Posted on 01/04/2011 10:08:49 AM PST by Qbert
SOUTH BEND - Republican leaders in the Senate, anxious to hinder President Obama, no matter the cost, turned what they could have hailed as a Republican success into a major victory for the president, a stinging defeat for them.
Ratification of the New START treaty is really a victory for a Republican senator, Indiana’s Richard G. Lugar, a leader in the fight for ratification of the treaty with Russia for mutual reduction of nuclear warheads.
Ratification is really a victory also for the dozen other Republican senators who put country ahead of divisive politics and provided the needed two-thirds vote.
Ratification is really a victory as well for Republican views on need for modernization of our nuclear weapons, with agreement now on funding to make sure the weapons are ready, not rusty.
Republican leaders could have claimed accurately that Lugar, who has achieved remarkable success in eliminating horrible weapons in the former Soviet Union that once were aimed at us, provided Republican influence as the mentor for a senator named Obama on need for further reduction of that nuclear threat.
They could have cited the treaty as a bipartisan achievement, building really on the arms reduction initiatives of Republican presidents going back to Reagan.
But the two top Republican leaders in the Senate, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Jon Kyl of Arizona, chose instead to do all they could to defeat the treaty, from filibuster to fib about lack of study of the document. It was the subject of exhaustive hearings by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, with section by section analysis and testimony in support by the nation’s top military officials and an array of Republican and Democratic foreign policy experts.
There even was humbugging by the ratification foes that bothering now with national security and ramifications for future Russian cooperation on Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan showed disrespect for Christmas. Guess those senators have important Christmas parties with lobbyists and big contributors earmarked on their calendars.
McConnell made clear his intent, right after Republican gains in the November elections, when he said: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”
Of course he wants a Republican president elected in 2012, not re-election of Obama.
But “single most important” objective?
More important than national security and a strong bipartisan show of resolve in dealing in the next two years with Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Russia and the rest of the world?
McConnell railed in treaty debate about “some politician’s desire to declare a political victory and host a press conference before the end of the year.”
Depriving Obama of an opportunity to cite New START treaty ratification as an achievement for American foreign policy and national security was more important than strengthening U.S. standing and security in the world?
Weakening Obama for the next election was more important than concerns about weakening the president in any further efforts for Russian cooperation and in pushing for Middle East peace and economic and trade agreements in a world already wondering about U.S. stability?
Embarrassing Obama with key word changes in the treaty, which the GOP leaders sought, was more important than the fact that the changes would void the treaty, leave us without inspections of Russian nuclear compliance and end negotiations on arms reduction?
Ironically, instead of depriving Obama of treaty ratification and weakening and embarrassing him, the Republican leaders deprived themselves of the opportunity to hail a Republican role in ratification at their own press conference.
They weakened what could have been their claim of supporting the bipartisan cooperation the voters want, allowing instead the credit for the bipartisanship to go to Obama.
They embarrassed themselves in rejecting the plea for ratification by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and treaty support from former Republican secretaries of state, from Henry Kissinger to Condoleezza Rice.
They see victory ahead over Obama. The November elections enhanced chances for that 2012 victory. But the Republican leaders risk a Pelosi-like image for the next election as voters view Congress. They could in their blatant partisanship, as shown in trying to stop a bipartisan START, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I can’t stand Lugar. He sent me a petition for his reelection campaign. I tossed it in the trash.
DEFEAT LUGAR IN ‘12 !
When I was a kid a Luger was something that was coughed up.
Question for all: Any conservative planning on running against this RINO? His support for the START Treaty was the last straw as far as I am concerned.
Senator Lugar is brain dead and a traitor along with POTUS Obama and the entire Democrat Party!!! The Ruskies are loving life making fools out of America. Putin knows Obama is a weak sister and will betray America with his dumbness and hate of America!!!
I don’t understand why we are still surrendering to the Russians. Didn’t we already win that war?
“I don’t understand why we are still surrendering to the Russians. Didn’t we already win that war?”
Know thine enemy: We’re the “bad guys” here to the Libs (even if they never blatantly admit it)...
To Obama (circa 1984 Columbia University groupthink and Rev, Wright seminars) and the progressives, the Soviet Union was actually “evolving” into the “Utopia” it was always supposed to be under Gorbachev. All the murders under Stalin are easily rationalized away because...wasn’t the U.S. founded with slaves? Didn’t we “slaughter all the Indians”? Didn’t they “purposely infect blacks with diseases”? Didn’t Ronald Reagan “create crack cocaine and introduce it into the ghettos to get black people hooked”? (I think moron actor Will Smith actually once said that b.s., IIRC). Didn’t we...yadda, yadda
The fact that we evolved and spread liberty of course doesn’t matter to them. They pick the “facts” they want to emphasize and rationalize away the rest...
Deep down Barry wants a more powerful Russia.
We know of several solid Conservatives who are considering this. Hoosiers are in agreement that RINO Lugar needs to go.
I like Hostettler, Daniels, and yes even Mike Pence should consider going for Lugar’s senate seat.
Names we have heard include Richard Mourdock (IN Treasurer) and State Sen Mike Delph. Hoping Pence will go for the Governor’s seat. Mitch...we will see...
He won’t be getting my support.
He won’t be getting my support.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.