Obama nominates moderate, veteran judge for Supreme Court

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:The wingnuts will be shitting bricks if Hillary wins in a landslide in November and the Senate flips back to Democratic control. The retribution for not replacing Scalia in 2016 will be a stinging one, for sure; and there will be more to follow.

Is it really worth the gamble?

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Good Man.  He is much needed.  If I were Trump, I would announce that if I am elected and the senate fails to nominate this moderate.....I will.  I would be a bold move, and one that would endure him to the moderates in this country.  It would be a brilliant move to solidify himself against the obstructionist in Congress who have been bought and paid for by special interests and campaign puppetmasters.   In any regard, swing state senators like Kirk have already moved from the dark side.   America gets that the courts cannot become part of the political process.  Yes, there are substantive differences in the politics of Presidents, and yes....there are differences in judges, but this guy is loved by everyone......Harvard and a tough prosecutor who went after gang bangers and brought the OK bombing to a successful conclusion.   Very encouraging.

As you and the other far left Progressives here know and painfully know is that there would NOT be an obstructionist congress were it NOT for the massive FAILURE OF THIS ADMINISTRATION.

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Good Man.  He is much needed.  If I were Trump, I would announce that if I am elected and the senate fails to nominate this moderate.....I will.  I would be a bold move, and one that would endure him to the moderates in this country.  It would be a brilliant move to solidify himself against the obstructionist in Congress who have been bought and paid for by special interests and campaign puppetmasters.   In any regard, swing state senators like Kirk have already moved from the dark side.   America gets that the courts cannot become part of the political process.  Yes, there are substantive differences in the politics of Presidents, and yes....there are differences in judges, but this guy is loved by everyone......Harvard and a tough prosecutor who went after gang bangers and brought the OK bombing to a successful conclusion.   Very encouraging.

As you and the other far left Progressives here know and painfully know is that there would NOT be an obstructionist congress were it NOT for the massive FAILURE OF THIS ADMINISTRATION.

Are you going to deny that Mitch McConnell called for complete obstruction of President Obama in 2009?  Are you also going to deny that the GOP has used every procedural trick in the book to avoid cooperating with the President, including shutting down the government...twice?...and at enormous cost?

WHAT FAILURE?  Despite the sorry GOP, President Obama has managed remarkable gains following the disastrous presidency of George W Bush.

https://ourfuture.org/20140923/the-cost-to-our-economy-from-republican-obstruction-and-sabotage

The Republican political strategy has been to obstruct efforts to help the economy for everyone but the wealthiest few, and then campaign on complaints that the economy isn’t helping anyone but the wealthiest few. It’s working.

In President Obama’s July 12 weekly address he said, “So far this year, Republicans in Congress have blocked every serious idea to strengthen the middle class.” He could have said, “Since 2009.” Since the 2009 “stimulus,” Republicans have obstructed pretty much every effort to help the economy. In the Senate they have filibustered hundreds of bills, and since the “stimulus” they have managed to keep anything from passing that might help the economy.

In the House, Republicans have refused to allow votes on anything that seriously would help the economy, instead passing only tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, spending cuts on essential things like maintaining our infrastructure and scientific research, and cutting regulations that protect people and the environment from being harmed by corporations seeking profit.

Republicans have blocked every effort since the stimulus to maintain infrastructure, hire teachers, raise the minimum wage, give equal pay for women, stop special tax breaks for millionaires corporations (especially oil companies), stop tax breaks for sending jobs out of the country, provide student loan relief, help the long-term unemployed, and more. Instead they insist on even more tax breaks for oil companies and billionaires, on cutting environmental protections, deregulating oil companies, and so on.

Obstruction Using Senate Filibusters

How many bills have been filibustered by Senate Republicans since President Obama took office? Bloomberg’s Jonathan Bernstein, in “All Filibusters, All the Time,” writes, “The correct count of how many bills have been filibustered during Obama’s presidency is: approximately all of them.”

That’s what it means to have a 60-vote Senate, which is what Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Republicans declared as soon as Obama was elected. Almost every measure and, until Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Democrats invoked the nuclear option last fall, almost every nomination, had to have 60 or more votes to pass. That’s a filibuster.

