The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

#Syria: Liberals Finally Beginning to Notice Obama Isn’t Really All That?

Posted on | September 5, 2013 | 46 Comments

Governing is so much harder than campaigning:

Chris Matthews of MSNBC, who served on Capitol Hill for years as a top Democratic aide, put the party’s dilemma in stark terms on Wednesday: “I think the Democrats are going to be forced to sacrifice men and women who really, really don’t want to vote for this. They’re going to have to vote for it to save the president’s hide. That’s a bad position to put your party in.”

MSNBC reports:

In its lobbying effort to get support for military intervention in Syria, the Obama administration now has one clear target: the left. Yesterday, per the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent, White House officials held a conference call with House progressives. Today, Secretary of State John Kerry chats with liberal bloggers, and he also sits down for an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. Here’s the logic behind the effort: Locking down House Democratic — and liberal — votes allows the White House to go back to House Speaker John Boehner to get the remainder of available Republican votes. But the White House will have to deliver a large share of Democratic votes. And consequently, we can report that momentum is growing for President Obama to address the nation in a primetime speech. If Democrats — many of whom were elected in the aftermath of Iraq — are going to have to cast a tough vote for military intervention, they’re going to need cover from Obama.

What’s amazing is that Obama has turned what should have been a simple decision into this grinding ordeal. If all we’re talking about is lobbing some missiles at Damascus, Obama could have ordered that and explained it later. George W. Bush would not have hesitated.

It’s like, you never ask your wife for permission to go play poker. You tell your wife you’re going to go play poker — or, perhaps, you don’t even tell her, you just go, and explain it later.

But because Obama wanted to give the appearance of acting on behalf of a coalition — in the name of “the international community” — he has turned this into a huge drama. I’m not in favor of attacking Syria (and according to a survey of conservative bloggers by John Hawkins, I’m not alone in my opposition), but either you do it or you don’t.

This drawn-out phony “debate” is just annoying. It looks weak, and weakness is synonymous with failure in foreign policy. Anyway, here are the latest headlines:

President Obama could lose
big on Syria in House
 

Politico

Obama needs game-changer
to win House vote on Syria
 

The Hill

The “no’s” keep piling up on
Syria resolution in the House

Washington Post

President Obama Considers
Address to Nation on Syria

ABC News

Do it or don’t, but stop all this hand-wringing. Ali Akbar and I discussed Syria, among other things, in a two-hour podcast Wednesday.

 

Check Out Politics Conservative Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Ali A Akbar on BlogTalkRadio

 

Comments

  • joethefatman

    I was against a strike on Syria before I was against it.

  • JeffS

    Sounds like The Community Organizer™ is having problems organizing his community.

    It would funny if lives were not at stake.

  • M. Thompson

    Hopefully, this merely accelerates the decline of the Democratic Party.

    Sadly, it’s going to result in some Americans dying.

  • R. Matthews

    you see we on the left are going through the five stages of grief about obama the first being denial looks like some of my compatriots are hitting Anger. TBH i still think Conservatives have it wrong about 51.2% of stuff but it is looking more and more like Obama wasn’t in that slice of the pie

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    First Chicken, Alaska…then Damascus!

    Have the scales fallen off your eyes yet?

  • Ryan

    People on the Left are waking up and realizing Obama’s ego is not just bigger than America, but the entire world.

  • richard mcenroe

    Yet for all that ego he will not rest until he finds someone else to take responsibility for the decision he wants to make but simply lacks the manberries to own.

  • Kirby McCain

    When the left clamored that Bush needed a coalition, he lobbied our allies and got one. The media has chirped for thirty years that diplomacy was the strong suit of the left, yet here we are. Congress divided and not a single ally at his side it is now Obama who is the loose cannon.

    If you were getting married and had doubts, would you still do it?

    Mr. Obama, you do this and you own it.

  • robertstacymccain

    If you were getting married and had doubts, would you still do it?

    Listen to the voice of experience, America!

    Heh, heh, heh. But seriously . . .

    This is why the prominent super-hawks on the Republican side are at this point such a detriment. If the Democrat president is going to take us to war, he ought to be able to deliver a solid majority of congressional Democrats as “yes” votes, so that he does own it. If the Democrat president goes to war with a majority of Democrats voting against it, then the liberal pundits will say he fought a Republican war.

    On the other hand, Rachel Maddow is now the most bellicose hawk on TV. It’s insane.

  • scarymatt

    Who knew there were so many raaaaacists in the Democratic party?

  • JeffWeimer

    What galls me is that he is passive-aggressively forcing Republicans to pull his chestnuts out of this fire he put himself in.

  • Pingback: Vote Count Shows that President Barack Obama Could Lose Big on Military Strike in Syria in House | Scared Monkeys()

  • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

    “What’s amazing is that Obama has turned what should have been a simple decision into this grinding ordeal.”

    However, that’s what he does on virtually everything, regardless of what it is. It’s the community organizer background, where, instead of solving problems, he makes them worse.

  • La Pucelle

    Her “pacifism” has always been entirely conditional. She has some blatant anger issues.

  • Pingback: Feckless Mendacity Marks the Fall of the Unicorn King()

  • robcrawford2

    ” the prominent super-hawks on the Republican side”

    You mean like McCain? The only reason he’s a “Republican” is because he knew he could never get nominated to run for president as a Democrat.

    (He voluntarily left a communist country, after all.)

  • Pingback: Why Aren’t All Lesbians Hot, Like in the Movies? | Regular Right Guy()

  • Eastwood Ravine

    Most lesbians do have anger issues.