Will #Syria Save Us – From #ObamaCare?

Update: Barack Obama is the author of his own demise. He has no one to blame but himself for his treacherous boobery. To the extent cutting off his arms, legs and the shriveled appendage between his legs harms America, which is the rallying cry of the attack Syria crowd, the answer is not to give him more authority and more power to harm and get us all killed. The answer is to get rid of him.

To give Obama authority was a catastrophic decision made by Hopium Guzzlers in 2008 and 2012. To give Obama more authority will be a damnable act by Congress. You don’t give liquor and matches to a drunk clown in a car. Now we hear more bad news in that China sending warship to Syrian coast:

How bad of an international debacle does that turn out to be when we have ships in place, the Russians and Chinese show up, and we turn tail and leave? It wouldn’t be the reality of what happened, but that’s how it could easily be spun on the international stage.

We’ve been writing for a long time that Obama will get us all killed. The answer is to cut off his hands, not give him more authority to do damage to the United States – and get rid of him NOW.


Syria has the capacity, the motivation and the opportunity to destroy ObamaCare. The timetable of events favors a Syria attack on ObamaCare too.

Consider, on the eve of September 11, the anniversary of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks (and the Benghazi terrorist attack) Barack Obama will try to bamboozle and bore the nation into another middle-east fiasco. The U.S. Senate will hold its critical cloture vote exactly on September 11. If the Senate decides to give bumbling, incoherent, Obama authority to attack Syria (remember when we all criticized George W. Bush for what we said was a none too subtle attempt to link an attack on Iraq with the World Trade Center terrorist attacks?) that “victory” will be in some part attributable to a conflation of Syria chemistry and burning lower Manhattan.

If the Senate and the House provide liquor to the drunken clown in a car the House will then vote the following week. Will Obama ignore the House on Syria attack? It’s possible Obama will do the maximum boob move and attack Syria with the House of Representatives and the American people against him as the Senate narrowly gives him liquor in the car. In either case this means an attack on Syria around the time that the ObamaCare websites are supposed to begin to function.

Do not forget that those ObamaCare websites have not yet been certified as “secure”. Indeed the certification of “secure” has been delayed until the day before these ObamaCare websites are set to begin operation. Yup, the very day before these websites, which will grab treasures for hackers such as potential blackmail information on the health of the sucker registrant, Social Security numbers, salary information, job information, home information, will be the day set aside to certify these websites as “secure” to receive this vital information. It’s a hackers paradise.

Enter the Syrian Electronic Army. Mandy Nagy of Legal Insurrection has been tracking the Syrian Electronic Army:

Syrian Electronic Army says it may retaliate if US strikes Syria

The Syrian Electronic Army, which has been grabbing headlines in recent days after its attack that disrupted the NY Times and Twitter, says it may retaliate using “methods of causing harm” for the US economy if the US strikes Syria. [snip]

But many are skeptical of the Syrian Electronic Army’s abilities.

To date, the group hasn’t really employed much in the way of sophisticated hacking. Their efforts have largely been that of phishing and social engineering. They’ve also been creative enough to find other sources of dependent weaknesses to exploit, rather than going after the big targets directly. And the SEA’s goal has been more about grabbing attention and getting its pro-Assad message out than it has been about causing any real damage. [snip]

The majority of experts seem to agree that any retaliation from the SEA would likely be more of a nuisance than a sophisticated attack that could do significant damage to a target.

But as I’ve written previously, it doesn’t necessarily take a sophisticated hacking to cause damage. Sometimes disinformation can be nearly as damaging when disseminated in a strategic fashion (though the US has been lucky in avoiding this for the most part thus far, minus a close call). Whether or not the SEA has that level of vision is a different story and is unknown, but it would certainly behoove media outlets and other institutions to include such precautions in their standard security planning nonetheless.”

If the S.E.A. wants a target as soft as Barack Obama’s manboobs the ObamaCare exchanges are it:

“The Department of Health and Human Services won’t certify that the so-called Obamacare “data hub” used to collect and verify personal health and financial information of health insurance applicants is secure until the system kicks in on October 1–unless further delays push it back further.

