Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Senator Tom Cotton and the Gang of 47

 

House Foreign Affairs CommitteeFrom a friend:

Somebody said this on Ricochet months ago—and nailed it: Tom Cotton is in the US Senate to break furniture.

The White House says Cotton’s merry gang of 47 is undermining the peace process? Peace process?!

I’d like Rubio (Walker too, if he’s got his sea legs) to get up this week and explain our new victory process.
 
We decide who gets the bomb. We win. They lose.

A new rule for sorting out GOP presidential candidates? Eliminate anyone unwilling to speak of “victory?”

I like that. I like it a lot. You?

There are 55 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Songwriter Member
    Songwriter Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    If the GOP doesn’t use its new-found majority status to start framing issues and stop allowing the Dems to control the media conversation, they might as well go home. Cotton is fighting and that is a very good thing. I don’t want there to be peace in the Senate, because peace in the Senate always means one thing: the Dems got their way.

    • #1
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:07 AM PDT
    • Like
  2. Peter Robinson Founder
    Peter Robinson

    Songwriter:If the GOP doesn’t use its new-found majority status to start framing issues and stop allowing the Dems to control the media conversation, they might as well go home. Cotton is fighting and that is a very good thing. I don’t want there to be peace in the Senate, because peace in the Senate always means one thing: the Dems got their way.

    Beautifully put, Songwriter–and I’m with you on every word.

    To apply Lincoln’s defense of Grant to the junior senator from Arkansas: “We need this man. He fights.”

    • #2
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:13 AM PDT
    • Like
  3. The (apathetic) King Prawn Inactive

    Didn’t you film a UK with him recently? If so, when will it be available to view?

    • #3
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:15 AM PDT
    • Like
  4. Ross C Member
    Ross C Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Peter Robinson:


    We
    decide who gets the bomb. We win. They lose.

    I like that. I like it a lot. You?

    I like the clear direction, but ultimately can this president or or republicans make the case to the American people as to why we need to risk war by intervening militarily in Iran.

    If you say “We decide” did we decide on Israel or India or Pakistan or North Korea or South Africa? One needs to make the case as to why Iran is worth war and North Korea was not.

    • #4
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:18 AM PDT
    • Like
  5. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I am trying to understand the Narrative.

    1983 – Senator Kennedy attempts to garner Soviet support in the 1984 election by offering a quid-pro-quo and that is Not Treason.

    2007 – Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi travels to Syria to “represent American political opposition” and this is also Not Treason.

    2015 – 47 Senators send a letter to the Iranian leadership to remind them that an executive agreement isn’t a treaty (kind of like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances given to Ukraine) and can be abrogated or modified by a subsequent President and this is held by the media to Be Treason.

    Just making things clear.

    • #5
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:25 AM PDT
    • Like
  6. The (apathetic) King Prawn Inactive

    For the left treason is like pornography…they know it when they see it.

    • #6
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:26 AM PDT
    • Like
  7. Mate De Inactive

    My lefty friends are losing their minds on Facebook over this Tom Cotton thing. One friend is postings things from Politico and NPR as his “unbias sources”. Just from this lefty hissy fit I’m watching on social media means this was the right move.

    • #7
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:31 AM PDT
    • Like
  8. Peter Robinson Founder
    Peter Robinson

    The King Prawn:Didn’t you film a UK with him recently? If so, when will it be available to view?

    Yup. We recorded Uncommon Knowledge with Sen. Cotton just ten days ago.

    Blue Yeti, when will that show go up?

    • #8
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:31 AM PDT
    • Like
  9. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Ross C:

    Peter Robinson:

    We decide who gets the bomb. We win. They lose.

    I like that. I like it a lot. You?

    I like the clear direction, but ultimately can this president or or republicans make the case to the American people as to why we need to risk war by intervening militarily in Iran.

    If you say “We decide” did we decide on Israel or India or Pakistan or North Korea or South Africa? One needs to make the case as to why Iran is worth war and North Korea was not.

    Because 1/2 of South Korea’ s 50 Million population (along with 30K US military) is within artillery range of 100K guns owned by N. Korea and all of Israel’s 8 million population is within range of MRBM out of Iran?

    • #9
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:33 AM PDT
    • Like
  10. Steve C. Member

    I continue to be amazed at how many folks have bought into Obama’s binary outcome.

    The Iranians are not threatening a war if we don’t let them continue their nuclear programs.

