Gallup: Obama Gets Low Marks for His Handling of Iran

Today in Washington, D.C. - Aug, 14, 2015:
Bill Smith, Editor: Congress in on their August recess. During the recess, senators and PRepresentaive will travel throughout their states to meet with constituents. The Senate will reconvene for legislative business on Tuesday, September 8th and consider H. J. Res. 61, the Resolution of Disapproval of the Iran Agreement.

U.S. Social Security Act was signed into law 80 Years ago on August 14, 1935 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Please read, "Social Security: An Unhappy 80th Birthday."

The American people oppose this deal with Iran and they oppose Obama's appeasement of Iran. A new Gallup poll measuring Obama's performance on several issues finds he gets his worst approval rating -- just 33% -- for his handling of Iran. Gallup reports that “Only one in three Americans approve of President Barack Obama's handling of the situation in Iran -- his lowest rating of eight issues measured in a new Gallup survey . . . . These data are from an Aug. 5-9 Gallup poll, conducted as Congress debates the Iran nuclear deal, which has challenged the usual Democratic allegiances the president has on the hill. As recently as February, Americans gave Iran the lowest favorable rating of 22 countries, and a strong majority felt Iran's development of nuclear weapons posed a "critical" threat to the U.S.”

A 55% majority disapproves of President Obama’s handling of Iran in the Gallup survey and, notably, 58% of Independents say they disapprove as well

Gary Bauer, a contributing author and President of Campaign for Working Families noted today that Kerry Is Clueless!

Secretary of State John Kerry is the man who negotiated the nuclear deal with the ayatollah's representatives from the Islamic Republic of Iran. It would be reassuring to know that our negotiators are sophisticated and understand the dangers confronting the free world.

Critics of the deal have been deeply concerned from the beginning about the extent of the concessions Kerry made to appease the Iranians. An interview Kerry recently did with The Atlantic explains a lot.

When pressed to address the ayatollah's repeated calls to destroy Israel, Kerry was dismissive, saying:"I don't know the answer to that. I haven't seen anything that says to me -- they've got 80,000 rockets in Hezbollah pointed at Israel, and any number of choices could have been made. . . . So I don't want to get locked into that debate. I think it's a waste of time here."
Where was John Kerry during the last Gaza war? What does he think those rockets are for? What does he think the "terror tunnels" are for? Has Secretary Kerry read the ayatollah's latest "how to" book? It's a book about destroying Israel.

Kerry's naive utterances are all too reminiscent of those made by western diplomats who negotiated with another dictator who also threatened to "wipe out" the Jews. Hitler's signature on the Munich agreement did not guarantee peace. That "scrap of paper," as Hitler later referred to it, proved to be worthless.

There is too much at stake to repeat the worst mistakes of the past. The world's leading state sponsor of terrorism cannot be trusted with the world's most dangerous weapons, and this deal does not prevent the tyrants in Tehran from getting them.

To the surprise of many, at least one left-wing member of the Congressional Black Caucus agrees. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) yesterday announced his opposition to the Iranian nuclear deal. In an op-ed, Rep. Hastings wrote:"After careful review, I have decided that I cannot support this deal. The goal of the recently concluded negotiations was to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. . . . in the end, the [deal] allows Iran to remain a nuclear threshold state while simultaneously reaping the benefits of relief from international sanctions."News Reports:
It’s unlikely that Americans skeptical of the Iran deal appreciate the president’s outrageous characterizations of critics of the deal.

The Washington Post editors took the White House to task for its rhetoric earlier this week. Writing that “it’s generally better to treat policy disagreements in good faith,” The Post editors pointed out, “That has not been the spirit in which Mr. Obama and his team have met his Iran-deal critics. The president has countered them with certitude and ad hominem attacks, the combined import of which is that there are no alternatives to his policy, that support for the deal is an obvious call and that nearly anyone who suggests otherwise is motivated by politics or ideology. Mr. Obama’s rhetoric reached its low point when he observed that the deal’s opponents value war over diplomacy and that Iranian extremists were “making common cause with the Republican caucus.”

They further wrote, “[B]y not sticking to the merits of the deal, Mr. Obama implies a lack of confidence in them. The contrast is striking between the president’s tone today and his 2008 speech accepting the Democratic nomination: Looking ahead to debating his GOP opponent, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), he pledged that ‘what I will not do is suggest that the senator takes his positions for political purposes, because one of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagree without challenging each other’s character and each other’s patriotism.’”

But the public isn’t enamored of the Iran deal on the merits either. Just a week after the deal was announced, Pew Research Center found, “More Americans disapprove than approve of the deal struck last week by the U.S., Iran and five other nations to limit Iran’s nuclear program: Among the 79% of Americans who have heard about the agreement, just 38% approve, while 48% disapprove . . . .

“There is widespread skepticism about aspects of the agreement, particularly the Iranian leadership’s commitment to the terms of the deal: Most of those familiar with the agreement say they have not too much (35%) or no confidence at all (38%) that Iran’s leaders will uphold their side of the agreement. And while there is greater confidence in the U.S. and international agencies’ ability to monitor Iran’s compliance, 54% are not too (33%) or not at all (21%) confident, while a smaller share (45%) express at least a fair amount of confidence in their ability.”

A week later, CNN wrote, “A majority of Americans want Congress to reject the recently-negotiated nuclear deal with Iran . . . . Overall, 52% say Congress should reject the deal, 44% say it should be approved.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was asked this week about his thoughts on the Iran deal. The Aspen Times noted, “On the Iran agreement, McConnell said his position gives him the option to bring up a resolution of approval or disapproval for Senate debate. ‘I’m obviously going to bring up the latter.'"

“McConnell claimed the proposed deal with Iran is flawed in numerous ways. The major flaw is it will disrupt stability in an already unstable part of the world. ‘He wanted to transform the Middle East. He has, he has,’ McConnell said. ‘The Saudis went to Moscow talking to the Russians about buying arms. I never thought I’d see that. . . . So our friends are skittish. Our enemies are emboldened,’ McConnell said. . . .

“McConnell said sanctions should have been used longer to secure a better bargaining position with the Iranians. ‘The president wants to set this up as either this (agreement) or war. Nobody’s advocating that,’ McConnell said. ‘If we spent the last two years trying to ratchet up the sanctions rather than negotiate them away we’d be in a lot better shape in my view,’ he added.”

---

Tags: Iran Nuke Deal, President Obama, low marks, poll numbers, Gallup Poll, Pew Research, Social Security To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!