Memo to Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York -- Re: Iran Deal

Dear Senator Schumer,

Your Press Release dated 08.06.15 describes how you have read the recently-negotiated agreement with Iran regarding its nuclear program.  It explains your reasoning behind your decision to vote to disapprove the deal.

Respectfully, I think that your reasoning is self-defeating.

Regarding the negotiated program of inspections and validations, you find that it is better to have the deal over the next ten years than it is to not have it, and yet the opposite is true for the succeeding ten years.  So, on the merits of the agreement, it seems that you are neutral overall.

However, it is said that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Clinton’s Blouse Versus Trump’s Blazer—The Sometimes Sad Media Coverage of the Presidential Primaries

(The following article is written by serial contributor Guy Heston, who has a life-long habit of spending vacation time in Iowa.)

We have fifteen months to go until the U.S. presidential election, plenty of time for quotable quotes, debate gaffes and such from the eventually culled list of candidates. We the electorate can endure that long process, but must we also endure the often silly media coverage? I never thought I would agree about anything with Sarah Palin (who has delivered a bonanza of quotable quotes), but her repeated references to “the lame stream media” have recently rung a bell with me, though probably not for the same reason.

U.S.A. and Iran -- questions about the deal

Admittedly, my understanding of the intricacies of the "P5 + 1 and Iran Nuclear Deal" is imperfect -- which puts me in good and plentiful company because my guess is that not more than 1 in 10,000,000 people on the planet have a perfect understanding of this agreement.

After reading overviews of the agreement, doing some research, and absorbing the reasons that some have for opposing the agreement, a few straight-forward "backgrounder" questions came to mind.  Here are those questions (some with answers); they could be directed to anybody, but probably most especially to those in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives who are opposed to the deal or thinking about opposing it: