GOP Senator to Dems: If you try to pass DADT, Republicans won't pass START

[cali]

By Greg Sargent

UPDATE, 4:11 p.m.: In an interview with me just now, Senator Bob Corker doubled down on his contention that if Dems move on DADT, Republicans will be less likely to support START.

"I felt like momentum was growing for START," Corker said, adding that since Reid announced he was holding votes on DADT and DREAM, it has had a "chilling effect."

"I'm watching support for the treaty erode, because of highly partisan political issues being brought up solely because activist groups in the Democratic Party want this done," he continued.

Corker said he wasn't issuing a personal threat, and was merely commenting on the reaction of his Senate GOP colleagues. When I pressed Senator Corker on whether Republican Senators would really base their decision on START on whether Reid held a vote on DADT, Corker didn't answer directly.

"That being thrown into the middle of this debate is causing many Republicans to want to see START pushed back and candidly is causing them to oppose it," Corker said. "This is hardening them against passage of this treaty at this time."

UPDATE, 4:46 p.m.: Corker just called back to clarify that a DADT vote won't lead his GOP colleages to oppose START permanently.

"I just want to make sure it's clear they're not going to oppose the treaty permanently," he said. "But it's hardening them against doing it right now."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/gop_senator_to_dems_if_you_try.html

[kenny blankenship]

1. You didn't think the Republicans were going to stick to any deals, did you?

[frazzled]

2. They weren't going to support START anyway.

So tell Lucy to go home, Charlie Brown.

[gateley]

3. More threats, more blackmail. Ugly, ugly human beings. nt

[tinymontgomery]

4. Don't believe them

they won't support the Dem's no matter what they say,

[juajen]

5. Why in hell wasn't all of this done earlier? Makes you wonder, don't it? NT

[Bandit]

11. Because Republicans have had a pemanent filibuster in place for two years now

The ONLY time Democrats have any chance at all of passing anything is at this time of year. The ONLY leverage Democrats have over Republicans is their desire to go home for Xmas. If Democrats threaten to keep them in session until some work is done it usually gets done..

[BulletproofLandshark]

6. The Dems should start calling them "soft on defense" every time they're on the tube.

That's EXACTLY what the repugs would do if the roles were reversed.

[WCGreen]

18. Exactly....

[Donnachaidh]

7. what was that about making deals with hostage takers?

Watch the admin bail on the gay community to get the START treaty passed. :grr:

[Little Star]

8. Lets hope this admin stands by the gay community.

[Donnachaidh]

10. I've got fingers and toes crossed

But considering previous *negotiations*, I don't have much faith in this admin. Think about it - the UI gave them political cover to push through billions for the wealthy.

Using the START treaty as political cover to kick DADT to the curb -- I'm hoping this doesn't happen. But *hope* isn't what a lot of us still have. :shrug:

[bushisanidiot]

9. Hahahaha! Let them try! We already have the votes to repeal DADT

and we will have a FIELD DAY nailing repukes asses to the wall if they don't move forward with START.

we should be THANKING them for giving us the upper-hand. WHAT A FRIGGIN' GIFT.. AND JUST IN TIME FOR CHRISTMAS!!


HAHAHA!

[cally]

12. Willing to put the security of US at risk over partisan hurt feelings

:argh: I hope Dems use this in campaign ads and in every interview this week. It's as bad as it gets.

[Major Hogwash]

13. That's exactly what this sounds like to me.

I can't see Corker getting reelected in 2012.

[madrchsod]

14. republicans killing reagan`s start treaty !

that`s what the president and every democrat should be saying...

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. Am I right in thinking that the START treaty is only a matter for the Senate, not the House?

Because it's an international treaty, and not an internal law?

If so, then I'd say let them threaten not to pass START now. Reid can bring it up again in the new Congress, because it's not affected by the new DumbshitRepublican majority in the House. Get the stuff done now that you need to finish in this Congress, like DADT (which looks passable now, if those few Republicans keep their word), and DREAM (which may not be, but you may as well end the Congress by fighting for something). And anyway, with a pause before trying to get START passed, the somewhat-sane senior Republicans outside Congress, who support passing START rather than playing childish politics with it, can get to work on the idiot senators who want to play around rather than grow up and do their job.

[DavidDvorkin]

17. Correct. However,

it requires a 2/3 majority in the Senate because it's a treaty. The next Senate would be even harder than this one.

[RegieRocker]

16. No deals with the GOP!

[and-justice-for-all]

19. We should not be negotiating with terrorist to begin with...nt

[Johonny]

20. if they don't allow a vote, make them work Christmas day

[democracy1st]

21. LMAO silly politicians!