Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Chuck Schumer’s Disingenuous Iran Deal Argument [View all]
Sharing a media market with Chuck Schumer is like sharing a banana with a monkey, Corzine was quoted as saying in New York magazine. Take a little bite of it and he will throw his own feces at you.
On Thursday evening, right in the middle of the first GOP debate, Schumer reached back, took aim, and heaved a large one. He penned a long piece for Medium that some anonymous hack described as thoughtful and deliberate. Uh, ok. Maybe compared to Mike Huckabees outrage about oven doors, but good grief our standards for political discourse have fallen. Schumers missive came across a bit like your crazy uncle who gets his opinions from talk radio and wants to set you straight at Thanksgiving.
(Im probably not the only one who thinks so. But then, I dont have to pretend Schumer is some great statesman lest he put a hold on some future appointment or nomination.)
Consider how Schumer describes the inspection regime in the Iran deal.
Schumer starts by repeating the claim that inspections are not anywhere, anytime; the 24-day delay before we can inspect is troubling. This would be very troubling if it were true. It isnt. The claim that inspections occur with a 24-day delay is the equivalent of Obamacare death panels. Remember those? A minor detail has been twisted into a bizarre caricature and repeated over and over until it becomes true.
Lets get this straight. The agreement calls for continuous monitoring at all of Irans declared sites that means all of the time including centrifuge workshops, which are not safeguarded anywhere else in the world. Inspectors have immediate access to these sites.
On Thursday evening, right in the middle of the first GOP debate, Schumer reached back, took aim, and heaved a large one. He penned a long piece for Medium that some anonymous hack described as thoughtful and deliberate. Uh, ok. Maybe compared to Mike Huckabees outrage about oven doors, but good grief our standards for political discourse have fallen. Schumers missive came across a bit like your crazy uncle who gets his opinions from talk radio and wants to set you straight at Thanksgiving.
(Im probably not the only one who thinks so. But then, I dont have to pretend Schumer is some great statesman lest he put a hold on some future appointment or nomination.)
Consider how Schumer describes the inspection regime in the Iran deal.
Schumer starts by repeating the claim that inspections are not anywhere, anytime; the 24-day delay before we can inspect is troubling. This would be very troubling if it were true. It isnt. The claim that inspections occur with a 24-day delay is the equivalent of Obamacare death panels. Remember those? A minor detail has been twisted into a bizarre caricature and repeated over and over until it becomes true.
Lets get this straight. The agreement calls for continuous monitoring at all of Irans declared sites that means all of the time including centrifuge workshops, which are not safeguarded anywhere else in the world. Inspectors have immediate access to these sites.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/09/upchuck-senator-schumers-disingenuous-iran-deal-argument/
46 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Schumer swallowed the Republican/Bibi treachery and feces whole and pronounced it delicious! Try some?
Fred Sanders
Aug 2015
#2
Well, there is that little objection by some folks about lying about the agreement and pretending
Fred Sanders
Aug 2015
#6
Only if one assumes that supporting a president of his own party is just as
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#26
you are confused again. No one here gave those voting against Obama on the TPP
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#31
Ah, the dishonest rightwing claim that the agreement is bad for Israel's security, and that
geek tragedy
Aug 2015
#38
"maybe it would lead to war and maybe not" What an astute analysis. Not.
R. Daneel Olivaw
Aug 2015
#34
Where that's where you have it terribly wrong. It's a diplomatic matter, silly.
R. Daneel Olivaw
Aug 2015
#41
I did think for myself, extensively. That's why I believe Schumer is DANGEROUSLY wrong
Tom Rinaldo
Aug 2015
#33