Here are just a few of the hundreds of bills Senate Republicans have filibustered since President Obama took office — just a few:

Infrastructure bills
The following headlines are from last week’s “Full Employment Is More Than Possible. It Is Essential.“

2011: “Republicans filibuster Obama infrastructure bill”
2012: “‘Phantom filibuster’ blocking path forward for highway bill, says Reid“
2013: “Bipartisan Transportation and Housing Bill Filibustered“
Equal Pay for Women
Minimum wage increase
Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act
Bring Jobs Home Act – stop tax breaks for moving jobs and production facilities out of the country
Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act of 2011 – rehire 400,000 teachers, firefighters, paramedics and police officers.
Student loan reform – ease the crushing burden of student loan debt by at least allowing refinancing to lower interest rates
Extended unemployment benefits – for the long-term unemployed
Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) — let working people join unions – filibustered in 2007, killed by threat of filibuster 2009
Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act – let public safety officers join unions
The Buffett rule – ensure millionaires pay a comparable tax rate to middle-class Americans
Repeal Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act
What would it have meant for the economy and jobs to launch a post-stimulus effort to maintain and modernize our infrastructure? How about reversing the tax structure that pays companies to move jobs out of the country? How about equal pay for women? How about a minimum wage increase? How about hundreds of thousands of teachers and first responders going back to work? How about being able to organize into unions to fight for wages, benefits and safer working conditions? How about relief from crushing student loan debt?

All of those things blocked, and people wonder what the economy is just slogging along…

Obstruction And Economic Sabotage In The House

In the House Republican leadership has been following what is called the “Hastert Rule” to obstruct bills that would win with a majority vote. This is not a real “rule”; it is a partisan method of limiting what Democrats and moderate Republicans can accomplish. Republican leadership will not bring a bill up for a vote unless a majority of Republicans are for it. In other words, even if a bill would pass with most Democrats and some Republicans voting in favor, it can’t even get a vote unless it fits with Republican doctrine. (Actually that would be Republican funder doctrine, which is basically oil companies, Wall Street and a few ultra-billionaires.)

So instead of looking at what has been blocked in the House, which would be literally everything Democrats and up to 49 percent of Republicans think would help the economy, we should look at what has passed. What has passed is a record of economic sabotage. Republicans claim there are more 300 bills passed by the House that are held up in the Senate. (Note that The Washington Post took a look at this and found that “In 11 of the past 19 Congresses – more than half – more than 300 bills were waiting for Senate action by the time the Congress completed its work.”)

Of particular note among the passed bills is the Republican “Path to Prosperity Budget” (a.k.a. the “Ryan budget”). It is described as “Cuts spending & implements pro-growth reforms that boost job creation.” It dramatically cuts taxes on the rich. It privatizes Medicare. It cuts spending on infrastructure, health care for the poor, education, research, public-safety, and low-income programs. It turns Medicaid, food stamps, and other poverty programs into state block grants.

Tax cuts aren’t going to fund schools or repair roads and bridges. And lo and behold, this Republican budget that passed the House cuts taxes and cuts funding for even maintaining – never mind modernizing – our vital infrastructure needs. This is a budget of economic sabotage.

Other Republican House “jobs” bills, listed at Speaker Boehner’s “jobs” page include:

Repeal ObamaCare
Working Families Flexibility Act – Eliminates overtime pay
Preserving Work Requirements for Welfare Programs Act
Approve Keystone pipeline, to build a pipeline across the country so Canadian oil can be soil to China, easing an oil glut here and bringing prices back up.
More offshore oil drilling
Student Success Act – Promotes charter schools, cuts federal programs and support for schools
Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act – blocks regulations on coal ash
Energy Consumers Relief Act – block government regulation of oil companies and carbon pollution
Stop Government Abuse Act – “Provides small business owners with tools to protect against government harassment.”
Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act – “Stops the IRS from implementing the president’s health care law”
Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act – “Requires congressional approval of any new regulation with an economic cost of at least $100 million”
National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act – Facilitates the development of strategic and critical minerals used to support manufacturing jobs. (Note Senate Republicans filibustered this.)
Protecting States’ Rights to Promote American Energy Security Act – Prevents regulations on fracking
Responsible And Professionally Invigorating Development Act – Expedites the approval for new energy projects
Electricity Security & Affordability Act – Protects coal-fired plants from regulation
Preventing Government Waste & Protecting Coal Mining Jobs in America Act – prevents coal regulations
Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act
North American Energy Infrastructure Act – promotes cross-border pipelines.
The Domestic Prosperity and Global Freedom Act – Expedites the approval of liquefied natural gas export applications
Lowering Gas Prices to Fuel an America That Works Act – expanding production of oil and gas
Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act – Permanently extends a ban on Internet access taxes
OK, got that? Their “jobs” bills include things like cutting government support for schools, stopping regulations on coal ash, requiring people receiving federal assistance to work, and drill-baby-drill. Oh, the list even includes bills that Republicans filibustered in the Senate.

