Obama’s Plan to Blame Syria on Congress

gop-s6-c30Obama’s belated agreement to take the Syrian strikes before Congress, while asserting that he will not be bound by whatever Congress decides, buys him a convenient exit strategy.

The Congress trap will let Obama opt out of an attack that he is ambivalent about while blaming Republicans for destroying American credibility. Even now the progressive spin machine is roaring into action and denouncing Congress for not immediately returning to session to consider Obama’s plan.

Considering that Obama waited for two years before deciding to bomb Syria, it seems ridiculously hypocritical of his political palace guard to denounce Congress for not immediately springing into action; but hypocrisy is hardly an obstacle for a Democratic Party that dramatically reversed its position on Iraq and now once again favors unilateral wars over WMDs.

Obama’s Rose Garden speech baited the trap with its warning to Congress to avoid partisan politics.

“I ask you, members of Congress, to consider that some things are more important than partisan differences or the politics of the moment. Ultimately, this is not about who occupies this office at any given time; it’s about who we are as a country. I believe that the people’s representatives must be invested in what America does abroad,” Obama said.

That is the Catch 22 trap. Either Congress adopts an unpopular attack in order to do the supposedly responsible thing or it gets accused of sabotaging American credibility for partisan politics and is held responsible for a great many dead children.

Obama prefers creating Alinskyite political traps for his opponents over doing the responsible thing. And his favorite trap is the one that shifts the blame for his irresponsibility to the Congressional Republicans who have been his favorite target ever since Bush retired to paint dog pictures.

Either Congress “invests” in Obama’s war and immunizes him from criticism by the Republican Party. Or Obama opts out of the war and blames Republican obstructionism for undermining American credibility abroad while splitting the Republican Party between interventionists and non-interventionists.

Obama’s speech and the distorted media coverage of it have given the impression that Congress gets the final say and that Republicans either have to give Obama a blank check on Syria or get the blame. These are the same cynical tactics that Obama has employed on the economy.

When faced with a difficult political choice, Obama’s natural instinct is to find someone to blame and to use that blame to sow division among his enemies while escaping responsibility for his own disaster.

On the debt ceiling, Obama self-righteously insisted that he would not allow Congress to avoid “paying our bills”. The bills were actually his bills, but he frequently uses the singular possessive pronoun for things that he believes that he controls but does not own, like the United States military, but shifts over to the plural possessive pronoun when trying to avoid responsibility for things that he should own up to.

“Now is the time to show the world that America keeps our commitments,” Obama said in the Rose Garden. But America had made no such collective commitments. Congress certainly had not.

When avoiding responsibility, Obama uses “Our”  to mean “Mine”.  What he really means is that having made a mess of Syria, he intends to dump the problem on Congress and make it “our problem” while still keeping all of his options open.

Once Congress begins debating Syria, the media will spin it as “partisanship” and an inability to reach a decision while contrasting that unfavorably with the decisiveness that led Obama to announce that his red line had been crossed some months later. Congress will be lambasted in editorials and cartoons for being unable to make a decision while Syrian children are dying.

Congress can give Obama the option of staying out of Syria while scoring political points. And that is why the Republican Party has to be careful when navigating these treacherous political currents.

Americans largely oppose intervention in Syria. So do most other countries. The Republican Party should not undermine its 2014 prospects by rubber stamping an unpopular military campaign that will raise Obama’s profile and reward Al Qaeda. But it should also avoid giving the appearance of irresponsibility that the media will be looking to seize on.

The best way to blunt the push for war is to ask the tough questions about the links between Al Qaeda and the Free Syrian Army, why so little attention is being paid to chemical weapons manufacture by the Al Nusra Front and whether the strikes will actually destroy Assad’s WMD stockpiles or whether they are only meant as the symbolic gesture that some officials have said that they will be.

Obama has said that he does not intend to intervene in the war or to implement regime change by military means. These assertions would be more credible if he were not arming the Syrian rebels and if he were willing to carry out drone strikes against Al Nusra Front leaders, instead of limiting the attack to the Syrian military, implicitly favoring the operatives of Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Mitt Romney failed to be fully prepared when challenging Obama’s Libyan War narrative. Republicans should learn from his mistake.

Benghazi was the outcome of Obama’s Libyan War. Republicans failed to hold him accountable for that. Now Obama has thrown another war with even more dangerous implications into the lap of Congress while hoping that it will blow up in their faces.

The debate will provide a national forum to question whether we should be picking a side in this war. The interventionists will point to photos of dead children, a staple of regional conflicts, but Republicans should instead ask the hard questions about the number of dead and exiled Christians at the hands of the Islamist militias we will be fighting to protect. And they should even call on some of them to testify.

