From the "If Bush had done it, the media and the left (but I repeat myself) would've gone ape" file:

ABC News' Jake Tapper reports that the Obama administration will ignore that constitution-thing and implement a treaty without going to the senate for approval.

Now, that's not really a fair characterization of what's going on. Obama has every right to do what he wants within his executive responsibilities that are in line with an unratified treaty.

However, there's six months remaining before the 18-year-old START treaty expires and for some reason Obama thinks that he'll have trouble getting it through a Senate where he's got 60 Democrat votes to start?

That fact makes one wonder if Obama is more interested in getting a treaty -- possibly at the sacrifice of a missile defense system in Europe -- than he is in making sure that America is protected from rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran. There are far too many senate Democrats who aren't blinkered, anti-nuke, '60s leftists that would balk at such a treaty.

And that may be the problem with Obama on this issue -- Obama appears to actually believe that the nuclear genie can be put back in the bottle. Obama believes that if the U.S. gets rid of its nukes, then North Korea, Iran, Russia, etc., won't want theirs either. This is stupid, but not uncommon on the far left of American politics.

You want to know when there will be no more nukes? I'll tell you: When we invent something an order of magnitude more horrifying.

The Anchoress has numerous links.