(You have to love the Orwellian double-speak in the titles of these bills. )

It is not clear how getting rid of public schools and replacing them with charter, private and home schools is about “jobs.” It also is not clear how banning taxes on Comcast internet access “creates jobs.”

Many of these so-called “jobs” programs are really about subsidizing and assisting the oil and coal companies that provide so much of the funding for the Republican Party and conservative propaganda apparatus. (Note that Koch Industries is at heart an oil company.) They’re just called “jobs” programs because people need jobs – because Republicans have been blocking actual jobs programs.

And what about direct sabotage? Who can forget the Republican hostage-taking of the debt ceiling, when they threatened to take down the entire world economy unless we cut back on things like maintaining our infrastructure, scientific research, public health, hiring teachers and other things we do to make our lives better? There was a direct cost of $18.9 billion, but then there was the resulting credit rating downgrade, the pullback by businesses worried that they might actually do this, and so on.

Who can forget the terrible cost to the economy of the government shutdown? There was a direct cost of $24 billion, but also the reduced fourth-quarter GDP growth from 3 percent to 2.4 percent. And the continuing harm from loss of confidence in our government’s ability to, well, govern.

The Voting Public Doesn’t Know

The Senate filibusters of real job and economic recovery efforts, the House’s so-called “jobs and growth” bills, the debt ceiling fights, the cuts in economically necessary spending like infrastructure maintenance and finally the government shutdown combine to show an incredible record of economic sabotage. This was the Republican plan, we saw it unfold, and now we see Republican campaigns running against the “Obama economy.”

However, the voting public is largely unaware of this record of obstruction and sabotage and the effect on the recovery. Seriously, go out and ask around. If you are reading this you are likely a highly-informed person. So you might be aware that there have been filibusters, but maybe not that there have been up to 500 or more Republicans filibusters.

The corporate media obscures the obstruction and sabotage. The corporate/conservative propaganda apparatus blasts out diversion and distraction. And, of course, the Democrats are not presenting a unified explanation of how Republicans are hurting the economy and how they would make things better. (Until recently President Obama blamed “Congress” in general, and the media still does.)

If Republicans take the Senate this fall, will they continue the obstruction and sabotage? What if they later also take the presidency? Here’s the thing, they know their tax cut, deregulate, smaller government nonsense does not work to boost the economy. Any economist will tell you, history will tell you, and common sense will tell you that taking money out of the economy won’t help the economy. It’s bad enough now, what happens to the country if they win? It’s well past time to be fed up with this. Vote, make sure your friends and family vote. Volunteer to talk to people about the urgency of voting. It’s all we have left.

By the way, here is what that 2009 stimulus spending accomplished — we went from losing more than 800,000 private sector jobs a month to gaining 100-250,000 a month:



You're an effing liar, Markle.

Floridatexan wrote:following the disastrous presidency of George W Bush.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:following the disastrous presidency of George W Bush.

Disastrous is an understatement and goes way beyond the disaster that was Iraq.

I have my nose into a new Kindle book that lays the case that North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation. When Kim Jong Il saw Saddam Hussein overthrown, he restarted his nuclear program in earnest as a measure to ensure the same would never happen to him. His first nuclear bomb was tested on George Bush's watch, too.

Wingnut logic and rhetoric.... You don't have to look far to see what it leads to.....

PkrBum wrote:Not accurate was too nice. There's no logic in revising a timeline that we all lived through. It's sad really.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_North_Korean_nuclear_program

1989: Soviet control of communist governments throughout Europe begins to weaken,and the Cold War comes to a close. Post-Soviet states emerge in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. As the USSR's power declines, North Korea loses the security guarantees and economic support that had sustained it for 45 years.

Through satellite photos,the U.S. learns of new construction at a nuclear complexnear the North Korean town of Yongbyon. U.S. intelligence analysts suspect that North Korea,which had signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1985 but had not yet allowed inspections of its nuclear facilities,is in the early stages of building a nuclear bomb. [5]

In response,the U.S. pursues a strategy in which North Korea's full compliance with the NPT would lead to progress on other diplomatic issues,such as the normalization of relations.

1991: The U.S. withdrew its last nuclear weapons from South Korea in December 1991,though U.S. affirmation of this action was not clear, resulting in rumors persisting that nuclear weapons remained in South Korea. [6] The U.S. had deployed nuclear weapons in South Korea since January 1958,peaking in number at about 950 warheads in 1967. [7]

1992: In May,for the first time,North Korea allows a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Agency inspection finds inconsistencies with North Korea declarations. [8] Hans Blix,head of the IAEA,and the U.S. suspect that North Korea is secretly using its five-megawatt reactor and reprocessing facility at Yongbyon to turn spent fuel into weapons-grade plutonium. Before leaving,Blixarranges for fully equipped inspection teams to follow.

