama knows the Constitution demands that. Before taking  office, he was a U.S. senator and a lecturer in constitutional law at  the University of Chicago, so he had expertise to draw upon when asked  about the war power in 2007. "The President does not have power under  the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a  situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to  the nation," he told the _Boston Globe_.

(And more)


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 28, 2015)

nwlady said:


> I know, it doesn't sound like a big deal.  Maybe it's the wording of the OP.  It doesn't seem news worthy.



It's the wording used in almost every news or opinion report on the topic.  I certainly didn't hear the word snub here for the first time, and it is appropriate.  Too bad it goes deeper than a snub politically.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_01/of_all_the_things_to_get_the_v053876.php



 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s snub of President Obama at John Boehner’s invitation is all the rage in Washington these days—and not in a good way. Even Fox News commentators lambasted both Republicans and Netanyahu not only for the transparent campaign ploy for his re-election, but also for breaking the protocols of Washington decorum. Politico today ran a blistering broadside by David Rogers titled “There Are No Rules Anymore.”

All the criticism is right, of course. Both Boehner and Netanyahu are guilty of massive political overreach, making an unprecedented and foolish insult to the President of the United States, the single most important person for Israeli security.

 And all, apparently, over disagreements over Iran policy—disagreements on which Netanyahu and Republicans are transparently wrong, as more bellicose policy against Iran will only make the problem worse and harm Israel’s security.

 On the American domestic side, it’s a wildly inappropriate move by Republicans, essentially co-opting a foreign power to desperately try to win a few political points against the President with their evangelical base and maybe with the votes of a few American Jews.

But really, of all the things for Fox News and the Washington establishment to turn on Republicans for, it’s this? A protocol breach that basically amounts to the diplomatic version of little Susie not getting invited to Nancy’s tea party with the rest of her stuffed animals? Everyone already knows that Netanyahu hates Obama, and everyone got a chance to see how comically pouty was Boehner’s reaction to the President’s State of the Union address.

Where was all the outrage when Republicans literally lied the country into war with Iraq? Or repeatedly cut food stamps for no reason? Or shut down the government? Or voted over 50 times to prevent people with pre-existing conditions from having access to health insurance? Or voted for the Paul Ryan budget? Or refused to acknowledge human-made climate change?

Somehow all of those crucial things that harm millions of people and weaken our national security became partisan issues for the Village Center to tut tut about and ask for compromise. But Boehner and Netanyahu’s social snub is somehow the last straw.

That says a lot about the Washington elite and where their misplaced priorities are.




QuickSilver said:


> And in violation of the Constitution.  Only the President can negotiate foreign policy.  The congress wants to derail any successful negotiations with Iran regarding their nuclear program by placing sanctions on them... This will naturally cause Iran to walk away from the talks with the Administration and go full speed ahead with their program... So I have to wonder why Netanyahu doesn't want peaceful negotiations to continue?  Does he WANT the US to go to war with Iran?  Probably so... so WE can fight his war for him.. with OUR blood and treasure.
> 
> Fortunately the President can veto any Sanctions Bill.. and NOW the Democratic Senators who supported Sanctions have pulled back.. so the veto will not be over-ridden.    But this whole thing is just nasty business and more evidence that the GOP will go to ANY means to demean and oppose this President no matter what.. even if it hurts our country and sends our troops back to war.   Man... they love war.



Well said, I agree.


----------



## darroll (Jan 28, 2015)

We didn't have any problems with Bush, all foreign leaders were welcome to visit.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Feb 18, 2015)

They say that more than 90% of his campaign money comes from the United States.  http://www.buzzfeed.com/sheerafrenkel/meet-the-american-families-bankrolling-netanyahus#.sj5l4K0RMk


----------



## QuickSilver (Feb 18, 2015)

darroll said:


> We didn't have any problems with Bush, all foreign leaders were welcome to visit.



No.... and I am sure that NO ONE in congress invited foreign leaders to speak WITHOUT making President Bush and his admin aware of it first..


----------



## AZ Jim (Feb 18, 2015)

nwlady said:


> I know, it doesn't sound like a big deal.  Maybe it's the wording of the OP.  It doesn't seem news worthy.



It IS VERY newsworthy.  Anyone who thinks it isn't, is not thinking of the ramifications of the act.


----------



## QuickSilver (Feb 18, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> It IS VERY newsworthy.  Anyone who thinks it isn't, is not thinking of the ramifications of the act.



I understand that he is STILL planning to come despite all the critics against him...  Oh... Obama hatred runs soooooo deep on the Right.


----------



## BobF (Feb 18, 2015)

And why not?   We want our Constitution back and our Congress making decisions.


----------



## BobF (Feb 18, 2015)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

[h=1]War Powers Resolution[/h]
The *War Powers Resolution of 1973* (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548)[SUP][1][/SUP] is a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress,  "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created  by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its  armed forces."
 The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress  within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and  forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto. It has been alleged that the War Powers Resolution has been violated in the past, for example, by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign  in Kosovo. Congress has disapproved all such incidents, but none has  resulted in any successful legal actions being taken against the  president for alleged violations.[SUP][2][/SUP]
..............................

I believe this allows the President to commit to armed conflict immediately.    But then the Congress has to be called on to make it a real war and not just the Presidents only call.     So after 60 days it must be a real war according to what Congress determines or the troops must be called back.


----------



## BobF (Feb 18, 2015)

In the US we have about 30% that are Democrats, 30% that are Republicans, and the remaining 40% are independents.    Those independents are of the various socialist, communist, what ever's for this or that, types.   So neither Republican or Democrat party can claim total control of our government until those unregistered independents help decide who they wish would lead the US.

My preference would be to eliminate these national parties and only allow voting by name and goals.


----------



## GeneMO (Feb 18, 2015)

Obama does not take anything serious, or act on anything, unless it directly affects his golf game.

Gene


----------



## AZ Jim (Feb 18, 2015)

GeneMO said:


> Obama does not take anything serious, or act on anything, unless it directly affects his golf game.
> 
> Gene



I'm sorry but that is an asinine thing to say. https://www.seniorforums.com/showth...tial-vacations-and-golf-rounds?highlight=golf


----------



## Warrigal (Feb 18, 2015)

GeneMO said:


> Obama does not take anything serious, or act on anything, unless it directly affects his golf game.
> 
> Gene



I have to say, that as an outsider looking in, that is not what I see.


----------



## GeneMO (Feb 18, 2015)

Yes Jim it is, glad you noticed.   I try to be that way.   It keeps me young.    I was the class clown and suscribe to the Alfred E. Newman motto:  "Why be normal"  

Gene


----------



## AZ Jim (Feb 18, 2015)

GeneMO said:


> Yes Jim it is, glad you noticed.   I try to be that way.   It keeps me young.    I was the class clown and suscribe to the Alfred E. Newman motto:  "Why be normal"
> 
> Gene



Ok...


----------



## tnthomas (Feb 18, 2015)

BobF said:


> In the US we have about 30% that are Democrats, 30% that are Republicans, and the remaining 40% are independents.    Those independents are of the various socialist, communist, what ever's for this or that, types.   So neither Republican or Democrat party can claim total control of our government until those unregistered independents help decide who they wish would lead the US.
> 
> My preference would be to eliminate these national parties and only allow voting by name and goals.



That's a very interesting "statistic", I'd be real interested to see the source...

I think that it would be more accurate to characterize that 40% as being the silent majority that feel that neither the Republicans or the Democrats are representing their (mostly middle-class) values and needs.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Feb 18, 2015)

BobF said:


> Those independents are of the various socialist, communist, what ever's for this or that, types.



I guess I'm in that *43%* category of Independents, socialists, commies, or what ever types.


----------



## BobF (Feb 18, 2015)

Yes, here is a recent chart showing the breakdown.    It is now bigger than I had from an earlier date.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

                                                                                  Election Trends by Group


                                                [h=1]Party Affiliation[/h]                                              
2015 Jan 5-8    Republicans 29%   Independents 42%   Democrats 28%


----------



## drifter (Feb 18, 2015)

I'm a fan of Angela Merkle, the German Chancellor, on her third term at the top among male egos. She is both educated and intelligent.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Feb 18, 2015)

Boehner's conspiracy to empower Netanyahu is to start America's war with Iran?  This doesn't sound good to me at all, any thoughts?...http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02...mpower-netanyahu-start-americas-war-iran.html


"The other blatant effort to advance the interests of a foreigner is the real reason House Speaker John A. Boehner violated nation’s 216 year-old federal Logan Act in summoning a foreigner to address a joint session of Congress.

 It is true that as suspected, and confirmed by Israeli consul general Yaron Sideman, Boehner and Netanyahu conspired to ‘defy and humiliate’ the President of the United States by violating the Logan Act. 

However, the real reason was to give the foreigner an opportunity to lobby for passage of a Senate bill. One that not only gives Netanyahu the full authority to end the State Department’s diplomatic negotiating power, but gives Netanyahu unilateral authority to force America into a war with Iran at Israel’s pleasure.There is nothing in the so-called Kirk-Menendez bill that fulfills the Constitution’s mandate that Congress levies taxes to pay for legislation for the general welfare of the United States.

