I always appreciate it when someone else does the work of rounding up the liars and putting quotes from them in one place. Today's collection is actually courtesy of Newsmax, who was kind enough to put together an article of reactions from some of the top right wing liars. (See? That widget actually does come in handy sometimes!)

We begin with General Michael "Torture is Awesome" Hayden:

"It took us 18 months to get to the outline of a framework and now we're going to get to the fine print in what, three months?" asked Hayden, who led both the CIA and the National Security Agency. "That shows you how difficult this is.

"We have just agreed that Iran will be an industrial-strength nuclear state and that it will never be any more than one year away from having a nuclear weapon," he said.

Clearly Hayden didn't pay attention to the details outlined by President Obama, because if he had, he would know that Iran was about 2-3 months from having a weapon. I'll take the one-year time frame over 60-90 days, wouldn't you? It's always much more convenient for the wingers to pretend they're shocked -- SHOCKED, I say -- over something they've been proclaiming for years now.

We move next to Speaker John Boehner, who is a master of weaselspeak while saying almost nothing.

"My longtime concerns about the parameters of this potential agreement remain, but my immediate concern is the administration signaling it will provide near-term sanctions relief," said Boehner, who talked with Obama on Thursday afternoon. "Congress must be allowed to fully review the details of any agreement before any sanctions are lifted."

The Ohio Republican led a GOP delegation to Israel, Iraq, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia over the past week.

"After visiting with our partners on the ground in the Middle East this week, my concerns about Iran’s efforts to foment unrest, brutal violence, and terror have only grown," Boehner said. "It would be naïve to suggest the Iranian regime will not continue to use its nuclear program, and any economic relief, to further destabilize the region."

What the hell does John Boehner think they've been doing for years and years and years? Finally we get them to participate in cleaning up the neighborhood against ISIS and start using their power for a greater good than their own, and he's concerned about a nuclear program reduced by something like 97 percent being a bigger problem than the one they have right now?

Next in line is Senator Bob Corker, who has managed to get some Democrats to foolishly sign onto his "slap them with more sanctions" bill.

"A nuclear-armed Iran would lead to a less safe and less secure world, which is why the stakes are so high in the pursuit of a strong agreement that is fully enforceable, verifiable, and is in our national-security interests," Corker said.

"It is important that we wait to see the specific details of today’s announcement, and … we must remain clear-eyed regarding Iran’s continued resistance to concessions, long history of covert nuclear weapons-related activities, support of terrorism, and its current role in destabilizing the region."

These comments should make sane people snort, given that Iran can be nuclear-armed without an agreement, and not nuclear-armed with one. Secretary Kerry and President Obama hand them an agreement loaded with accountability and such reduced access to enriched uranium that they're not going to have a weapon, and these guys simply cannot admit what they know: This is a strong deal with lots of accountability baked in.

Senator Lindsey Graham was a bit more subtle, but not much.

"My biggest fear is a bad deal, which makes Iran a nuclear threshold state, will lead to an arms race in the Middle East," said Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "In addition, it will put our closest ally in the region, Israel, at great risk.

"The impact of a bad deal with Iran are unimaginable to our own national security, the region as a whole, and our allies," he said. "We simply cannot take President Obama’s word that it is this or war."

So for Miss Lindsey, the biggest concern is that they cannot trust their President because secret Kenyan Muslim or something. In whose interests would it be for anyone -- Obama, Kerry or anyone else -- to lie about this?

Newly-minted Senator Thom Tillis tossed his negative two cents in, too.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, who also serves on the panel, said the outline proved that "the Obama administration is willing to settle for any deal instead of prioritizing a fundamentally effective deal.

"The Iranian regime has proven their word is worth just as much as the paper it is written on and cannot be trusted to drop their nuclear weapons ambitions," he said. "This framework is undoubtedly taking several steps back in our efforts to prioritize the safety and security of the U.S., Israel, and our allies."

Shorter Sen. Tillis: F*ck diplomacy, kill them all, because they refuse to bow before American demands to give up everything.

Tehran Tom Cotton had to contribute another asinine comment to the mix:

Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, another Armed Services committee member, characterized the framework as "only a list of dangerous U.S. concessions that will put Iran on the path to nuclear weapons."

Sweetpea, Iran is and has been on the path to nuclear weapons for years and years and years. Wake up and read the briefings before you open your stupid mouth, Senator Cotton.

Moving on to Rep. Matt Salmon, who echoes Jeb Bush's ridiculous objection to any deal with Iran because they've been mean to Israel:

Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon, who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the outline sets "ourselves on a disgraceful path.

"President Obama may continue to put his trust in a nation that has time and time again publicly stated their desire to destroy America and one of her closest allies, but I will not."

We can include him in the "war is the only option" column, I guess.

Finally, North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows:

"Today's framework is far too vague for the U.S. to be immediately lifting sanctions," he said. "Without question, Tehran will consider today’s agreement, which allows it to keep its underground facilities intact, a huge victory."

Not exactly intact, Buckwheat. A reduction in stockpiles at the most rapid rate in history, plus the requirement that the underground facility be hobbled to the point where all they can produce is material for medical use and research is hardly keeping it intact.

This collection is probably not complete, but it certainly represents the gamut of the lies and spin. They're so wanton that they are willing to look like utter fools by pretending Iran wasn't close to having a nuclear weapon already, or that somehow a deal will fast-track a nuclear weapon when it's just the opposite, or that it's really just about Iran saying bad things about Israel.

If they screw up this agreement, the blood of every American who has to fight a dirty, destructive, evil war over something that could have been resolved via diplomatic means will be on their hands. That assumes they have hands after the escalation builds up in the Middle East and one of those countries decides a nuke would solve all their problems. Like Israel. Or Pakistan.

Let's see if their lies get called out. If it follows the usual press trajectory, we'll begin with the media generally being positive about the deal before shifting to the usual negative, critical, lying ways of their right-wing masters.

I fully expect Bill O'Reilly to do a 180 by tonight's show. Anyone want to bet me?