Um, this is kind of important. It's also very under-reported and under-appreciated. In fact, other than Rachel Maddow, I can't remember a single person at any cable news outlet that pays much attention to President Obama's relentless efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
Remember this? Anyone? Bueller?
President Obama, 2009:
As a nuclear power as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility to act. We cannot succeed in this endeavor alone, but we can lead it. We can start it. So today I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. [applause] I'm not naive. This goal will not be reached quickly. Perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, yes we can."
Now the president is renewing that push for a nuclear treaty at the United Nations. Per The Hill, progress on a treaty has been stalled due to Pakistan's opposition:
Administration officials and arms control activists believe they now have a new window for action. They point to increased cooperation on the UN Security Council and the beginning of John Kerry’s tenure as secretary of State as reasons for optimism. [...]
[Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association] said progress on Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) would depend on cooperation from Pakistan, which harbors fears of archrival India having more access to fissile material. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council might hold side talks with India and Pakistan in April to try and move the treaty forward, he said. [...]
Kerry is seen as a potential facilitator in those talks because of his long-standing relationship with Pakistan. [...]
Kimball said that if Pakistan won't agree to let the treaty talks proceed, another option would be for other nuclear powers to jointly declare that they will collectively observe a moratorium on fissile material production. The United States, Russia, France and Great Britain have already acknowledged they've stopped producing fissile material, and China is believed to have ended it as well.
Maybe it's finally time to get this news around, whaddya think?
Yep, let it sink in. This twisted Tea Fart is fighting against a treaty aimed to improve people with disabilities lives simply because his Teabagger antennae are overtuned. And he hasn't ruled out running for President again in 2016.
Joining Santorum was Tea Party favorite Sen. Mike Lee from Utah and members of the Home School Legal Defense Association, a nonprofit that advocates for the rights of parents who home school. The treaty, which was negotiated during the George W. Bush administration and signed by 126 countries, will be taken up by the Senate during the lame-duck session. The document essentially requires signatories to update their laws for persons with disabilities, and supporters say it could effect real change for those facing mistreatment around the world.
But Lee said he had "grave concerns" about the treaty's impact on the authority of America, and that he had gathered signatures from 36 Republicans who opposed the ratification of the treaty for similar reasons.
Mike Farris, head of the Home School Legal Defense Association, said he worried that the treaty would give the government "unilateral ability" to impact people with disabilities while parents should "get the choice of what's best for their child." Earlier, the association had expressed concern that the treaty would allow the federal government to require children with disabilities be enrolled in public schools and not be home schooled.
"We have set leadership in the world for people with disabilities. Adopting this treaty will do nothing to improve that, or people with disabilities overseas," Santorum told Whispers. "This is undermining parents, and adopting a standard that is something that folks are justifiably afraid of—which is the state having priority over the parent as to what's in the best interest of the child."