The inspections do not go well. Over the next several months,the North Koreans repeatedly block inspectors from visiting two of Yongbyon's suspected nuclear waste sites,and IAEA inspectors find evidence that the country is not revealing the full extent of its plutonium production.

1993: In March,North Korea threatens to withdraw from the NPT. Facing heavy domestic pressure from Republicans who oppose negotiations with North Korea,President Bill Clinton appoints Robert Gallucci to start a new round of negotiations. After 89 days,North Korea announces it has suspended its withdrawal. (The NPT requires three months notice before a country can withdraw.)

In December,IAEA Director-General Blixannounces that the agency can no longer provide "any meaningful assurances" that North Korea is not producing nuclear weapons.

12 October 1994: the United States and North Korea signed the "Agreed Framework": North Korea agreed to freeze its plutonium production program in exchange for fuel oil,economic cooperation,and the construction of two modern light-water nuclear power plants. Eventually, North Korea's existing nuclear facilities were to be dismantled,and the spent reactor fuel taken out of the country.

26 October 1994: IAEA Chairman Hans Blixtells the British House of Commons' Foreign Affairs Select Committee the IAEA is "not very happy" with the Agreed Framework because it gives North Korea too much time to begin complying with the inspections regime. Phase III

18 March 1996: Hans Blixtells the IAEA's Board of Governors North Korea has still not made its initial declaration of the amount of plutonium they possess,as required under the Agreed Framework,and warned that without the declaration IAEA would lose the ability to verify North Korea was not using its plutonium to develop weapons.

October 1997: spent nuclear fuel rods were encased in steel containers, under IAEA inspection. [9]

31 August 1998: North Korea launched a Paektusan-1 space launch vehicle in a launch attempt of its Kwangmyŏngsŏng-1 satellite. U.S. military analysts suspect satellite launch is a ruse for the testing of an ICBM. [10] This missile flew over Japan causing the Japanese government to retract 1 billion in aid for two civilian light-water reactors. [11][12]

2002

29 January: U.S. President George W. Bush in his State of the Union Address named North Korea as part of the axis of evil,arming to threaten the peace of the world and posing a grave danger.

7 August: "First Concrete" pouring at the construction site of the light-water nuclear power plants being built by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization under the 1994 Agreed Framework. Construction of both reactors was many years behind the agreement's target completion date of 2003.

17 September: Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi becomes the first Japanese prime minister to visit Pyongyang,making a number of political and cooperative offers. [13]

3–5 October: On a visit to the North Korean capital Pyongyang,US Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly presses the North on suspicions that it is continuing to pursue a nuclear energy and missiles programme. Mr Kelly says he has evidence of a secret uranium-enriching programme carried out in defiance of the 1994 Agreed Framework. Under this deal, North Korea agreed to forsake nuclear ambitions in return for the construction of two safer light water nuclear power reactors and oil shipments from the US.

16 October: The US announces that North Korea admitted in their talks to a "clandestine nuclear-weapons" programme. [14]

17 October: Initially the North appears conciliatory. Leader Kim Jong-il says he will allow international weapons inspectors to check that nuclear facilities are out of use.

20 October: North-South Korea talks in Pyongyang are undermined by the North's nuclear programme "admission". US Secretary of State Colin Powell says further US aid to North Korea is now in doubt. The North adopts a mercurial stance,at one moment defiantly defending its "right" to weapons development and at the next offering to halt nuclear programmes in return for aid and the signing of a "non-aggression" pact with the US. It argues that the US has not kept to its side of the Agreed Framework,as the construction of the light water reactors—due to be completed in 2003—is now years behind schedule.

14 November: US President George W Bush declares November oil shipments to the North will be the last if the North does not agree to put a halt to its weapons ambitions.

18 November: Confusion clouds a statement by North Korea in which it initially appears to acknowledge having nuclear weapons. A key Korean phrase understood to mean the North does have nuclear weapons could have been mistaken for the phrase "entitled to have",Seoul says.

27 November: The North accuses the US of deliberately misinterpreting its contested statement,twisting an assertion of its "right" to possess weapons into an "admission" of possession.

December: South Korean presidential election. The Grand National Party,who opposed the Sunshine Policy,made much of the North Korean situation,although it eventually lost the election.

4 December: The North rejects a call to open its nuclear facilities to inspection.

11 December: North Korean-made Scud missiles are found aboard a ship bound for Yemen. The US illegally detains the ship,but is later forced to allow the ship to go,conceding that neither country has broken any law.

12 December: The North pledges to reactivate nuclear facilities for energy generation,saying the Americans' decision to halt oil shipments leaves it with no choice. It claims the US wrecked the 1994 pact.

13 December: North Korea asks the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to remove seals and surveillance equipment - the IAEA's "eyes and ears" on the North's nuclear status—from its Yongbyon power plant.

22 December: The North begins removing monitoring devices from the Yongbyon plant.

24 December: North Korea begins repairs at the Yongbyon plant. North-South Korea talks over reopening road and rail border links,which have been struggling on despite the increased tension,finally stall.

25 December: It emerges that North Korea had begun shipping fuel rods to the Yongbyon plant which could be used to produce plutonium.

26 December: The IAEA expresses concern in the light of UN confirmation that 1,000 fuel rods have been moved to the Yongbyon reactor.

27 December: North Korea says it is expelling the two IAEA nuclear inspectors from the country. It also says it is planning to reopen a reprocessing plant,which could start producing weapons grade plutonium within months. [15]

Phase IV

2003

2 January: South Korea asks China to use its influence with North Korea to try to reduce tension over the nuclear issue, [16] and two days later Russia offers to press Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear programme. [17]

6 January: The IAEA passes a resolution demanding that North Korea readmit UN inspectors and abandon its secret nuclear weapons programme "within weeks",or face possible action by the UN Security Council. [18]

7 January: The US says it is "willing to talk to North Korea about how it meets its obligations to the international community". But it "will not provide quid pro quos to North Korea to live up to its existing obligations". [19]

9 January: North Korea sends diplomats to meet with New Mexico governor Bill Richardson about the nuclear crisis; [20] North Korea also agrees to hold cabinet-level talks with South Korea on 21 January.

10 January: North Korea announces it will withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. [21]

20 January: US Secretary of State Colin Powell calls on the IAEA to refer the North Korean nuclear issue to the United Nations Security Council for resolution. [22]

21 January: Diplomatic talks commence between cabinet-level officials from both North Korea and South Korea; the North is represented by Kim Ryong Song. [23]

24 January: Cabinet-level talks between North and South Korea end without making progress. [24] South Korean President-elect Roh Moo-hyun proposes face-to-face meeting with Kim Jong-il. [25]

28 January: In his annual State of the Union address,President Bush alleges North Korea is "an oppressive regime [whose] people live in fear and starvation". He accuses North Korea of deception over its nuclear ambitions and says "America and the world will not be blackmailed". [26]

29 January: North Korea says Mr Bush's speech is an "undisguised declaration of aggression to topple the DPRK system" and dubs him a "shameless charlatan". At the same time,however,it reiterates its demand for bilateral talks on a non-aggression pact.

31 January: Unnamed American officials are quoted as saying that spy satellites have tracked movement at the Yongbyon plant throughout January,prompting fears that North Korea is trying to reprocess plutonium for nuclear bombs.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer delivers a stern warning that North Korea must not take "yet another provocative action... intended to intimidate and blackmail the international community".

4 February: The United States says it is considering new military deployments in the Pacific Ocean to back up its forces in South Korea,as a deterrent against any North Korean aggression that might arise in the event that the US initiated a new military campaign in Iraq.

5 February: North Korea says it has reactivated its nuclear facilities and their operations are now going ahead "on a normal footing".

6 February: North Korea warns the United States that any decision to build up its troops in the region could lead the North to make a pre-emptive attack on American forces.

12 February: The IAEA finds North Korea in breach of nuclear safeguards and refers the matter to the UN security council.

16 February: Kim Jong-il celebrates his 61st birthday,but state media warns North Korean citizens to be on "high alert".

17 February: The US and South Korea announce that they will hold joint military exercises in March.

24 February: North Korea fires a missile into the sea between South Korea and Japan.

25 February: Roh Moo-hyun sworn in as South Korean president.

2 March: Four North Korean fighter jets intercept a US reconnaissance plane in international air space and shadow it for 22 minutes.

10 March: North Korea fires a second missile into the sea between South Korea and Japan in as many weeks.

22 March: As a blistering bombing campaign pounds the Iraqi capital, and South Korean and US forces perform military exercises on its doorstep, a jumpy North denounces their "confrontational posture" and calls off talks with the South.

1 April: The US announces that "stealth" fighters sent to South Korea for a training exercise are to stay on once the exercises end.

7 April: Ministerial talks between North and South Korea are cancelled after Pyongyang fails to confirm they would take place.