 It does, however, strip foreign policy authority from the Executive Branch and puts it in the hands of a foreigner.

That is why Boehner invited Netanyahu to lobby in front of a joint session of Congress; to fear monger, lie, and convince legislators from both chambers to pass the legislation eliminating the Executive Branch’s authority to negotiate with Iran and hand Israel’s leader the authority to declare war on Iran in America’s stead. Don’t believe it?​​Buried in the Kirk-Menendez bill, in section 2(b)(5), is a stipulation that whenever Israel feels like taking military action against Iran, the United States is compelled to provide “military support” to Israel.

 Do Americans understand what the bill entails? Of course not, but that is why Republicans and some blood-thirsty anti-Muslim Democrats are couching their true intent with phony fears that Iran will not adhere to negotiated agreements.

Obviously, to Israel, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and warmongers lusting for yet another Middle East war fought by Americans, the legislation empowering Israel to start America’s next war is a must-pass bill; particularly because it includes an ironclad legal requirement for the United States to launch what neo-cons were giddy concluding would be “a very substantial war” with Iran. 

The primary reason Boehner showed his true national allegiance to Israel in summoning “the esteemed Senator from Israel” (Netanyahu) to lobby Congress to pass the Iran-War authorization bill, is to put an abrupt end to President Obama and world leaders’ diplomatic efforts to find a peaceful resolution with Iran without a war.

 Also, Boehner wants to strip foreign policy decisions from the Executive Branch and give them to foreigner Netanyahu along with the power to unilaterally send U.S. armed forces into another Middle East war; this time with Iran.

It is difficult to note when, over the past two decades at least, Republicans in Congress have actually fulfilled their Constitutional mandate to “levy taxes to pay for legislation for the general welfare of the United States.”

 In fact, they have not passed any legislation for the general welfare of anyone other than their wealthy donors, and yet they have no problem passing legislation either endangering the people’s general welfare or advancing the interests of foreigners who have no allegiance to America and could not care on iota less about its welfare. What is astonishing, and frankly pathetic, is that the American people allow any Republican to serve in Congress when they have shown nothing but contempt for this nation and its people while giving their complete loyalty and attention to foreigners.

Understanding that Republicans are indebted to the Koch brothers, their fealty to a foreign corporation for oil profits make sense. However, their undivided devotion to Israel, including their willingness to give a foreigner (Netanyahu) relative authority to send American troops to fight a war with Iran hidden within the Kirk-Menendez bill not only does not make sense, it is patently un-American.

 It is also un-American to disregard the Constitution’s well-defined Separation of Powers; foreign policy is not the purview of Congress any more than approving an international-border crossing construction permit is no matter who owns Congress.Republicans cannot be bothered to pass one piece of legislation spending one penny on America’s infrastructure, its people, or its Homeland Security, but they regularly send American dollars to fund Israel’s military and anticipate funding another war Netanyahu gets to start at his pleasure.

 There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution mandating Congress to serve the best interests of foreigners, no matter their country of origin, and yet that has been where Republicans, and some Democrats, have put all their energy over the past few months. 

It is long past time for Republicans to declare publicly where their national loyalty lies.

 If it is with the United States, then they must start fulfilling their oath of office, adhere to the Constitution, and legislate for the general welfare of Americans.

 If they are loyal to Israel, they need to emigrate to the so-called ‘holy land’ and join Netanyahu on the front lines when he invades Iran; without American assistance, money, or troops."​​


----------



## drifter (Feb 18, 2015)

There is nothing to keep Boehner from inviting anyone to speak to the Congress but he is out of line to do so, and I hope he comes to regret it. I was hoping the administration would get an agreement with and on the Iran situation. The Middle East
is so volatile, I suppose anything could happen. I hope we are not dragged into endless involvement and the Iran situation does not explode because of what's going on now politically with Boehner, the president, and Netanyahu. Of course Netanyahu has big problems at home on account of living high on the hog of both he and his wife and putting on his expense tab. The world is troubled waters to navigate for mere politicians.


----------



## BobF (Feb 19, 2015)

Why would anyone trust Iran as they have a long history of doing what they want regardless of others wishes.   They are intent on building their nuclear weapon, very close to doing so right now.   They have proven over years now that they are not trustworthy, why think they are now.   For the recent 6 years of Obama they have failed to show any real way to trust them and continue to work on their nuclear projects while not allowing anyone to visit and see what they are really doing.   With what is happening in the middle east these days I am  not sure their is any reason to trust anyone over there right now.


----------

