Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (6538)	3/25/2009 11:46:01 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Respond to of 86355

You have not comprehended my post. So I'll try to get through to you again. is now putting tougher sanctions off indefinitely That is a reference not to the present sanctions regime, but to a toughening of the sanctions as advocated by Senator Kyl and others including the campaign-era Obama. an amendment to the Senate omnibus appropriations bill from Arizona Republican Jon Kyl, would forbid federal funds from going to companies involved in Iran's energy industry. On the House side, Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Rob Andrews sponsored complementary legislation in 2007 that would have expanded the Iran Sanctions Act to companies selling refined petroleum to Iran. See the above are ADDITIONAL extensions of the current sanctions in place. That's what Obama, in league with Congressional leaders, is apparently putting off despite the fact that he called FOR similar extensions of sanctions during the campaign. See below: Senate Dems reject Kyl's amendment on Iran This may surprise you. During the general election, Arizona Sens. Jon Kyl and John McCain agreed with Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, on something besides the importance of winning Arizona. Iran. .... Barack Obama, running for President; sounding very clear at least twice about the options: "Iran right now imports gasoline . . . if we can prevent them from importing the gasoline that they need . . . that starts changing their cost-benefit analysis. That starts putting the squeeze on them." "We should work with Europe, Japan and the Gulf states to find every avenue outside the U.N. to isolate the Iranian regime -- from cutting off loan guarantees and expanding financial sanctions, to banning the export of refined petroleum to Iran." Fast forward to the Senate floor, circa Wednesday, and a passionate appeal from Jon Kyl to support an amendment to the omnibus bill that would ban any $ in the omnibus from supporting a company that has a business presence in Iran's energy sector. It says very simply: That none of the funds made available in this appropriations legislation, can go to companies helping Iran either import or export energy or energy-related goods.... Why would American legislators and policy makers provide American taxpayer dollars to assist them? (ea) Well, apparently American legislators and policy makers don't mind it all that much. Jon Kyl's amendment was defeated just minutes ago, 53-41. Notes: Only four Democrats crossed party lines to support the amendment: Evan Bayh of Indiana; Russ Feingold of Wisconsin; Bill Nelson of Florida; Ben Nelson of Nebraska. .... gop12.com I hope you understand now. Again, you don't bother to check your facts. There is a clear pattern of your negligence in fact checking. Your credibility is on the wain. No, as I explained above, the problem is you haven't bothered to try to understand my post. I hope you do now.