<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Who&#8217;s Against START, And&nbsp;Why?]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p><em><span style="font-size: 8pt;">by Patrick Appel</span></em></p> <p>P.M. Carpenter <a href="http://pmcarpenter.blogs.com/p_m_carpenters_commentary/2010/12/a-binky-for-the-gop.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pmcarpenterscommentary+%28p+m+carpenter%27s+commentary%29&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader" target="_self">calls out</a> the naked partisanship of the GOP:</p> <blockquote> <p>Had this precise treaty been up for Senate ratification four years ago, they would have hailed it as a Bushian triumph of Talleyrandian proportions; Reagan vindicated, Metternich invoked -- and Senate Democrats, en masse, and like adults, would have peeplessly ratified the necessary thing.</p> <p>Yet the hardcore-base-pandering nakedness of the GOP leadership&#39;s breath-holding resistance to Start screams for no further clarity when one ponders this simple juxtaposition: on the pro-treaty side, there are former GOP Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and James Baker, as well as George H.W. Bush&#39;s former national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft; on the other, anti-treaty side, there are -- all alone -- the ... tea party types.</p> </blockquote> <p>&#0160;Greg Sargent <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/the_morning_plum_155.html?wprss=plum-line" target="_self">counts</a> noses:</p>]]></html></oembed>