Sunday, April 12, 2015

BloggeRhythms

A couple of items today, both dealing with leading Democrats trying to steer public opinion away from reality.
 
FoxNews.com reports that, “President Obama said Saturday that partisan wrangling over the nuclear agreement with Iran has gone beyond pale and said the harsh criticism of the deal “needs to stop.”
 
He singled out Arizona Senator, John McCain’s, suggestion that Secretary of State John Kerry’s explanations of the framework agreement in Iran were “somehow less trustworthy” than those of Iran’s supreme leader.
 
An “exercised” Obama said, “That's an indication of the degree to which partisanship has crossed all boundaries. And we're seeing this again and again."
 
After saying he “understood that people would be against the proposed deal and be suspicious of Iran,” he went on, “But when you start getting to the point where you are actively communicating that the United States government and our secretary of state is somehow spinning presentations in a negotiation with a foreign power, particularly one you say is your enemy, that's a problem."
 
However, it seems at the moment, not only might Senator McCain's assessment of the deal be correct, but the president may actually be responding to news items suggesting the makeup of the Iran agreement is even worse.
 
On Friday’s McLaughlin Group, "US News and World Report Chairman and Editor-in-Chief and publisher of the New York Daily News, Mort Zuckerman said that Iran “can do almost everything they want” under the P5 +1 framework .
 
“I think there’s a real concern about what really is being inhibited — for the Iranians? It’s not very much, frankly. They can do almost everything they want. They’ll do it a little bit more slowly, but I don’t think — I don’t think the constraints are really anywhere close enough for Iran” Zuckerman stated.
 
What’s still most remarkable, though, is that with all the crosstalk between those for and against the Iranian deal, no one on the Republican side has yet to mention the president’s pastor, Reverend Wright, whose goal is a clear path to liberate Jerusalem from what’s believed to be illegal Zionist occupation. And, if that’s the president’s true agenda, no amount of talk or criticism is going to deter his completion of the "deal” to weaponize Israel's enemy, Iran.  
 
In item two, Maureen Dowd writes in today’s nytimes.com, about Bill Clinton’s wife’s presidential campaign, and her attempt to change her image, as follows:  
 
Referring to her granddaughter, Bill’s wife wrote: ““I’m more convinced than ever that our future in the 21st century depends on our ability to ensure that a child born in the hills of Appalachia or the Mississippi Delta or the Rio Grande Valley grows up with the same shot at success that Charlotte will.”
 
Ms Dowd believes, “This was designed to rebut critics who say she’s too close to Wall Street and too grabby with speech money and foundation donations from Arab autocrats to wage a sincere fight against income inequality.”
 
And then, Ms Dowd delivers the clincher, “But if Hillary really wants to help those children, maybe she should give them some of the ostensible and obscene $2.5 billion that she is planning to spend to persuade us to make her grandmother of our country.”
 
So, here we have two stories that strongly reinforce the fact that,  whatever politicians say, promise or present means nothing at all. All that counts is what they’ve actually done, which rarely, if ever, matches with what they keep trying to sell us.
 
That's it for today folks.
 
Adios

No comments:

Post a Comment