    The P5+1 is not threatening war if Iran doesn’t sign some agreement.

    Today, the worst case is no agreement, a continuation of Iran’s programs and a renewal of sanctions by some, not all, of the Big 6.

    Not even Israel is talking about an Iranian breakout in the next year.

    Yes, ultimately, we have to be perceived as willing to use force. That’s no different than throughout modern history.

    • #10
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:33 AM PDT
    • Like
  11. MarciN Member

    It’s funny how the gun control party is okay with nuclear arms for Iran. :)

    • #11
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:34 AM PDT
    • Like
  12. Songwriter Member
    Songwriter Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Matede:My lefty friends are losing their minds on Facebook over this Tom Cotton thing. One friend is postings things from Politico and NPR as his “unbias sources”. Just from this lefty hissy fit I’m watching on social media means this was the right move.

    Exactly. Anything that upsets the dulcet-toned folks at NPR is okay by me. We are known by our enemies as much as by our friends. Tom Cotton is angering all the right people, in my estimation.

    • #12
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:34 AM PDT
    • Like
  13. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I wonder, is it Treason to allow the same negotiator who crafted the framework by which N. Korea acquired Nuclear weapons to be the lead negotiator with the Iranians?

    • #13
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:37 AM PDT
    • Like
  14. Mendel Member
    Mendel Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Tom Cotton is in the US Senate to break furniture.

    So writing a tersely-worded yet toothless letter is now considered “breaking furniture?”

    Republicans hold a majority in both houses. If they want to break furniture, they need to block any legislation which Obama would like to sign until he meets their demands. Yet their only attempt to do so thus far failed miserably.

    Instead, we get purely symbolic but utterly powerless gestures like inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress and writing a letter to the mullahs. To me, that speaks of their weakness, not their strength.

    And yet many here seem to eat this up. Perhaps if conservatives could recognize the distinction between the symbolic and the real, they would be less disappointed when they repeatedly discover how little their elected officials actually accomplish.

    • #14
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:40 AM PDT
    • Like
  15. Scott Abel Inactive

    Out of curiosity, which Republicans did not sign the letter, and did they give reasons?

    Were there any Democrats who did?

    • #15
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:48 AM PDT
    • Like
  16. Profile Photo Member

    Mendel:

    Tom Cotton is in the US Senate to break furniture.

    So writing a tersely-worded yet toothless letter is now considered “breaking furniture?”

    Republicans hold a majority in both houses. If they want to break furniture, they need to block any legislation which Obama would like to sign until he meets their demands. Yet their only attempt to do so thus far failed miserably.

    Instead, we get purely symbolic but utterly powerless gestures like inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress and writing a letter to the mullahs. To me, that speaks of their weakness, not their strength.

    And yet many here seem to eat this up. Perhaps if conservatives could recognize the distinction between the symbolic and the real, they would be less disappointed when they repeatedly discover how little their elected officials actually accomplish.

    Wholeheartedly endorse.

    Obama wants his agreement, no matter what, whether it is enforceable or even physically possible. And Iran is holding out for more concessions knowing that Obama will never walk away. This letter stops nothing. Maybe it makes the Iranians ask for more.

    For a study in contrasts, the Washington Post just did a story on how Pelosi is running circles around the “historic” Republican majority in the House of Representatives.

    Meanwhile, we are excited about a letter.

    Our standards have to be higher than this.

    • #16
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:52 AM PDT
    • Like
  17. Mate De Inactive

    Scott Abel:Out of curiosity, which Republicans did not sign the letter, and did they give reasons?

    Were there any Democrats who did?

    As per the Wall Street Journal, no Democrats signed it. Even the pro-Israel Democrat Senators did not.

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/03/10/tom-cotton-the-man-behind-the-explosive-iran-letter/

    • #17
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:54 AM PDT
    • Like
  18. Cato Rand Coolidge

    Steve C.:I continue to be amazed at how many folks have bought into Obama’s binary outcome.

    The Iranians are not threatening a war if we don’t let them continue their nuclear programs.

    The P5+1 is not threatening war if Iran doesn’t sign some agreement.

    Today, the worst case is no agreement, a continuation of Iran’s programs and a renewal of sanctions by some, not all, of the Big 6.

    Not even Israel is talking about an Iranian breakout in the next year.

