September 19, 2015 --

The New York Times lead headline, September 3:

"A Coordinated Strategy / Brings Victory to Obama / On the Iran Nuclear Deal" [one column]

The New York Times lead headline, September 11:

"DEMOCRATS HAND / VICTORY TO OBAMA / ON PACT WITH IRAN" [two columns]

LPR has a hunch that those caps in the September 11 headline represented high-fiving at The New York Times. For LPR, however, the President's Iran "deal" is no cause for celebration -- unless one would celebrate the end of the Constitution of the United States. In a November 19 editorial, The New York Times signaled that it could accept presidential action when "he has given up waiting for Congress to act." For LPR, the Iran "deal" means that a president can enter into an agreement with a foreign power and the agreement will take effect if the president has the votes of 41 senators to sustain a filibuster.

Behold the transformation of the federal government to rule by a president with authority to act when he has given up waiting for action from Congress, and can make "deals" with other nations with the backing of 41 of 100 senators. According to a Pew Research poll, the minority congressional support for the "deal" is matched by minority support for the "deal" among the American people, with perhaps no more than 21 percent backing the Iran "deal."

Next? LPR would ask Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell: If the president decrees that he is now president-for-life, will you say that, "unfortunately we don't have the votes to end a filibuster on a Senate move to thwart the president and, therefore, must accept his lifetime presidency unless, should the president permit congressional elections, Republicans can get a filibuster-proof majority"?