Ratification of the New START Treaty was achieved when the Senate voted 71 yea and 26 nay.
All of the chamber Democrats voted to ratify; they were joined by 13 Republicans.
Aside from the obvious question about giving a badly-damaged and dangerous (in the view of some) president a last minute political victory, Republicans who voted yea should be required to address certain concerns:
Does START really “snooker” the U.S. as alleged by Senator Kyle and other respected critics?
Was the vote rushed through the Senate because of concerns about the political make-up of the 112th Congress?
Did the desire to rush home for Christmas vacation trump the need for intelligent exercise of the "Advise and Consent" oversight required by the Constitution?
If the treaty indeed makes the world and Americans safer, why in the world would the 112th Congress not be trusted for ratification?
Did the rushed vote circumvent the process required for a complete and thorough examination?
Has the defense of the American people been compromised to accommodate the political agenda of President Obama?
The last minute cajoling and chicanery in the Senate on START bear an unhealthy resemblance to the witchcraft used to pass ObamaCare in 2009.
Why would the most deliberative and respected political body in the world ratify a treaty in such a haphazard, rushed manner?
John W. Lillpop is a recovering liberal. “Clean and sober” since 1992 when last he voted for a Democrat. For years, John lived in the San Francisco Bay Area, the very liberal sanctuary city which protects, rather than prosecutes, certain favored criminals. John escaped the Bay Area in May and now lives in Pine Grove California where conservative values are still in vogue.