    Yes, ultimately, we have to be perceived as willing to use force. That’s no different than throughout modern history.

    Unfortunately, we’re not perceived as willing to use force, and nothing short of the coming of January 2017 is going to change that.

    • #18
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:54 AM PDT
    • Like
  19. Cato Rand Coolidge

    MarciN:It’s funny how the gun control party is okay with nuclear arms for Iran. :)

    Hey, it’s not like the Mullahs are the police in Ferguson or something.

    • #19
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:56 AM PDT
    • Like
  20. Mate De Inactive

    Songwriter:

    Matede:My lefty friends are losing their minds on Facebook over this Tom Cotton thing. One friend is postings things from Politico and NPR as his “unbias sources”. Just from this lefty hissy fit I’m watching on social media means this was the right move.

    Exactly. Anything that upsets the dulcet-toned folks at NPR is okay by me. We are known by our enemies as much as by our friends. Tom Cotton is angering all the right people, in my estimation.

    The left’s reaction puts more credence to Dennis Prager’s theory that “those to do not confront evil, resent those that do”

    • #20
    • March 10, 2015, at 9:59 AM PDT
    • Like
  21. Cato Rand Coolidge

    Mendel:

    Tom Cotton is in the US Senate to break furniture.

    So writing a tersely-worded yet toothless letter is now considered “breaking furniture?”

    Republicans hold a majority in both houses. If they want to break furniture, they need to block any legislation which Obama would like to sign until he meets their demands. Yet their only attempt to do so thus far failed miserably.

    Instead, we get purely symbolic but utterly powerless gestures like inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress and writing a letter to the mullahs. To me, that speaks of their weakness, not their strength.

    And yet many here seem to eat this up. Perhaps if conservatives could recognize the distinction between the symbolic and the real, they would be less disappointed when they repeatedly discover how little their elected officials actually accomplish.

    I’m not sure you’re right. I’m not sure we can rely on the Iranians to appreciate that the stalling tactic they’re negotiating with the Obama regime won’t necessarily buy them the time they’re looking for. I think this move might throw a monkey wrench into the works in a real way.

    • #21
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:00 AM PDT
    • Like
  22. KC Mulville Inactive

    Like Steve C. above, I reject the binary alternatives about an Iran treaty, which amount to promises on a piece of paper or war.

    Sanctions were squeezing Iran before. Oil markets bringing the price of oil down were also helping. Whereas those options may not work very well now, it shows that there are other means of pressure besides all-out war.

    But look at it from Iran’s point of view. the reporting is correct (I hope it isn’t), Iran has little motive to comply. Politically, sanctions and war are off the table. At this point, the worst penalty Iran faces for its misbehavior is that the negotiations will stop, leaving them in no worse position than they are right now. And right now, they’re proceeding to a nuke anyway.

    • #22
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:05 AM PDT
    • Like
  23. No Caesar Thatcher
    No Caesar Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Cato Rand:

    Steve C.:I continue to be amazed at how many folks have bought into Obama’s binary outcome.

    The Iranians are not threatening a war if we don’t let them continue their nuclear programs.

    The P5+1 is not threatening war if Iran doesn’t sign some agreement.

    Today, the worst case is no agreement, a continuation of Iran’s programs and a renewal of sanctions by some, not all, of the Big 6.

    Not even Israel is talking about an Iranian breakout in the next year.

    Yes, ultimately, we have to be perceived as willing to use force. That’s no different than throughout modern history.

    Unfortunately, we’re not perceived as willing to use force, and nothing short of the coming of January 2017 is going to change that.

    Exactly. Too many ignore the arrows that Bush put in Obama’s quiver in the early days. The greatest benefit of the Liberation of Iraq was that bad guys were afraid of us. This gave diplomacy a chance to accomplish something, before it was frittered away by The One. Second best was that we were on the offensive, drawing a lot of jihadists to the streets and sands of Mesopotamia where we killed them, making the world a better place for everyone else (Muslims included).

    • #23
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:08 AM PDT
    • Like
  24. Profile Photo Member

    Cato Rand:I’m not sure you’re right. I’m not sure we can rely on the Iranians to appreciate that the stalling tactic they’re negotiating with the Obama regime won’t necessarily buy them the time they’re looking for. I think this move might throw a monkey wrench into the works in a real way.

    I’m sure they saw what happened in Libya when the Libyans gave up their nuclear weapons program. We shouldn’t expect the Iranians to be that naive not know that.