In Libya, Obama claimed that the humanitarian plight of the people of Benghazi required urgent military intervention, but it was really the Islamist militias of Benghazi that he was worried about. In Syria, any strikes will be conducted on behalf of the same Islamist militias scrambling to hold on to cities that were once full of Christians, but are now run by Sunni Islamic Jihadists implementing Islamic law at gunpoint.

Obama intends to use Syria as a weapon in a political power struggle against the United States Congress, but it’s also an opening for exposing his Muslim Brotherhood alliances and the wisdom of his Muslim Brotherhood regime change operations in Syria and Egypt.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • American1969

    This Administration’s foreign policy is chaotic and incoherent. Obama is putting us in danger not only arming our enemies, but making us look weak in the region.
    I don’t think it’s a good idea to be going into Syria. This is a civil war—-we have no business getting involved. By the way, would someone explain to me why it’s always a Progressive Democrat that gets us involved in CIVIL WARS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH US (Korea, Vietnam, Bosinia, Somalia just off the top of my head)?
    Republicans and Conservatives are warmongers? Apparently they aren’t the only ones.

  • John

    Republicans are idiots , Democrats are idiots – And America is doomed .

    • tagalog

      Our Founding Fathers were absolutely right to disdain political parties. Now we know why.

  • F-14 Navy Vet

    BO is a walking nightmare of a leader… His credibility was lost long ago when he REFUSED to trust Americans (including his own voters) with allowing Americans to see his authentic records regarding his identification and his past. The only people who hide their past in this way – are people with something to hide. Regardless – America does not need a president to place the lives of our men and women in uniform on the line, to provide military support for anti-America Al Qaeda and other terrorists associated with those who killed 4 Americans in Benghazi.

    • tatave

      Yes,but to the rest of the world,a walking joke.Quite interesting that lots of bulletins cast by armed force services at election times are counted,but Benghazi Barack ,Dick Durbin,Jean Francis Kerry,as well as the rest of the low lives,won’t hesitate to send them to harm’s way.

  • gawxxx

    I think we should bomb the ” s#$” out of washington d. c.

  • Texas Patriot

    Daniel Greenfield: “The Congress trap will let Obama opt out of an attack that he is ambivalent about while blaming Republicans for destroying American credibility.”

    I’m wondering how American credibility will be destroyed if we allow warring factions of totalitarian Muslims destroy each other. The only thing we risk losing by doing nothing is our reputation for stupidity. Unfortunately, Daniel Greenfield is starting to sound a lot like John McCain.

    • Lanna

      Maybe a setup where our enemies say, “That Obama, he can’t make his mind up about anything, so we’ll just attack America and Israel and he won’t do anything decisive!”

      • Texas Patriot

        Any enemy so foolish as to make that assumption would probably be making a very big mistake.

        • Lanna

          Never the less Obama has done dillusionary things to mess with people’s minds and deceived so many to accomplish his goals! All this is part of his goals and intentions, if we get attacked he and Washington would be in bunkers…Another way to bring us down and millions could die from a nuclear attack, that way the government could be in total control and issue marshall law.

    • tagalog

      This little play has nothing to do with objective reality. It has everything to do with our perceptions.

  • Anamah

    Please don’t let the showman distract your attention from both mega bills pending in Congress before is too late.

    Please sign the Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul petition Not to fund Obamacare…

    That is the last month to stop it…We must DEFUND OBAMACARE NOW!!!
    And the House MUST REJECT this massive amnesty they call IMMIGRATION REFORM.
    If these two abominations are not banned they will kill America.

    • Lanna

      You’re right another big distraction from the issues on the table that matter to Americans!

  • canalway

    America is too big too fit into Obama’s empty suit

  • Hewlett Harris

    Because of Obama’s skin color he will never be held accountable for anything.

    • hpe reader

      How ironic that a man who bases his whole reason to exist on a claim that people treat him unfairly because of is skin color, now has skin color as his only redeeming attribute. Can you follow all of that? It’s a mad house.

      • m4253y

        i always wonder how a man who was born and raised of a white mother sees himself as black.

        when two of his black TM children whipped the 85 year old war vet with flashlights to death, why didn’t he come on TV and say ‘if i had a grandfather he would look like Delbert Belton’?

        this guy would be a psychiatrist’s dream to psychoanalyze.

        • hpe reader

          M425, Obama is one sick puppy, for sure. I used to hear stories about how much Duke University would pay for someone to donate their dead bodies to their medical research departments. I’m figuring that we could pay off the national debt with what the psych department would pay for a peek under Obama’s bonnet.