9 April: The United Nations Security Council expresses concern about North Korea's nuclear programme,but fails to condemn Pyongyang for pulling out of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

12 April: In a surprise move,North Korea signals it may be ready to end its insistence on direct talks with the US,announcing that "if the US is ready to make a bold switchover in its Korea policy for a settlement of the nuclear issue,[North Korea] will not stick to any particular dialogue format".

18 April: North Korea announces that it has started reprocessing its spent fuel rods. The statement is later amended to read that Pyongyang has been "successfully going forward to reprocess" the rods.

23 April: Talks begin in Beijing between the US and North Korea,hosted by China. The talks are led by the US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian affairs,James Kelly,and the deputy director general of North Korea's American Affairs Bureau,Li Gun.

24 April: American officials say Pyongyang has told them that it now has nuclear weapons,after the first direct talks for months between the US and North Korea in Beijing end a day early.

25 April: Talks end amid mutual recrimination,after the US says North Korea had made its first admission that it possessed nuclear weapons.

28 April: US Secretary of State Colin Powell says North Korea made an offer to US officials,during the talks in Beijing,to scrap its nuclear programme in exchange for major concessions from the United States. He does not specify what those concessions are,but reports say that Pyongyang wants normalised relations with the US and economic assistance. Mr Powell says Washington is studying the offer.

5 May: North Korea demands the US respond to what it terms the "bold proposal" it made during the Beijing talks.

12 May: North Korea says it is scrapping a 1992 agreement with the South to keep the peninsula free from nuclear weapons - Pyongyang's last remaining international agreement on non-proliferation.

15 May: South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun meets US President George W Bush in Washington for talks on how to handle North Korea's nuclear ambitions.

2 June: A visiting delegation of US congressmen led by Curt Weldon says North Korean officials admitted the country had nuclear weapons had "just about completed" reprocessing 8,000 spent fuel rods which would allow it to build more.

9 June: North Korea says publicly that it will build a nuclear deterrent, "unless the US gives up its hostile policy".

13 June: South Korea's Yonhap news agency says North Korean officials told the US on 30 June that it had completed reprocessing the fuel rods.

18 June: North Korea says it will "put further spurs to increasing its nuclear deterrent force for self-defence".

9 July: South Korea's spy agency says North Korea has started reprocessing a "small number" of the 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods at Yongbyon.

1 August: North Korea agrees to six-way talks on its nuclear programme, South Korea confirms. The US,Japan,China and Russia will also be involved.

27–29 August: Six-nation talks in Beijing on North Korea's nuclear programme. The meeting fails to bridge the gap between Washington and Pyongyang. Delegates agree to meet again.

2 October: North Korea announces publicly it has reprocessed the spent fuel rods.

16 October: North Korea says it will "physically display" its nuclear deterrent.

30 October: North Korea agrees to resume talks on the nuclear crisis, after saying it is prepared to consider the US offer of a security guarantee in return for ending its nuclear programme.

21 November: Kedo,the international consortium formed to build 'tamper-proof' nuclear power plants in North Korea,decides to suspend the project.

9 December: North Korea offers to "freeze" its nuclear programme in return for a list of concessions from the US. It says that unless Washington agrees,it will not take part in further talks. The US rejects North Korea's offer. President George W Bush says Pyongyang must dismantle the programme altogether.

27 December: North Korea says it will take part in a new round of six-party talks on its nuclear programme in early 2004.

2004

2 January: South Korea confirms that the North has agreed to allow a group of US experts,including a top nuclear scientist,visit Yongbyon nuclear facility.

10 January: The unofficial US team visits the North's "nuclear deterrent" facility at Yongbyon.

22 January: US nuclear scientist Siegfried Hecker tells Congress that the delegates visiting Yongbyon were shown what appeared to be weapons-grade plutonium,but he did not see any evidence of a nuclear bomb.

3 February: North Korea reports that the next round of six-party talks on the nuclear crisis will be held on 25 February.

25 February: Second round of sixnation talks end without breakthrough in Beijing.

23 May: The UN atomic agency is reported to be investigating allegations that North Korea secretly sent uranium to Libya when Tripoli was trying to develop nuclear weapons.

23 June: Third round of sixnation talks held in Beijing,with the US making a new offer to allow North Korea fuel aid if it freezes then dismantles its nuclear programmes.

2 July: US Secretary of State Colin Powell meets the North Korean Foreign Minister,Paek Nam-sun,in the highest-level talks between the two countries since the crisis erupted.

24 July: North Korea rejects US suggestions that it follow Libya's lead and give up its nuclear ambitions,calling the US proposal a daydream.

3 August: North Korea is in the process of developing a new missile system for ships or submarines,according to a report in Jane's Defence Weekly.

23 August: North Korea describes US President George W Bush as an "imbecile" and a "tyrant that puts Hitler in the shade",in response to comments President Bush made describing the North's Kim Jong-il as a "tyrant".

12 September: Clinton Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright admits North Korean "cheating" on the Agreed Framework occurred during the "Clinton Watch."[1]

28 September: North Korea says it has turned plutonium from 8,000 spent fuel rods into nuclear weapons. Speaking at the UN General Assembly,Vice Foreign Minister Choe Su-hon said the weapons were needed for "self-defence" against "US nuclear threat".

2005

14 January: North Korea says it is willing to restart stalled talks on its nuclear programme,according to the official KCNA news agency. The statement says North Korea "would not stand against the US but respect and treat it as a friend unless the latter slanders the former's system and interferes in its internal affairs".

19 January: Condoleezza Rice,President George W Bush's nominee as secretary of state,identifies North Korea as one of six"outposts of tyranny" where the US must help bring freedom.

10 February: North Korea says it is suspending its participation in the talks over its nuclear programme for an "indefinite period",blaming the Bush administration's intention to "antagonise,isolate and stifle it at any cost". The statement also repeats North Korea's assertion to have built nuclear weapons for self-defence.

18 April: South Korea says North Korea has shut down its Yongbyon reactor,a move which could allow it to extract more fuel for nuclear weapons.

1 May: North Korea fires a short-range missile into the Sea of Japan (East Sea of Korea),on the eve of a meeting of members of the international Non-Proliferation Treaty.

11 May: North Korea says it has completed extraction of spent fuel rods from Yongbyon,as part of plans to "increase its nuclear arsenal".

16 May: North and South Korea hold their first talks in 10 months,with the North seeking fertilizer for its troubled agriculture sector.

25 May: The US suspends efforts to recover the remains of missing US servicemen in North Korea,saying restrictions placed on its work were too great.

7 June: China's envoy to the UN says he expects North Korea to rejoin the six-nation talks "in the next few weeks".

22 June: North Korea requests more food aid from the South during ministerial talks in Seoul,the first for a year.

9 July: North Korea says it will rejoin nuclear talks,as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice begins a tour of the region.

12 July: South Korea offers the North huge amounts of electricity as an incentive to end its nuclear weapons programme.

25 July: Fourth round of six-nation talks begins in Beijing.

7 August: The talks reach deadlock and a recess is called.

13 September: Talks resume. North Korea requests the building of the light-water reactors promised in the Agreed Framework,but the U.S. refuses,prompting warnings of a "standoff" between the parties.

19 September: In what is initially hailed as an historic joint statement, North Korea agrees to give up all its nuclear activities and rejoin the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,while the US says it had no intention of attacking.

20 September: North Korea says it will not scrap its nuclear programme until it is given a civilian nuclear reactor,undermining the joint statement and throwing further talks into doubt.

7 December: A senior US diplomat brands North Korea a "criminal regime" involved in arms sales,drug trafficking and currency forgery.

20 December: North Korea says it intends to resume building nuclear reactors,because the US had pulled out of a key deal to build it two new reactors.

2006

Main article: 2006 North Korean nuclear test

12 April: A two-day meeting aimed at persuading North Korea to return to talks on its nuclear programme fails to resolve the deadlock.

26 June: A report by the Institute for Science and International Security estimates that current North Korea plutonium stockpiles is sufficient for four to thirteen nuclear weapons.

3 July: Washington dismisses a threat by North Korea that it will launch a nuclear strike against the US in the event of an American attack,as a White House spokesman described the threat as "deeply hypothetical".

4 July: North Korea test-fires at least sixmissiles,including a long-range Taepodong-2,despite repeated warnings from the international community.

5 July: North Korea test-fires a seventh missile,despite international condemnation of its earlier launches. [27]

6 July: North Korea announces it would continue to launch missiles,as well as "stronger steps",if other countries were to apply additional pressure as a result of the latest missile launches,claiming it to be their sovereign right to carry out these tests. A US television network also reports that they have quoted intelligence sources in saying that North Korea is readying another Taepodong-2 long-range missile for launch. [28]

3 October: North Korea announces plans to test a nuclear weapon in the future,blaming "hostile US policy". [29] Their full text can be read at BBC News. [30]

5 October: A US envoy directly threatens North Korea as to the upcoming test,stating "It (North Korea) can have a future or it can have these (nuclear) weapons,it cannot have them both." The envoy also mentions that any attempt to test a nuclear device would be seen as a "highly provocative act". [31]

6 October: The United Nations Security Council issues a statement declaring,"The Security Council urges the DPRK not to undertake such a test and to refrain from any action that might aggravate tension,to work on the resolution of non-proliferation concerns and to facilitate a peaceful and comprehensive solution through political and diplomatic efforts. Later in the day,there are unconfirmed reports of the North Korean government successfully testing a nuclear bomb." [32]

9 October: North Korea announces that it has performed its first-ever nuclear weapon test. The country's official Korean Central News Agency said the test was performed successfully,and there was no radioactive leakage from the site. South Korea's Yonhap news agency said the test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (01:36 GMT) in Hwaderi near Kilju city,citing defense officials. The USGS detected an earthquake with a preliminary estimated magnitude of 4.2 at 41.311°N,129.114°E . [33] The USGS coordinate indicates that the location in much north of Hwaderi,near the upper stream of Oran-chon,17 km NNW of Punggye-Yok,according to analysts reports . In an interview [34] on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, former Secretary of State James Baker let it slip that North Korea “... had a rudimentary nuclear weapon way back in the days when I was Secretary of State,but now this is a more advanced one evidently.” He was Secretary of State between 1989 and 1992.

PkrBum wrote:Yes... it's true or false:

" North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation."

PkrBum wrote:Yes... it's true or false:

" North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation."

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Yes... it's true or false:

" North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation."

True

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Yes... it's true or false:

" North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation."

True

0% Fail  

Reread the factual timeline... not a twisted narrative with obvious bias and agenda.

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Yes... it's true or false:

" North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation."

True

0% Fail  

Reread the factual timeline... not a twisted narrative with obvious bias and agenda.

False

VectorMan wrote:There is no such thing as a moderate liberal.

gatorfan wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:following the disastrous presidency of George W Bush.

Disastrous is an understatement and goes way beyond the disaster that was Iraq.

I have my nose into a new Kindle book that lays the case that North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation. When Kim Jong Il saw Saddam Hussein overthrown, he restarted his nuclear program in earnest as a measure to ensure the same would never happen to him. His first nuclear bomb was tested on George Bush's watch, too.



Wingnut logic and rhetoric.... You don't have to look far to see what it leads to.....

Actually that's not a very factual summation of the convoluted NK nuclear program but when in doubt BLAME A BUSH!!!!

Perhaps this timeline will help:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/20/world/asia/northkorea-timeline.html?_r=0#/#time238_7104

Floridatexan wrote:

VectorMan wrote:There is no such thing as a moderate liberal.

You may be right, and I'll tell you why...because the other side has gone to the dark side and there really is no choice but to defeat the enemy.  

PkrBum wrote:Obama, biden, reid... et al took mcconnell's exact position when the shoe was on the other foot.

Lets just play by one set of rules and standards.

End of discussion. Right?

Floridatexan wrote:

gatorfan wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:following the disastrous presidency of George W Bush.

Disastrous is an understatement and goes way beyond the disaster that was Iraq.

I have my nose into a new Kindle book that lays the case that North Korea would not now be a declared nuclear power if the lunatics of the Bush43 administration had not undone Clinton Administration initiatives that had the North Koreans ready to suspend their nuclear program and bring their country out of isolation. When Kim Jong Il saw Saddam Hussein overthrown, he restarted his nuclear program in earnest as a measure to ensure the same would never happen to him. His first nuclear bomb was tested on George Bush's watch, too.



Wingnut logic and rhetoric.... You don't have to look far to see what it leads to.....

Actually that's not a very factual summation of the convoluted NK nuclear program but when in doubt BLAME A BUSH!!!!

Perhaps this timeline will help:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/20/world/asia/northkorea-timeline.html?_r=0#/#time238_7104

Perhaps you should do some serious research on the history of the Bush family.

2seaoat wrote: If I were Trump, I would announce that if I am elected and the senate fails to nominate this moderate.....I will.  I would be a bold move, and one that would endure him to the moderates in this country.  It would be a brilliant move to solidify himself against the obstructionist in Congress who have been bought and paid for by special interests and campaign puppetmasters.  

Wordslinger wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Obama, biden, reid... et al took mcconnell's exact position when the shoe was on the other foot.

Lets just play by one set of rules and standards.

End of discussion. Right?

Your last statement denotes the attitude of a leader.  Only you're the only one here who thinks of you in that light!  The issue is Obama's nominee and the obstructionist move of the republican senate -- a group of old white men who represent the same establishment Trump's growing crowds of dissatisfied, angry followers would love to decapitate, en-masse.

VectorMan wrote:There is no such thing as a moderate liberal.