    • #24
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:25 AM PDT
    • Like
  25. Larry Koler Inactive

    Quinn the Eskimo:

    Mendel:

    Tom Cotton is in the US Senate to break furniture.

    So writing a tersely-worded yet toothless letter is now considered “breaking furniture?”

    Republicans hold a majority in both houses. If they want to break furniture, they need to block any legislation which Obama would like to sign until he meets their demands. Yet their only attempt to do so thus far failed miserably.

    Instead, we get purely symbolic but utterly powerless gestures like inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress and writing a letter to the mullahs. To me, that speaks of their weakness, not their strength.

    And yet many here seem to eat this up. Perhaps if conservatives could recognize the distinction between the symbolic and the real, they would be less disappointed when they repeatedly discover how little their elected officials actually accomplish.

    Wholeheartedly endorse.

    Obama wants his agreement, no matter what, whether it is enforceable or even physically possible. And Iran is holding out for more concessions knowing that Obama will never walk away. This letter stops nothing. Maybe it makes the Iranians ask for more.

    For a study in contrasts, the Washington Post just did a story on how Pelosi is running circles around the “historic” Republican majority in the House of Representatives.

    Meanwhile, we are excited about a letter.

    Our standards have to be higher than this.

    Did you two get confused and start thinking that the intended recipient of this letter was in Iran? It’s aimed at Obama, the Dems and the media.

    • #25
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:27 AM PDT
    • Like
  26. Cato Rand Coolidge

    Quinn the Eskimo:

    Cato Rand:I’m not sure you’re right. I’m not sure we can rely on the Iranians to appreciate that the stalling tactic they’re negotiating with the Obama regime won’t necessarily buy them the time they’re looking for. I think this move might throw a monkey wrench into the works in a real way.

    I’m sure they saw what happened in Libya when the Libyans gave up their nuclear weapons program. We shouldn’t expect the Iranians to be that naive not know that.

    A fair point. But then we’re left with the question of what to do? War? (I’m reluctantly not sure the answer to that question is “no” by the way. I do wonder if we couldn’t try some version of “blow the stuff up we want to blow up and kill the guys we want to kill, and then leave and let them sort the rest out” this time.)

    • #26
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:30 AM PDT
    • Like
  27. Larry Koler Inactive

    Yes, it was Peter Robinson who used the phrase “break furniture” in a podcast a short time ago.

    Peter, were you quoting someone else? Or was that your construction?

    • #27
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:31 AM PDT
    • Like
  28. Cato Rand Coolidge

    Larry Koler:Yes, it was Peter Robinson who used the phrase “break furniture” in a podcast a short time ago.

    Peter, were you quoting someone else? Or was that your construction?

    LOL. Is Peter quoting himself?

    • #28
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:34 AM PDT
    • Like
  29. Larry Koler Inactive

    Cato Rand:

    Larry Koler:Yes, it was Peter Robinson who used the phrase “break furniture” in a podcast a short time ago.

    Peter, were you quoting someone else? Or was that your construction?

    LOL. Is Peter quoting himself?

    He is quoting a friend who is reminding him, I think.

    The reason I remember the phrase is that it was so… memorable. Oh, and it gave me hope. But, going straight at Obama with this letter is better than I would have predicted. I hope he keeps it up. It’s a fight for the minds of America and the media prevents our salvos from scoring (Iron Dome feature of the media).

    We have to take down the Praetorian Guard of the media before we can get into the castle. Republicans don’t know how to do this normally. Is this the opening attack in a wider war? I hope so.

    • #29
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:41 AM PDT
    • Like
  30. James Gawron Thatcher
    James Gawron Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Peter,

    I am shocked yes shocked surely you are aware of the vast new neocon conspiracy! Josh Earnest may look like an insipid dweeb but that is just a cover. He is agent 0013 of the super special white house narrative-ops group. Those guys can come up with a red herring faster than you can say Peter Robinson (no offense).

    47 Senators, hah! 47 puppets all controlled by one fiendish mind. With X-Ray like vision Josh ferreted out (with apologies to the ferrets) who the master mind was. Here is his photo below:

    220px-Paul_Wolfowitz (1)

    Yes it’s him!!! Dr. Evil! Peter please please warn everybody immediately.

    AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #30
    • March 10, 2015, at 10:42 AM PDT
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.