Booker’s Folly: Iran Deal Supporters’ Logical Conundrum

Today, Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland announced his opposition to the Iran nuclear deal. As the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, Cardin’s decision might have had some impact on the outcome of the vote on the pact. But since he waited until after President Obama had already secured the requisite 34 votes to sustain a veto of a motion of disapproval, it is essentially meaningless. Yet his statement explaining why he is going to vote against the president — assuming, that is, that Democrats fail to filibuster and prevent a vote — is another damning indictment of the administration’s failure. In reading it, what was most striking was how much of its language echoed that of yesterday’s statement from Senator Cory Booker explaining why he was voting for the deal. Both agreed that the agreement legitimized Iran’s nuclear program, rewards the Islamist regime for its bad behavior and that the easing of sanctions will make it difficult if not impossible to keep the nuclear scofflaw and the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism in check. Booker’s decision to vote for the deal in spite of these drawbacks demonstrates not only the illogic but also the abandonment of principle on the part of the minority of the House and Senate that will vote for the president’s policy. If, as I wrote earlier this week, this partisan vote now means that the Democrats will own Iran and its future misconduct for the foreseeable future, then these statements will haunt the party for years to come.

0
Shares
Google+ Print

Booker’s Folly: Iran Deal Supporters’ Logical Conundrum

Must-Reads from Magazine

Planet Earth Dodges a Bullet

Banality and evil.

A week ago, I wondered what was going on in Sunspot, New Mexico. The FBI had swept into this mountain-top solar observatory, complete with Black Hawk helicopters, evacuated everyone, and closed the place down with no explanation whatever. Local police were politely told to butt out. It was like the first scene in a 1950’s Hollywood sci-fi movie, probably starring Walter Pidgeon.

0
Shares
Google+ Print

The Unprincipled Boycott of Israel

The demands of the politicized life.

John Cheney-Lippold, an associate professor of American Culture at the University of Michigan, has been the subject of withering criticism of late, but I’m grateful to him. Yes, he shouldn’t have refused to write a recommendation for a student merely because the semester abroad program she was applying to was in Israel. But at least he exposed what the boycott movement is about, aspects of which I suspect some of its blither endorsers are unaware.

3
Shares
Google+ Print

The Low, Low Price of Serfdom

Nothing ventured.

Convenience, wrote Columbia University law professor Tim Wu, is a tyrant. It makes our lives easier and more enjoyable, but everything comes with a price tag. We may not recognize that which we are sacrificing in the pursuit of convenience, but we are sacrificing nonetheless.

8
Shares
Google+ Print

Podcast: Brett Kavanaugh and the #MeToo Moment

Podcast: Christine Rosen on Brett Kavanaugh.

The podcast welcomes COMMENTARY contributor and author Christine Rosen on the program to discuss the allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Have his confirmation hearings have transformed into another chapter in the national cultural reckoning that is the #MeToo moment?

6
Shares
Google+ Print

A Hill to Die on

Justice both delayed and denied.

According to Senate Judiciary Committee Democrat Chris Coons, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who has accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when she was a minor, did not want to come forward. In an eerie echo of Anita Hill’s public ordeal, her accusations were “leaked to the media.” With her confidentiality violated, Ford had no choice but to go public. Coons could not say where that leak came from, but he did confess that “people on committee staff” had access to the letter in which Ford made her allegations. Draw your own conclusions.

133
Shares
Google+ Print