The department’s assistant inspector general told a convention of auditors Tuesday morning that the office handling Obamacare, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, is still testing to make sure the system is secure from hackers and other digital attacks.

Kay Daly said that CMS has promised the HHS inspector general that the system security certification will come on time, the day before Obamacare kicks in. But in a sign of doubt, she added, “We are looking forward to seeing how this all works out.”

In her address to the American Institute of CPAs, she said that CMS is “looking at the vulnerability assessments of the hub” used by state, federal and insurance company officials to judge applicants. The information being collected includes salary, Social Security numbers, personal health information and even pregnancy status.

Daly said that the system doesn’t store data, but lawmakers on Capitol Hill have worried that it is too vulnerable to a hacker attack.”

The FBI is concerned enough about the Syrian Electronic Army to issue an advisory. The S.E.A. has already hacked the New York Times website which has been operating for years and has been “secure” for years. The “secure” Times website went down repeatedly over several days thanks to the Syrian Electronic Army.

The “media is going down” chortled the Syrian Electronic Army. According to Legal Insurrection the S.E.A. has already attacked Twitter, Huffington Post, “Thomson Reuters, NPR, The Guardian, CBS, BBC, Reuters and Al-Arabiya, as well as the Financial Times, ITV News, The Onion and E!Online”. All these websites have been operating for years, and presumably “secure” for decades since the dawn of the internet. It’s not just Big Media under attack by S.E.A. Syrian Electronic Army Defaces US Marines Recruitment Website

Is it likely that the Syrian Electronic Army will scuttle Barack Obama’s clowning achievement? Ordinarily we would bet against that happening but the ironies erupting from Obama’s bungling on Syria are so many and so stark only a card counter would bet against it. Here we have Obama and his “antiwar” minions arguing that Syria has weapons of mass destruction, an authorization vote on September 11 in the senate, “stand by the president” arguments, etc. – in short all the arguments Barack Obama made against George W. Bush are now being made by Barack Obama.

Some are concerned that if the congress votes down the Syrian authorization we will be without a president for three years – that is cause for rejoicing, not lamentation. In late August we made the argument that It’s Barack Obama In Crisis, Not America. A week later Nile Gardiner of the Telegraph echoed many of our points:

“Obama’s ‘red line’ remarks on Syria were a train wreck. The president’s credibility is on the line, not America’s

President Obama has done himself no favours today with his disingenuous statements on Syria in Stockholm alongside Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt. As The Weekly Standard first reported, Barack Obama claimed “he didn’t set a red line” on Syria’s use of chemical weapons, arguing that “the world set a red line” when it passed the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention prohibiting the use of chemical weapons. He also declared that his credibility isn’t on the line, but Congress’s credibility, America’s credibility and the international community’s credibility is at stake if military action isn’t taken on Syria. [snip]

As Obama’s words made clear, he is himself 100 percent responsible for the ‘red line’ that has been laid down on Syria, a red line that he drew without much thought behind what it would entail. He made these remarks at the height of his presidential election campaign, after a year and a half of doing absolutely nothing about the crisis in Syria, no doubt in an effort to look tough and to demonstrate that he wasn’t ‘leading from behind.’

It is not America’s credibility that is on the line at the moment, or that of the United States Congress. It is the credibility of Barack Obama himself, who unwisely drew a line in the sand, and is now pushing for a military intervention in the Middle East without a clear strategy, while aggressively cutting defence spending and failing to demonstrate that a Syrian war is in the US national interest.”

America must cut off Obama like a gangrened arm. We have no doubt whatsoever that if Barack Obama loses the Syria attack authorization vote he will be broken. His presidency will be broken beyond repair. To us that is cause for applause.

The conundrum Barack Obama faces, one of his own making after repeated mistakes, bumbling and stumbling involves having drawn a red line Barack Obama must must must attack Syria or be an international rodeo clown worthy only of flung pies and seltzer sprays. But, but, but, Barack Obama has corralled himself by going to congress (in order to shift the blame for his catastrophes) to beg for an authorization vote.