          • m4253y

            sure enough, only to be disappointed to find absolutely nothing there.

  • wildjew

    Daniel Greenfield wrote: “Mitt Romney failed to be fully prepared when challenging Obama’s Libyan War narrative. Republicans should learn from his mistake. Benghazi was the outcome of Obama’s Libyan War. Republicans failed to hold him accountable for that….”

    As Greenfeild notes, Republicans are largely to blame for the confusion in the mind of the public. The Republican party (my party) used to be strong and clear-eyed on matters related to national security / foreign policy. No longer. Even as former President George W. Bush failed to define the enemy post 9/11, Mitt Romney proved to be a similar disaster. Romney to Dan Gilgoff, US News: “Jihad (or jihadism) is not part of Islam Islam.”

    Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham (both supported Obama in Libya), Kelly Ayotte traveled to Egypt to explain to former Egyptian President Morsi why calling the Jews bloodsuckers and the sons of Apes and Pigs was not acceptable in polite company, even as they supported shoring-up the murderous (America-hating, Christian and Jew-hating) Muslim Brotherhood government with more U.S. aid. Is it any wonder Americans are confused? When Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and four of her colleagues( including Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert) called for an investigation into Muslim Brotherhood penetration into the Obama regime and related agencies, McCain led the effort to condemn Bachmann on the Senate floor, followed by Senator Marco Rubio (who distanced himself from Bachmann) and Speaker John Boehner who called Bachmann’s behavior “dangerous.” Mike Rogers, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence also distanced himself from his courageous colleague. This is what has become of the Party of Lincoln. Moral clarity? I don’t see it.

    When (in the December 10, 2011 Iowa debate) Newt Gingrich said the Palestinians are an invented people who are dedicated to Israel’s destruction, Mitt Romney, joined by Rick Santorum took issue with Gingrich in favor of Palestinian (‘two state’) cause. They opted for the phony “peace” process. Romney’s surrogate (Sen. Jim Talent) fought Christian conservatives on our national platform writing committee for the Palestinian jihad against Israel. One delegate argued that, in endorsing the two-state solution, the “Republicans were dictating the terms of a peace agreement to the Israeli government.” Do you think?

    “The overwhelming majority of Republicans don’t support the creation of another terror state like the ones that have since been created in southern Lebanon and Gaza,” declared South Carolina delegate Randy Page. “We cannot continue to endorse [President Barack] Obama’s policy of forcing Israel to negotiate in the face of suicidal risk.”

    Alas, to no avail. Mitt Romney and Sen. Talent prevailed. Republicans support Israel’s dismemberment at the hands of savages every bit as much as Democrats.Is it any wonder the public is confused which of these two parties is the national security party? In light of all this morass and moral confusion withing the Party of Lincoln, is it any wonder Obama is having his way with these the Republicans?

    • Texas Patriot

      What’s your point? That no one in our government is willing to take off the blinders? Maybe the upcoming debate will help on that score. Someone will surely ask the question, “Mr. President. Why do you want to commit the military of the United States of America in order to prevent President Assad from killing Al Qaida?”

      • wildjew

        Republicans should be obliterating this evil man in the White House on what SHOULD be our turf; our strong suit. I’ve not seen anything like this in my forty plus years as a registered Republican. It’s pathetic. But since 9/11, I’ve not seen any, moral clarity from the leaders of my party. Have you? Where is / was Rush Limbaugh? Where was / is Sean Hannity? Why didn’t anyone call out former President George W. Bush on all the untruths he told the nation about Islam? Why didn’t any conservative leader, writer, pundit, call out Mitt Romney for the lies he told the public about the enemy? Did you see any articles on this page taking Romney to task for supporting the jihad against Israel; for saying jihad is not a tenet of Islam? That we don’t have a strong national security Republican president is a disgrace. That conservatives carry water for Republicans who dissimulate about the global jihad is appalling.

        • Texas Patriot

          WJ: “I’ve not seen any, moral clarity from the leaders of my party. Have you?”

          Ted Cruz is beginning to make some interesting points on the subject. Otherwise, no, I haven’t.

          • wildjew

            I hope Ted Cruz will get it right on Islam. I have been waiting for Cruz (who I tend to like) on national security, foreign policy issues; issues relating to Israel, etc. I read a couple or so weeks back Cruz joined Senator Paul calling for ending aid to Egypt’s military because of the coup which deposed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. Granted, we should have a discussion on ending foreign aid which I support in principle but why punish Egypt now? Since then, now that the military is bringing some stability to Egypt, I’ve not seen anything further from Ted Cruz on Egypt. Have you? He should NOT listen to John McCain or Lindsey Graham or Marco Rubio. Can we agree on that? Some eleven or twelve years post 9/11, how can any American, much less a United States Senator or a Governor or a Congressman not be up to speed on Islam and the global jihad? Why aren’t they reading Jihad Watch and all the great books Spencer and other scholars on Islam have written? Did you see all the incredibly foolish things Romney said? How he essentially agreed with Obama’s dangerous foreign policy? What is wrong with my party?

          • Texas Patriot

            I think it’s a case of intellectual laziness and profound psychological denial, stemming from just not wanting to come to grips with how serious the problem really is or what that may mean for the West. It’s much easier to pretend that Islam is a “religion of peace” and that terrorists are just a few bad apples. If one thing should be clear at this point, it’s that Islam is not a religion of peace. Not even Muslims think that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eoHMicqnz8

          • NAHALKIDES

            I’d say you’ve pegged the psychological evasion at work regarding the nature of Islam.

          • Texas Patriot

            It’s like little children playing on the beach and not wanting to notice the storm clouds gathering on the horizon. Very dangerous.

    • johnnywood

      Everything you say is correct my friend. Too bad the Rinocrats can`t see it.

  • Lanna

    This whole situation gets more weird by the day, this guy does not have normal thought patterns. Syria crossed the red line months ago, but no apparent hurry as there is today. All of a sudden warships are gathering around Syria, decision delayed, and Obama has his people manning the phones to strongarm Congress to vote for this decision, once again when 80% of the American people say something worse will come out of this conflict, just like Obamacare….This is all so predictable…and the end goal is to create a war in the Middle East and Pull Israel into the conflict…that has been the goal all along, the anti-semetism that was alive with Hitler and the Nazis is alive and well today! This isn’t about a humanitarian mission, there are bigger conquests for this administration. Note how our economy, jobs, and energy policy to get us off foreign oil is never on the front burner, and never working for the American people. In an already weakened economy, and a military that has been cut, this is the worst decision ever to create another war front. Then Obama wants to cut our nuclear weapons when other rogue nations are increasing theirs. Ever wonder at the true priorities of this President who sends our money and our troops to help muslims fight muslims and change regimes in the MIddle East. Take a lesson from Egypt!

  • Spinoneone

    As you point out, Mr. Greenfield, Commander Zero is trying to get Congress to accept the blame for whatever happens in Syria and future potential military confrontations regardless of which way they vote. A “no” takes him off the hook, and a “yes” puts the blame squarely on the Congress.

    That, however, is the tip of the iceberg. 0 is a ruthless politician. He is attempting to put in place a strong leftist/progressive/Fascist infrastructure on which his next, he hopes, Democratic successor can build but which a Republican successor would find very difficult to dismantle. He wants a legacy to include 0care/green energy/crony capitalism and he is certain that the slimestream media will continue to give him its fawning support. He is also certain, in fact, assured, that future historians will rate him a “great” president….for fear their peers will otherwise accuse them of being racists. His grasp seeks control of at least 60% of the people to assure a permanent Democratic/Fascist administration of the U.S.A.

  • Texas Patriot

    I think that most knowledgable observers would agree that Western governments have never really had a rational strategy for dealing with the threat of totalitarian Islam. Maybe the upcoming debate will help on that score. Someone will surely ask the following question: “Mr. President. Why do you want to commit the military of the United States of America in order to prevent President Assad from killing Al Qaida by any means necessary? Perhaps you would like the rest of the world to start questioning your methods for killing them? Remember, Mr. President, President Assad is in a struggle for his very survival against the same ideology that destroyed the One World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001. Our enemies recognize no limits on how they are permitted to destroy us. Is it a wise strategy to place limits on how we can defend ourselves?”

  • tagalog

    Obama’s going to do the old one-two on this one. He’s saying that he’s going to refer Syria to Congress, but if Congress says no he might send the troops anyway, as he has the power to do so. Congress might say no or yes. If Yes, then Obama can say Congress authorized it and it’s OK. If No, Obama will do what Congress said and blame Congress for not doing the thing Obama claims is morally right. Either way he’s off the hook. Good one, Mr. Prez. Also nice wag-the-dog end run around the other scandals that are brewing up.

    And Hewlitt Harris is right. Obama will NEVER be impeached. No one is going to support ousting our first black President. No one.

    • johnnywood

      It is sad that so many Americans are so blind and afraid of being falsely accused of being “racists” to stand up to the Libtards. Time for a “slapdown”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/melvin.polatnick Melvin Polatnick

    There is no better hit man than Assad, he has killed thousands of al-Qaeda members. If he gave up his alliance with Russia and stopped badmouthing the US,Assad would be a good friend.

  • kT TK

    McCain, Graham, and all the Republicans are being set up for the liberal blame game. When are the the republicans going to learn to fight dirty and underhanded and back stabbing like democrats?

    • johnnywood

      It is time for the Democraps in Congress to experience some crushed testicles and have some of their blood spilled in the aisles

  • John Davidson

    I guess manipulating others is alright even when lives are at stake.

  • tatave

    The intervention in Syria will be a complete fiasco.Benghazi Barack will blame Congress for it.Blame it for authorising him. to go to war,and still blame Congress if he doesn’t get the authorisation.

  • nelly2004

    americans don’t want war, blaming this on the Republicans is not going to hurt them if anything it will help them

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bryan-Schmick/100000836170959 Bryan Schmick

      As long as people remember Pelosi going behind Bush’s back to meet with Assad while Bush was trying to isolate Syria and Hillary Clinton’s saying Assad is a moderate we can work with.

  • ziggy zoggy

    What is an “Islamist?” Is that different from a Muslim? Is Obama an “Islamist?”

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bryan-Schmick/100000836170959 Bryan Schmick

      Islam is a religion. A person that follows Islam is called a Muslim.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      An Islamist is a Muslim political activist

  • CTsOpinion

    This article goes straight to the point of our Petulant Punk POTUS’s perfidy to his oath of office.

  • Digli

    .
    Why not use our resources to help refugees?
    Send aid to Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan with codicils and guarantees that safe guard the implementation and distribution of the aid.
    Use our power to help get people to safety rather than to make them even more unsafe.
    How is nerve gas use worse in any degree than North Korean concentration camps or African slavery?
    Why is Drone strike collateral damage better than Syrian civil war collateral damage?
    Ask a grieving Syrian mother if she has a preferred way for her child to die.
    These politicians don’t have a brain between them.
    Let the Syrian innocents flee the carnage and let us use our power to help take care of them.
    Tell the countries surrounding Syria and the world that we will help get innocents out of harms way an not ourselves contribute to the violence.
    Let the violent participants slug it out.
    How does bombing and killing and ruining yet another group of people serve our interests?

    • Suzyqpie

      All excellent points. Imagine the beleaguered citizens still in Syria living in a war zone with intermittant electricity, water, and food, awakening to the news that they will now be bombed by the United States of America, the kind and benevolent. I am taxed to imagine how anyone can think that bombing Syria, considering the conditions on the ground, is a good idea. Pres 0bama makes it sound like he can adjudicate a war plan where nothing goes wrong. Complete folly.

  • ray_in_seattle

    “The Congress trap will let Obama opt out of an attack that he is ambivalent about while blaming Republicans for destroying American credibility. Even now the progressive spin machine is roaring into action and denouncing Congress for not immediately returning to session to consider Obama’s plan.”

    This is hardball, isn’t it?

  • cathy

    Could it be that there is an Islamic plan taking place behind the scenes? Could it be that Barack Obama and his MB backers anticipate that a Congressional vote will not afford approval for a Syria Strike? Could it be that this outcome will be a foundation for not taking action to assist in defending Israel against an attack originating from one of the many Islamic enemies that surround Her.

    In other words … Barack Obama’s never had any intentions of striking Syria. It has all been a dog and pony show.

    There are those who do not give Barack Obama credit. I give him full credit. In less that five years the puppet and those who pulls his strings from within and without of the administration have been successful at “fundamentally” changing America. Think about the furthering of an Islamic appeasing/Marxist agenda. The strategy has been brilliant.

  • ProudlyUnaffiliated

    All the Republicans in the Congress should simply vote “Present.” This shows Obama the contempt he richly deserves as well as not bailing him out of his self-snookered position. Ultimately, it throws the decision back to him and then we can ask, “What say you now, Obama?” Leave it up to him to press forward into war or not, he must own it.

  • JVictor

    Reports out of Israel last week indicate that Netanyahu was days away from making pre-emptive strikes on targets in Syria and Iran. Suddenly, Obama decides to get interested in the Syrian civil war and decides to re-position some of “his” military assets in the Mediterranean Sea. There are those who are saying that the US Navy is in place to deter a Middle Eastern leader–and it’s not Assad.

    Secondly, the Hebrew Fall Feasts begin this Wednesday (September 4th) night at sundown with Yom Teruah. I am sure the media has conveniently forgotten that Yom Kippur 2013 is the 40th anniversary of the infamous Yom Kippur War that Egypt and Syria led against Israel in 1973. The dates on the Gregorian calendar will not match up because it’s solar based whereas the Hebrew calendar is lunar based. Given who the current players are in this country and in the volatile Middle East, we should not be surprised if Israel is attacked by her enemies during these Holy Convocations.

    Obama can lay the blame at Congress’ feet all he wants. The bigger issue is what is the potential impact on Israel.

    • 1mountainman1

      Interesting Timing: I am studying the King James
      “Application Study” Bible. I read a chapter, then I read the
      interpretation of the chapter below. Then I read Dr. Vernon McGees’
      interpretation of the chapter. I find the timing ironic regarding our situation with Syria. The notes in Chapter 4 (1 Samuel) say : “Romans 13:1-7 teaches that God has placed the government and its leaders in power. We may not know why, but, like David, we are to respect the positions and roles of those to whom God has given authority. There is one exception, however. Since God is our highest authority, we should not allow a leader to pressure us to violate God’s law…Don’t compromise your moral standards by giving in to group pressure or
      taking the easy way out.”

      Dr. McGee says: “I personally do not believe that the president of The
      United States, regardless of his party or character, should be made the subject of cartoon or the object of ridicule….we ought to have more respect for the office than we do…. Romans 12:19, ‘Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.’ When we take things into our own hands, we are no longer walking in faith. We are not trusting God.'”

      In other words, leave it alone. God will sort it out in His own way and time and it will be done correctly. God will take care of Syria and he will surely take care of Israel!

      PS- You may not believe in God, and if so, I do not mean to offend you. But I do.

  • cuchobear

    “Mitt Romney failed to be fully prepared when challenging Obama’s Libyan War narrative.”

    Wrong. Romney was prepared for Obama. He wasn’t prepared for Candy Crowley to be so far up Obama’s a s s

  • cuchobear

    “Mitt Romney failed to be fully prepared when challenging Obama’s Libyan War narrative.”

    Wrong. Romney was prepared for Obama. He wasn’t prepared for Candy Crowley to be so far up Obama’s ass.

  • m4253y

    Daniel, with all due respect, you have underestimated the muslim in chief’s arrogance.

    he will go to congress and whether the vote is yes or no, he will do it anyway.

    what does he have to lose? he has the lame stream media in his pocket. he has the MB in his pocket. he has all of the splintered rebel groups in his pocket. he has McCain and a few other fools in pocket.he has no blow back whatsoever to worry about from anyone but a few of us who know outright that he is as nuts as they come.

    a megalomaniac he is and always will be.

    because he uttered a stupid statement during a reelection run now begets acting out of humiliation. he is Allah, I am surprised you missed that point here on his current strategy. with Egypt now moving to disband the MB and moving to trials and all of the hubbub about his half brother handling the finances of the MB and the rumors spreading that Egypt plans on exposing his involvement in backing the MB, he needs a sideshow like Syria more than ever right now. Wag the dog, and wag he does well.

    cheers

  • johnnywood

    Mooslims kill each other all the time so why get involved? The Republicrats should carefully consider their options without any concern for any claims of racism or partisanship. The Libs. will hate them no matter what they do anyway.

  • Gee

    Only the President of the United States can call Congress back into session before their scheduled return – doesn’t anybody know American laws and rules?

    Do not think that the Democrats are going to blindly follow the President. I have contacted some and they too are absolutely against this latest Odumba wae

  • 1mountainman1

    Interesting Timing: I am studying the King James “Application
    Study” Bible. I read a chapter, then I read the interpretation of the
    chapter below. Then I read Dr. Vernon McGees’ interpretation of the chapter. I
    find the timing ironic regarding our situation with Syria. The notes in Chapter
    4 (1 Samuel) say : “Romans 13:1-7 teaches that God has placed the
    government and its leaders in power. We may not know why, but, like David, we
    are to respect the positions and roles of those to whom God has given
    authority. There is one exception, however. Since God is our highest authority,
    we should not allow a leader to pressure us to violate God’s law…Don’t
    compromise your moral standards by giving in to group pressure or taking the
    easy way out.”

    Dr. McGee says: “I personally do not believe that the president of The
    United States, regardless of his party or character, should be made the subject
    of cartoon or th! e object of ridicule….we ought to have more respect for the
    office than we do…. Romans 12:19, ‘Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but
    rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will
    repay, saith the Lord.’ When we take things into our own hands, we are no
    longer walking in faith. We are not trusting God.'”

    In other words, leave it alone. God will sort it out in His own way and time
    and it will be done correctly. God will take care of Syria.

  • dougjmiller

    Obama’s intended confrontation with the Assad regime in Syria has nothing to do with Israel. Obama’s foreign policy is dictated by his benefactors in the oil rich Arabian Peninsula. The rich Sunni Arab/ Moslems are scared to death of the Shia Persian/ Moslems. And the Assad regime in Syria is a satellite of the Shia dictatorship in Iran which has threatened the monarchies in the Arabian Peninsula countless times. Obama is trying to curry favor with his masters by going after Assad. At some point he will also go after the mullahs in Iran at the behest of his masters. But Obama would like to hold off on the Iranian campaign until after they nuke Israel.

  • obamathemarxist

    Republicans should call Obama’s bluff and allow air strikes, I don’t think he has the cohones to act.

  • obamathemarxist

    We should never interfere when our enemies are killing each other.

  • R. Scott Stewart

    Then we’ll need facts to point out why its not the same and Obama, Kerry and McCain are still idiots:

    President Obama is going before Congress to tell them America
    has a moral duty to intervene in Syria after the gassing of Syrians, possibly
    by the Syrian regime. He will tell them it is comparable to the Iraq invasion
    asked for by George Bush. Comparing two presidents, two calls to war, we find*:

    Bush & Iraq:

    * Saddam Hussein used gas to kill Iranians and Iraqis, and
    America had U.N. sanction to attack and police Iraqi compliance to cease-fire
    agreements. (Every major news source.)

    * His military had fired on US aircraft over a THOUSAND
    times in 10 years. (AP)

    * His nation reneged on verification his generals had agreed
    to at ceasefire to prevent a rebuilding of aggressive capabilities. (Every
    major news source.)

    * After Bush was accused of lying re: Niger yellowcake,
    Niger officials admitted Iraq had pursued Niger as a source of yellowcake. (AP)

    Joseph Wilson III was the liar, not Bush. (AP)

    * Centrifuges for production of nuclear grade material was
    found in Iraq after invasion. (Washington Post)

    * Iraqis shipped intermediate range missile engines as scrap
    in 6 months leading to war. (AP)

    * While US tactics and technology prevented deployment, huge
    amounts of tactical nerve agents ready to deploy were found in Iraqi
    stockpiles. (NPR, AP)

    * Hussein repeatedly acted against US allies we had promised
    to protect in southern and northern Iraq. (Every major news source.)

    * Czech officials in 99 to 02 insisted Mohammed Atta took
    Iraqi moneys to commit terrorism, and other 911 figures involved in the
    hijackings met Iraqi officials in Malaysia the year prior 911. (Washington Post,
    NYT, several Eastern European newspapers, English language versions.)

    Obama & Syria:

    * Someone, identity not yet proven, used gas. Past attacks
    in Syria have been linked to al Qaida factions. (Every major news source.)

    * The resistance is largely comprised of al Qaida and other
    radical Islamists Obama seems bent trying to hand the Islamic world to. (Every
    major news source.)

    International law allows unilaterally attacking other
    nations in self defense or defense of an ally. For other reasons, the Constitution
    requires approval of Congress.

    Obama, Kerry, McCain are moving this nation into a world war
    we are the aggressors in. If they succeed, 5 of Sunni Wahhabi radicalism’s
    (Muslim Brotherhood, al Qaida) top enemies will be at war with each other: Israel,
    U.S., Shiite Iran, Russia and China.

    We need to stop them. Contact your Senators and
    Representative at:

    http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

    http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

    Tell them “NO!” to Obama’s war. And then, if
    you’ve ever shared anything, share this. Only YOU can prevent World War III.

    *Sources that carried these news
    articles.

  • http://www.facebook.com/melvin.polatnick Melvin Polatnick

    Saudi and Wahhabi nationalists are now struggling to dominate the ME and its oil wealth. Once Assad is gone and Iran conquered the dreamed of Caliph will be established. Its ruler might be Obama.

  • Painter

    All Republicans should vote”Present”.

  • Robert Mull

    The American people overwhelm do not want to attack them so I think this will just be a wash.

    It would be nice if the Republicans would get out and say how it was obamas Ciro speech that started this whole mess in the middle east and that this is obamas and clintons foreign policy at work.

    This is what happens when stupid Americans elect a community organizer as President.

  • Mo86

    I was thinking along these lines and thought… wow, I am cynical. I guess I am not the only one.

    That this man Obama is doing this shows once again how morally bankrupt he really is.

    And no, Republicans won’t say or do much about this Syria mess. They’re too terrified of being called racists.

