« Re: The American Christian: Why We Pray | Main | Re: Because Islam is a Religion of Peace, "Robert Spencer should have kniting needles stuck down he's thoart!" »

November 10, 2010

NYT: Why Rush to Cut Nukes?

John Bolton and John Yoo write at the NYT:

THE sweeping Democratic midterm losses last week raise serious questions for President Obama and a lame-duck Congress. Voters want government brought closer to the vision the framers outlined in the Constitution, and the first test could be the fate of the flawed New Start arms control treaty, which was signed by President Obama and President Dmitri Medvedev of Russia last spring but awaits ratification. The Senate should heed the will of the voters and either reject the treaty or amend it so that it doesn't weaken our national defense.

The treaty's supporters are likely to try to rush it through the Senate before Congress adjourns. They worry that since the Republicans have gained six seats, New Start will fail to get the required two-thirds majority when the new Senate convenes in January.

Senators should be in no hurry. The Obama administration's main strategy in this two-minute drill is likely to emphasize a "resolution of ratification" that the Foreign Relations Committee approved along with the treaty in September. But that resolution, which supposedly addresses concerns about missile defense and modernization of the nuclear arsenal, is a Trojan horse. Any senators who fall for this ploy will not only imperil our safety, they will also undermine the Senate's formidable powers in the treaty-making process.

[...] While the Constitution gives the president the prime role in the treaty process, the Senate has the final say. If 34 senators reject a treaty, no president can override them. Senators should now use that power to advance the national interest by stopping or demanding changes in New Start. The Constitution's plain meaning, so prized by the voters in last week's elections, requires no less. (Emphasis added)

Anyone willing to wager on the Dems being smart enough not to fall for this "Trojan horse" Bolton speaks of - or even considering putting our real national interest ahead of ideology?

Meanwhile, the leftards are clearly unhappy about Bolton and Yoo's piece, apparently unconcerned about a greatly weakoned America. And gee, by the way, missile defense was indeed an item in the GOP's Pledge to America and something the voters were fully aware of and obviously supported given that the GOP did so well in the election.

Posted by Richard at November 10, 2010 11:45 AM

• NYT: Why Rush to Cut Nukes? - Nov 10, 2010