Here is the conundrum Barack Obama has trapped himself with: He must attack Syria or attach a red clown nose to his face... but… he cannot be seen as a Peace Prize winning war monger baby killer… but… now he has to win the authorization vote he is likely to lose… but… to win he endangers his Obama Dimocrats in congress in the 2014 elections… but… to win on Syria he loses on fiscal votes, immigration reform, ObamaCare votes, debt ceiling votes, because he has to use the few cents of political capital he has in this the first year of his reelection…. In short: Barack Obama must attack Syria but Barack Obama must not attack Syria.

What is the worst scenario for Barack Obama? The worst outcome, one that is not so unlikely, is that the Congress rejects authorization but Obama realizes he must attack anyway to preserve some semblance of authority. At that point impeachment rears its head and we predict gale forces winds of laughter here at Big Pink.

Niles Gardiner also sees Barack Obama hitting the iceberg:

“Barack Obama is heading for a humiliating defeat over Syria: this will be a massive blow to his presidency

Politico has an eye-opening piece today revealing the extent to which the White House is staring defeat in the face over Syria. [snip]

That would represent a dramatic failure for Obama, and once again prove that his sway over Congress is extraordinarily limited. The loss would have serious reverberations throughout the next three months, when Obama faces off against Congress in a series of high-stakes fiscal battles.

If Obama doesn’t get Congressional backing for military action, he could still go ahead with strikes against Syria, but it would be a huge political gamble. It would probably be a bridge too far for a president with sinking approval ratings, and his party facing crucial midterm elections in 2014. A defeat in Congress would be a massive blow to the Obama presidency, as well as to the president’s personal credibility, and could well amount to the biggest humiliation of his career so far.”

At the DailyBeast, Obama crotch sucker Michael Tomasky is weeping and denouncing his fellow “liberals” for not bowing down to the tin plate idol:

“I’m sure liberal members of Congress who’ve announced they’re voting no—Raúl Grijalva, Alan Grayson, Charlie Rangel, Barbara Lee, and about 17 others—have spent a heck of a lot of time thinking about what could go wrong if we do strike. I bet they haven’t given a moment’s thought to what could go wrong if we don’t.”

We’ve thought and written about those issues and have better answers than Tomasky. Tomasky’s real agenda is to float Obama’s boat not watch it sink. We say sink the sucker. It is better to be leaderless than have a leader take you down the wrong path.

Obama crotch licker Ronald Brownstein, like Tomasky is also trying to save Barack by blaming America and the military:

“America’s Sharp Turn Inward

The widespread ambivalence over Syria is the culmination of a mood that has almost completely reversed what had been a rising tide toward interventionism. The public no longer believes in the military’s capacity to yield lasting results. [snip]

For nearly a decade, from Bill Clinton’s first-term moves into Haiti and Bosnia through George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003, the current of American foreign policy moved steadily toward greater tolerance of military intervention abroad. The division, ambivalence, and hesitation in both parties about intervening in Syria culminate a subsequent decade that has almost completely reversed this tide.

The unease about military action in Syria has many roots. But its core is a diminished faith that U.S.-led military actions can produce benefits that exceed their costs, especially in the Middle East.”

Brownstein wants to shift Barack Obama’s failures and bumbling stumbling boobery onto the lap of the American public and the military. But the American public has great confidence in the American military. The American public places the greatest trust in the American military in poll after poll. What Americans do not trust is the boob in the White House. Brownstein loves himself the boob so Brownstein will make excuses for Barack the boob and blame everyone else for Obama’s ceaseless rodeo booberies.

Why should anyone lament the destruction of the Barack Obama presidency? After last Saturday’s announcement of “share the blame” congressional vote Barack Obama went golfing with dumb as a golf ball Joe Biden. Today, Barack Obama is back on the golf course with his male staff members playing with balls and sticks. While some lament the end of the Obama presidency Barack Obama is celebrating with a golf game. Instead of working on work that needs to be done Barack is working on swinging balls. Work? What work?:

“Obama ‘Imploding’ in the House

I was just talking to a Capitol Hill source who thinks there are maybe two dozen Republican votes for the authorization, no more — and there probably won’t be more. [snip]

2) The chickens are coming home to roost in terms of the non-existent White House relationship with Capitol Hill. He shared a few stories of the chief White House lobbyist either not knowing key players he should know or not being recognized himself by key players (tellingly, my source doesn’t know his name);

3) Even as the vote is swinging the wrong way, there seems to be no urgency on the part of the White House, which should be in a near panic. [snip]

It’s hard to find a precedent for a president imploding on something this big,” he says.

Keith Koffler at WhiteHouseDossier has supported an attack on Syria. But Koffler sees the feathers flying:

“Obama’s Chickens are Coming Home to Roost

You know, I’ve been casually telling people that I thought Obama was in the end going to win the vote on Syria. [snip]

If this were Bill Clinton or George W. Bush, I’d think yeah, it will pass in the end. But not this guy. I can’t say that Obama’s motion to attack Syria will fail, but I can’t say it will pass either. Because Obama has acted very unpresidential for the past four and a half years. [snip]

You really get the feeling with this president that he’d rather be left alone in the Oval Office or on the golf course with his little friends than hang out with the riffraff from Capitol Hill. Obama lacks strong relationships there, even with his allies.

I covered both Bush and Clinton, and I’d constantly see a line of lawmakers’ cars parked on the West Wing driveway while their owners hashed something out with the president in the Oval Office. With Obama, the driveway is always nice, tidy and empty. [snip]

We used to require a couple of years of experience of presidential candidates before we leased them the White House. Obama was elected having proven nothing about himself to the public other than an ability to get elected and write autobiographies. And now we see he is entirely bereft of the skills needed to function effectively as president.

Koffler notes that Obama’s one real, albeit hated, achievement is ObamaCare. Now we discover Obama using secure White House bunker for meetings on ObamaCare for some reason. Maybe the reason is the Syrian Electronic Army or maybe they just like those comfy chairs. It’s possible the Syrian Electronic Army will erase even that ObamaCare achievement by making registration so impossible or so dangerously leaky that the websites ObamaCare built will have no one to come. Much like those daisy print Vietnam era anti-war posters “What if they gave an war ObamaCare and no one came?”

On ObamaCare, the debt ceiling, immigration reform, on his entire presidency Barack Obama is in the death throes. This is cause for rejoicing, not lamentation.

We’re the ones that in April declared Barack Obama a lame duck after he lost the vote on gun control. We’re the ones that announced immigration reform was dead on the day of the Boston Bomber terrorist attack. We certainly are not going to lament the lame duck now a dead duck.

No phony tears here. No worries about supporting a drunk clown driving us into that proverbial ditch he used to speak about so often. Syria might not only save us from ObamaCare but from other Obama boobfests to come.

What we do wonder about is Barack Obama’s bag man fixer, Syrian Antoin “Tony” Rezko, sitting in a prison as his crooked pal Barack is laid low by his fellow Syrians. What must Rezko be thinking as he rots in jail for protecting his pal?


113 thoughts on “Will #Syria Save Us – From #ObamaCare?

  1. Sink him, don’t save him:


    President Obama’s decision to seek political cover for his plan to bomb Syria by going to Congress is on the verge of blowing up in his face Friday, as two outside vote counters now show a majority of the House of Representatives oppose granting Obama authorization to strike Syria. [snip]

    Bonamici became the 217th “no” or “lean no” vote on the progressive blog Firedoglake’s Syria Whip Count. FDL shows 83 Republicans and 23 Democrats as firm “no’s” on the Syria vote, with another 78 Republicans and 42 Democrats leaning against. An ABC News whip count also shows 217 votes against bombing, although they show only 71 firm votes against (57 R, 14 D) and 146 likely to oppose (106 R, 40 D).

    Not an issue to organize around

    Even worse for Obama, his own outside lobbying organization, Organizing for Action, announced Thursday that they would not be pushing Obama supporters to support the president on Syria. “The debate in Congress over the Syria vote is not one that OFA is planning on organizing around,” OFA Executive Director Jon Carson told the Washington Examiner’s Rebecca Berg.

    The phones are melting in opposition

    Meanwhile, Americans already opposed to bombing Syria are melting the Capitol switch board. [snip]

    As bad as the situation looks now in the House, there still is a strong possibility that Democrats will rally around Obama and delivers the votes he needs ,strong>to save his presidency. “At the end of the day, a lot of these Democrats are going to be with the president,” a House Democratic aide told Politico. “Because the choice is to vote against [the Syria resolution] and turn the president into a lame duck and destroy his credibility, or swallow it and vote for something that you’re not wild about. When you’re faced with that kind of decision, most of these fence-sitters are going to come aboard.”

  2. I had turned the tv off after I saw CNN starting to crotch lick (Don Lemon) … they couldn’t verify a video they showed but thought “it might be helpful to those overseas who needed verification on what happened in Syria”….duh, like American’s are just so on board this boat that we didn’t need any more “verification” than Obummer and PlankBoard HorseFace Kerry.

    To hear that he is back on the golf course

    Well, as Rome burned……

    Be aware phone bomb links going through FB now … Monday, huge phone bomb to Washington


  3. “What must Rezko be thinking as he rots in jail for protecting his pal?”
    As a guess: Worried about his fellow Syrian Christians, not unhappy that Moslems a killing each other and hoping that Assad destroys the Islamists.

  4. Kay Daly said that CMS has promised the HHS inspector general that the system security certification will come on time, the day before Obamacare kicks in. But in a sign of doubt, she added, “We are looking forward to seeing how this all works out.”


    Do not forget that those ObamaCare websites have not yet been certified as “secure”. Indeed the certification of “secure” has been delayed until the day before these ObamaCare websites are set to begin operation. Yup, the very day before these websites, which will grab treasures for hackers such as potential blackmail information on the health of the sucker registrant, Social Security numbers, salary information, job information, home information, will be the day set aside to certify these websites as “secure” to receive this vital information. It’s a hackers paradise.


    In her address to the American Institute of CPAs, she said that CMS is “looking at the vulnerability assessments of the hub” used by state, federal and insurance company officials to judge applicants. The information being collected includes salary, Social Security numbers, personal health information and even pregnancy status.

    Daly said that the system doesn’t store data, but lawmakers on Capitol Hill have worried that it is too vulnerable to a hacker attack.”


    bottom line, the Ocare HUB is much more than a hacker’s paradise…this so called HUB is completley ‘ripe’ for multiple ‘insider jobs’

    …think “identity theft”…it is already rampant…and rampantly taking advantage of the IRS…which doles out much dinero to people using indentity theft…and they are on record as knowing it is a problem but still having no solutions…

    the IRS is only one component of the HUB…and it is already inundated with fraud and identity theft…

    …this HUB is a paradise for identity theft rings right here in the USA…lots of low lifes already working scams at this…this will just be one-stop shopping for any freaking identity they want…all they have to do is have their ‘moles’ or people working on the inside and BINGO! there goes all your private info to the highest bidders…reminds me of the scam where the salesperson in a retail store has their friend come in to make purchases or give returns…they work the scam together…

    …and don’t forget, the O admin has already stated they won’t be doing background checks on the people handling all this confidential information on all of us…

    …the whole idea of this HUB is insane…lots of big problems on the horizon

  5. O is becoming the catalyst for uniting all our enemies against us and Israel…he is going to provoke more danger and violence…

    …a colossal failure as a leader…and so easily distracted…

  6. “Because the choice is to vote against [the Syria resolution] and turn the president into a lame duck and destroy his credibility, or swallow it and vote for something that you’re not wild about. When you’re faced with that kind of decision, most of these fence-sitters are going to come aboard.”


