The ink isn’t dry on any Iran deal, and the Congress hasn’t seen the terms, but USA Today is already off to the spit-and-polish stand for Obama. The headline was “First take: Obama's winning streak continues with Iran deal.”
Reporter Ray Locker gushed:
WASHINGTON - Derided as a lame duck after his Democratic Party suffered losses in last November's midterm elections, President Obama has carved out a series of accomplishments that show he remains consequential despite the fervent desires of his adversaries.
Two weeks ago, Obama announced the United States and Cuba would open embassies in each other's capitals, a move that ended more than 50 years of diplomatic isolation between the two nations.
On Tuesday, with Vice President Biden beside him, Obama endorsed what could be his administration's signature foreign policy accomplishment - a deal that would limit Iran's nuclear program and potential to build an atomic bomb. The negotiations showed the United States could join with a diverse group of allies to reach a potential accommodation with a country that held U.S. diplomats hostage 35 years ago....
The deal announcement continues Obama's recent winning streak, which includes Cuba and the Supreme Court's rulings in support of the Affordable Care Act, his signature domestic accomplishment, and same-sex marriage.
Locker called the deal “a multilayered piece of diplomacy not seen since World War II when the United States, Great Britain and the Soviet Union joined together against Nazi Germany and Japan.” But this isn’t joining together to fight an imperialistic oppressor. It’s joining together to make concessions to one.
Critics of the emerging Iran "accomplishment" are postponed until paragraph 13, and they're not actually quoted. Locker mentions Israel and the Sunni Arab countries, but there's no mention of Republicans (or Democrats) in Congress who are opposed. Instead, Locker compared this favorably to Republican foreign dealings:
This isn't Henry Kissinger and President Nixon going to China in 1971 and 1972, deals that were hatched in total secrecy. For starters, there's no evidence the United States gave Iran classified intelligence information, as Nixon and Kissinger gave China.
This isn't Iran-Contra, in which the Reagan administration traded arms with Iran to help release hostages in Lebanon. Those were done in secret. These talks were held in hotels in Switzerland and Austria as the world press waited outside, burning their expense accounts and watching tired and testy diplomats come and go.