  • Inane Rambler

    Sorry, but I don’t see the endgame here. I have trouble seeing Obama going “Oh, those damn Republicans blocked my (unpopular) war, vote against them.” and having that be an effective strategy. It’s ridiculous.

  • Barb3000

    I believe there are thousands of terrorists in this country that got in here on a legal visa if their name wasn’t found on a watch list, and of course never left. This quiet hidden army could cause a enormous amount of damage whenever they are sent the word. This has always been the danger of not bothering to check on just who leaves the country and who don’t. For all their hoopla this country is to lax on security for all of the billions in taxes we shell out every year to pay for it. I know one thing this country is tired of waging constant war with nothing at all to show for it. Not even one country that we attacked is free of the Muslin Brotherhood and their followers.

  • NJK

    Egyptian Media Says Obama is a Muslim Brotherhood Member Posted by Gateway Guest Blogger on Monday, September 2, 2013, 1:46 PM – See more at:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/09/shocking-report-egyptian-media-says-obama-is-a-muslim-brotherhood-member/#sthash.RlU73WrU.dpuf

  • Ellman48

    “When faced with a difficult political choice, Obama’s natural instinct
    is to find someone to blame and to use that blame to sow division among
    his enemies while escaping responsibility for his own disaster.”

    This is Obama’s most devastating talent and, combined with the naive and clueless Republicans, it has served him well and deluded the American people each and every time he’s employed it. He’s been playing a game with the Republicans and they fell for it every time. They jump out of the plane with him but only his parachute opens after they do.

  • bitemeDC

    Republicans should take a page from Senator Obama…

    They should all vote “present”….

    • pfbonney

      I can’t believe you haven’t received more up-votes for that one, bitemeDC.

      So they should!

  • sylvester

    congress should vote to aid Assad remove rebels from Syria and call check mate on president Obama

  • GardenGnomeLF

    Democrats and jihadis are allies because they both have the same enemy, human beings.

  • EarlyBird

    “Obama’s belated agreement to take the Syrian strikes before Congress, while asserting that he will not be bound by whatever Congress decides, buys him a convenient exit strategy.”
    I agree. I have a feeling that Obama is praying that Congress will not authorize a strike on Syria. He realizes he’s gotten himself into a pickle with his confused and ambivalent Syria “policy.” He not only would get off the hook, but could make political lemonade out of lemons by showing that he respects the Constitution and its limits on executive war-making abilities.
    What FPM’s house hack, Lil’ Danny Greenfield, misses, is that the very fact of a US president going to Congress for such authorization is historic and could be an important corrective to the long tradition of presidents making extra-Constitutional acts of war. It makes it a bit tougher for the next president to not go to Congress, even if Obama is rebuffed on Syria.
    Another thing that Lil’ Danny, addled by anti-Obama hatred, misses, is that an attack on Syria greatly increases the chance of the US getting into a confrontation with Iran. That’s why AIPAC is lobbying for this attack. You’d like Israel First Greenfield would see it. Danny’s a clever boy.

  • MTF

    Every Republican should vote against the war resolution and at the same
    time say, “I cannot vote for an attack that I think is unnecessary and
    unwise but I acknowledge that the president is commander-in-chief and if
    in his judgment this war is essential to American interests I will not
    oppose his taking action on his own authority.”

    Only I’m afraid
    the Republicans are too stupid to shove his war resolution down his
    throat like that and Obama will successfully deflect the blame because
    either (1) The resolution will pass, Obama will go to war, and Obama
    will be able to blame all the children dead from American cruise
    missiles on the fact that it was the “Will of the American people as
    expressed by their representatives.” OR (2) The resolution will fail,
    Obama won’t go to war, and Obama will be able to blame all the children
    dead from Assad’s gas warfare on the fact that “I begged congress to
    allow me to cripple Assad’s ability to wage chemical warfare, but they
    refused for partisan political reasons.

    Yes, I actually believe that Boehner, McCain and the rest will allow Obama to get away with this.

  • Rushpaul Rush

    the only word that comes to mind is he is a total asshole….there, I think that covers the whole situation.

  • stargrrrrl

    every single member of congress should vote “present.”

  • pfbonney

    Daniel Greenfield, this is one of the most insightful and, likely prescient articles I have ever read.

    You were really quick to spot what Obama is up to.

    As we used to say in the Navy, “Bravo Zulu” for an excellent article.

  • http://att.net/ patty

    President Traitor refuses to take responsibility..Now, why am I not surprised. I think the cliche is called PASSING THE BUCK. We need to somehow TAKE BACK AMERICA from this man. He is leading us to DOOMSDAY..AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA CONTINUES TO PROTECT THIS LIAR.