And yet, there you are, bewaring the liberal boogeymen…
Are these new sanctions targeting Russia in general? The existing sanctions, especially the Magnitsky Act, have been denying specific people in the Russian government like Putin access to most international banking. They ARE hurting Putin; so much so he spent lots of time effort and money installing Loser Donald to end them. It’s likely he has hundreds of billions of dollars frozen.
I have this mental image of all of us wearing horned helmets and fur vests (Hagar The Horrible) stomping up and down the streets waving axes now 
This.
Putin has, according to reports, about 200 billion of his own money tied up. Additionally, it blocks the Tillerson Exxon oil deal that would have propped up “his” economy and provided more money for his “fun and games” in Ukraine.
Don’t confuse “the left” with “Democrats in Congress”. They are not the same thing.
I say everybody in the pool! We ALL get to help destroy the world, TOGETHER!
Absolutely NOT. Hell no. Every single individual person who was ever in any branch of the military took an oath to defend the country and the Constitution. They do NOT take an oath of fealty to ANY person. They do swear to follow orders, but the Constitution and the country still take precedence.
The enlisted oath for the Army, as an example:
I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
And no, they are expected to NOT follow unlawful illegal orders.
You will find any other oaths are eerily similar. Loyalty to the country, not some “overlord”.
Dude. Nothing you said there is true. Literally nothing. There is no reason to believe that elected representatives are simply supposed to take the temperature of their constituents and vote how such an opinion poll directs. Even if that were the case, you would have the same result in this case because a fairly strong majority of Americans favor the bill.
And once again, 40% of Americans were not against the bill. About 60% polled their approval of the policy, and the remainder was split. Why do you think 20% of Americans (who do not approve of Russian sanctions) ought to be able to have 51% of Congress vote their way? Even if this were a direct democracy, the bill would be enacted anyway.
I get it. It sucks to think you’re right and be on the losing side. I went through that just about 10 months ago. But the essence of your claim seems to be that the system is rigged against your opinions. I do not think that is the case: you just happen to hold unpopular opinions. Which I think at some level you recognize, right?
Yet they will ask “How High?” when Trump says “Jump.”
This all sounds great, but in practice, they will do whatever he tells them to.
Oh yes, the deficiencies in the mechanics of both of those forms of democracy are very clear to me.
As is the minority status of my position. The point is the tree was shaken and scarcely a soul fell out. Bernie and Trump are hugely popular figures yet nobody saw fit to side with them on the issue. Something is off. There is usually some leftish Democrat that is solid on these issues. Is the Dem party discipline that serious that nobody wants to be associated with the Larry David impersonator?
Very true. I sometimes fall into that Limbaughism, but here I would think at least one or two would break with the party if for nothing else but to get mentioned alongside Sanders. Someone is cracking the whip over there.
Let’s try that out: “I call POC niggers all the time, and when folks tell me I’m being offensive, I just assume that they’re being overly PC and hypersensitive.” (and before you say it’s not the same thing, it’s exactly the same thing).
Don’t 'splain to a minority group what is and is not offensive to them.
I shared the GLAAD media guide link explaining proper terminology before on this board. IIRC people just dug in their heels and reacted along the lines of “why should I listen to this organization I never heard of? Show me a declaration signed by all member nations of the UN saying it’s offensive, and then I might believe it!”
Once again, the thing that’s off is assuming they are on the same side of the issue.
Sanders: pro sanctions on Russia, pro Iran nuclear deal
Trump: mostly anti sanctions on Russia, mostly anti Iran nuclear deal
Sanders voted against the bill ONLY because he thought it jeopardized the Iran nuclear deal. Which I have to say, is probably a fair point. I think Republicans, especially Trump, are seeking to undermine the deal without having to directly take the heat for pulling out of it.
You mean like this ban, which ALL branches of the military have done NOTHING to comply?
OP, being an anti-interventionist American is like being an anti-sacrifice Aztec. Americans aren’t anti-war, they’re anti-losing.
I don’t think explaining that power structures use performative wokeness as a figleaf for their cruelty will be productive here. This board is the same demo that would think “more women guards!” is sexist.
Speaking of transgender folks and the security state, have you ever followed Chelsea Manning’s Twitter? She constantly posts anti-police state and anti-prison messages filled with rainbows and smiley faces. This is even funnier when an angry liberal shows up who wants to throw her in a cage and torture her for airing the government’s dirty laundry. She broke da rules!!
America constantly interferes in other country’s internal politics, including Russia’s after the collapse of the USSR, and to a much greater extent than spreading disinfo, handing out sacks of cash, or noodling around with targeted social media bots, so should the rest of the world have put sanctions on America like 200 years ago, or nah?
Ok so why didn’t more Democrats vote against the bill on the same ground as Sanders?
Considering the tin pot dictators we installed or propped up, and clusterfucks WE have caused or made worse, maybe they should ???
I can’t say for sure. Maybe they saw that the only way to get effective sanctions on Russia was to worry about the possible, but not certain, threat to the Iran deal later.