Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska coherently explains the President Obama's negotiations with Iran, and says that his administration "isn’t negotiating" but getting its "lunch money taken in an alley."
Hi, I’m Ben Sasse.
I’ve been traveling across Nebraska this week, and a number of folks have been telling me their worries about the Iranian nuclear program.
If you’ve not been paying close attention to this subject, here’s why all of us should care deeply about the dangerous path our government is on toward a deal with Iran:
In November, the Iranian Supreme Leader talked yet again about annihilating Israel.
Then in January, right after U.S. officials praised Yemen for partnering with us in fighting ISIS, Iran funded a coup by Islamic terrorists that took down the government, a huge black eye for America.
At about the same time, an Argentinean prosecutor was assassinated as he prepared to reveal an Iranian link to the murder of 85 Jews in Buenos Aires.
Meanwhile, back home, Iran has been purposely pursuing the development of an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. We're not talking about a weapon that can merely reach Jerusalem here, we're talking weapons that have the potential of reaching Los Angeles.
This is just the recent backdrop against which the Obama Administration has been negotiating with Iran about its intolerable nuclear program.
Any discussion of this program needs to begin with one simple fact: It has been the undisputed U.S. policy for decades that we would not accept any deal with Tehran short of eliminating Iran’s nuclear program. Elimination of the program, period.
But now, in a perversion of language that makes no sense to anyone who lives outside the DC bubble, the Administration is claiming that they have made “progress” with Iran by moving the goalposts against our own objectives and interests. As the Washington Post has rightly editorialized in recent weeks, the Obama Administration has now decided to reset our goal at merely “temporarily restricting” the Iranian nuke program.
This is the opposite of eliminating the program. This is, instead, explicitly tolerating a renegade nuclear program.
Why the change? It is really hard to understand, but it appears that the Administration wants a deal with Iran so desperately that it will accept any deal – even if contrary to our interests. Given how lazy so much of the national media has been about investigating anything the government announces with grand-triumph press releases, look for most American and European journalists not to ask tough questions when the Administration soon claims that it has reached some sort of supposed “landmark deal” with Iran. In all likelihood, the coming deal will not be any sort of victory for U.S. interests, but rather a near total surrender by America on this issue. Make no mistake: Allowing Iran to keep its nuclear program will be a failure, not a success.
There are six UN resolutions prohibiting uranium enrichment that help set the basis for the U.S.’s past opposition to the Iran nuke program. Now, however, instead of sticking with demands for the complete destruction of this nuclear program, our Administration is apparently preparing to give Iran -- the undisputed, largest state sponsor of terror in the world—billions of dollars per month of additional sanctions relief; a broader role in the region; and simultaneously allow them to keep their nuclear program.
That's what this Administration calls a deal.
To quote a Nebraskan the other day: It’s like the President has never even bought a used car before – and now he’s negotiating nukes with the world’s most dangerous nation. This isn’t negotiating; this is getting your lunch money taken in an alley.
We are going to look back on this as a watershed moment for American foreign policy.
Allowing a terror-supporting, Israel-hating, American troop-killing enemy of the U.S. to take a broader leadership role in the Middle East is foolishly short-sighted. And it’s a horrible betrayal of our allies.
This agreement will likely ignite an immediate nuclear arms race in the region, further endanger Israel, Jordan, and other allies, and eventually increasing the probability that a nuclear device makes its way to one of our cities.
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.
Texas senator Ted Cruz has endorsed Ben Sasse in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in Nebraska. From the Sasse campaign announcement:
“I have gotten to know Ben Sasse, and while Nebraskans have good choices, Ben is the strongest conservative voice running for United States Senate,” said Sen. Cruz. “Ben will not be just another vote in the Senate – he will be a leader in the fight to stop the Obama agenda and repeal ObamaCare from day one. We need strong reinforcements like him in the United States Senate.”
Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse has been declared "Obamacare's Nebraska Nemesis," and in a new ad Sasse explains why he's personally invested in repealing the law. In 2007, his wife Melissa had an aneurysm followed by an arduous recovery, which left his family with $160,000 in medical bills. Sasse ended up waging a months-long battle against the health insurance system, and Sasse is convinced Obamacare will only make these problems worse: