Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska reports on the four central questions he's been getting from constituents on Iran:
The questions are:
1) Didn’t we decide we wouldn’t tolerate state sponsors of terrorism?
2) Why change 36 years of bipartisan policy consensus that prohibited Iran’s nuclear weapons?
3) What is the administration’s best case scenario for a nuclear Iran?
4) What really happens if we lift the sanctions and Iran cheats?
Sasse concedes the questions are hard to answer. “The one topic that came up every single place we went was the President’s attempted Iranian nuclear deal. . . Not one time did we hear anybody who thinks the administration’s plans with regard to Iran are in the U.S.’s long-term interests. It seems like every conversation could be summarized in four questions people had.”
“Frankly, it’s really hard to answer any of these four questions that folks were asking. So we thought we’d just throw them out there for President Obama’s consideration.”
“Isn’t Iran still the world’s largest state sponsor of terror and, if so, what are we doing? Wasn’t the fundamental lesson of 9-11 that we would never just turn a blind-eye toward rogue regimes that sponsor terrorism and try to breed instability, try to support and fund those that would attack the U.S. homeland and try to destabilize our main allies around the world? Nebraskans believe that’s the main thing we learned about 9-11 and somehow the administration appears to be deciding to forget it.”
“Why has the administration decided to change not only its position but 36 years of U.S. foreign policy about not allowing Iran to become a nuclear state? It’s been a bipartisan policy consensus—not just Republicans but all Republicans and all Democrats—going back to the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-1980 that we never wanted Iran to become a nuclear threshold power. And even this administration, a year and a half ago, said the same thing—that they were not going to allow the Iranians to be enriching uranium. Now, they seem to have pivoted to a place where they’re willing to allow Iran to have 6,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. The people of my state want to know: why this change?”
“Nebraskans want to know: what does the administration really believe the best case scenario is? Because folks have heard on TV the president saying he’d like to see Iran become a successful regional power. We don’t know why a regime that spews the hatred they do toward the U.S.—and says that it has as a national objective the annihilation of Israel—why we would possibly want them to become a successful regional power?”
“What really happens now once we lift the sanctions—if that’s where the administration indeed takes us—what happens next if the Iranians cheat? Because the people of my state assume that Iran is going to cheat and they don’t know what happens after that, once the administration has allowed all these other nations to unravel the international inspections regime and the Russians have announced just in the last week that they’re going to sell weapon systems to Iran. So the people of my state think that once you allow the Iranians to take this step and get access to all of the sanctions dollars that are overseas—they don’t understand how you ever put Humpty Dumpty together again.”
“There are so many regimes in that part of the world that, if they have nuclear weapons, it’s hard to imagine how they wouldn’t ultimately be used. And the people of the heartland want to ask you, Mr. President: would you please re-think this? Because they think this is a really dangerous step that makes the Middle East and, therefore, the entire world less safe.”
Senator Ben Sasse has introduced a law to eliminate the amnesty tax bonuses, according to a press release from his office.
“Presidents should enforce the laws—not unilaterally rewrite them—and it’s time for Congress to hold this Administration accountable,” Sasse says in a statement. “By preventing this Administration from issuing new Social Security Numbers to illegal aliens, the ABE Act would help restore the rule of law and save taxpayers billions of dollars.”
Ben Sasse of Nebraska, who rode his opposition to Obamacare to a seat in the Senate, has introduced legislation that should help Republicans avoid turning a potential victory at the Supreme Court into a defeat for the cause of repeal. Sasse’s bill, introduced yesterday evening, is designed to keep Republican governors and state legislators from setting up state-based exchanges in the wak
President Barack Obama has promoted his recent executive action on immigration by arguing that he’s only deferring action – holding off on enforcement of the current immigration laws until an immigration reform he approves of passes Congress.
Republican voters are down on the sluggish GOP officials they elected, and the officeholders whine about the unreasonable people who voted for them. Republican backbenchers complain about their lame leaders, and GOP leaders grumble about their unruly followers. Right-wing pundits despair of unimaginative Republican pols, and the hard-headed pols are impatient with impractical commentators. Conservative activists loathe the GOP establishment, and the establishment is terrified and contemptuous of the base.
Ben Sasse has just won a decisive victory in the Nebraska Republican Senate primary. As of this writing, the race has been called by the Associated Press and Sasse holds a 27 point lead over his nearest competitor, with 79 percent of precincts reporting. Having clinched the primary win, early polling suggests Sasse will be the likely victor in the general election in November. At 42 years old, Sasse is poised to become the youngest GOP senator.
The New York Times is up with a story today, "Tea Party Activists See Own Groups Among Washington Adversaries," about the supposed tension between national Tea Party groups and local Tea Party activists. The lede of the piece involves an anecdote -- and I use that term loosely, as it seems to bear little relationship to reality -- about the Nebraska Senate race:
In advance of tomorrow’s Nebraska Republican Senate primary — one of the most hotly contested in the nation — Ben Sasse’s final two television ads note his opposition to Obamacare. The first begins, “Conservatives are rallying in Nebraska against Obamacare and for Ben Sasse,” and it features Sarah Palin speaking in support of Sasse, as well as footage of Ted Cruz, another prominent Obamacare opponent and Sasse supporter. (Paul Ryan, Mike Lee, Rick Santorum, and Tom Coburn have also endorsed Sasse.)
Yesterday, I reported on how a super PAC -- Freedom Pioneers Action Network, started by Mitch McConnell's former campaign manager Justin Brasell -- was flooding Nebraska with outside money to take down Tea Party endorsed Senate candidate Ben Sasse. The primary is just a week away and the Sasse campaign said they expected more attacks this week. Well, here is one of them, and it's ugly:
With the Nebraska Republican Senate primary a week from tomorrow, outside money is flowing into the state to take down the race's frontrunner, Midland University president Ben Sasse. And the provenance of the money attacking Sasse is especially curious--a super PAC with strong ties to senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.