    Saving Barack’s so-called “credibility” is not a reason to vote to for an attack on Syria. He has destroyed it on his own. His presidency is not worth salvaging – if indeed, that were even possible. With the controversy around his proposed strike, the lack of public support for it, and the reluctance of the House of Representatives to approve it, even if he receives approval from congress, Obama’s handling of this won’t be forgotten or swept under the rug, as have his other screw-ups. He’ll always own it. And, congressional approval will not enhance the chances of election or reelection of the Dims’ who are running in 2014.

    As Admin said (Paraphrasing) When it comes to taking action against Syria, Obama is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.

    I read an article a couple of days ago (I would link it, but can’t remember where I read it) that was calling out the anti-war faction of Obama supporters who so vigorously condemned Bush for the Iraq war. The article identified a number of Hollywood anti-war Obama-lovers who are either conspicuously absent on this issue, or if protesting a US attack on Syria, at all, are doing it very quietly.

    A few of those nailed in the article were George Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Tim Hutton, and of course, the ever obnoxious, Ms. Janine Garrafolo, among others. Where are these anti-war progs now ?!

  7. Freespirit, we linked to the article you are searching for. The link is in the paragraph that begins with “Is it likely that the Syrian Electronic Army will scuttle Barack Obama’s clowning achievement?” Check the link in the words “antiwar minions”.

    Obama indeed is damned no matter what he does. It is a massive monument to his utter stupidity that he is the author of his own demise. It’s justice at work that it is words, words, words that got him into trouble. We were all correct all along when we noted that his communications skills were not what his worshipers insisted they were (brilliant!). Obama is a treacherous boob and his ultimate treachery was against himself because he is such a boob. Justice at work.

  8. Why would anyone lament this?:


    Fears of wounding Obama weigh heavily on Dems ahead of vote

    The prospect of wounding President Obama is weighing heavily on Democratic lawmakers as they decide their votes on Syria.

    Obama needs all the political capital he can muster heading into bruising battles with the GOP over fiscal spending and the debt ceiling.

    Democrats want Obama to use his popularity to reverse automatic spending cuts already in effect and pay for new economic stimulus measures through higher taxes on the wealthy and on multinational companies.

    But if the request for authorization for Syria military strikes is rebuffed, some fear it could limit Obama’s power in those high-stakes fights.

    That has left Democrats with an agonizing decision: vote “no” on Syria and possibly encourage more chemical attacks while weakening their president, or vote “yes” and risk another war in the Middle East.

    “I’m sure a lot of people are focused on the political ramifications,” a House Democratic aide said.

    Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a veteran appropriator, said the failure of the Syria resolution would diminish Obama’s leverage in the fiscal battles.

    “It doesn’t help him,” Moran said Friday by phone. “We need a maximally strong president to get us through this fiscal thicket. These are going to be very difficult votes.” [snip]

    Moran said he doesn’t think the political aftershocks would be the “deciding factor” in their Syria votes.

    “I rather doubt that most of my colleagues are looking at the bigger picture,” he said, “and even if they were, I don’t think it would be the deciding factor.”

    Moran said the odds of passing the measure in the House looked slim as of Friday. [snip]

    Yet others see a more serious threat to the Democrats’ legislative agenda if the Syria vote fails.

    A Democratic leadership aide argued that Republicans — some of whom are already fundraising on their opposition to the proposed Syria strikes — would only be emboldened in their fight against Obama’s agenda if Congress shoots down the use-of-force resolution.

    “It’s just going to make things harder to do in Congress, that’s for sure,” the aide said Friday. [snip]

    “Should the President lose the vote in Congress, he will be severely weakened in the eyes of public opinion, the media, the international crowd and the legislative branch,” The Hill columnist John Feehery said Friday on his blog.

    Unless he wants to take the rest of his Presidency off and leave the keys with Harry Reid, that means he will have to show that he is still relevant to the process, which means he will need to somehow get a victory in the debt limit/appropriations battles that are now coming close to being engaged.”

  9. What we wrote echoed by Reuters:


    Analysis: Obama won’t say it, but vote on Syria has high stakes for his presidency

    (Reuters) – It seems that everyone in Washington is talking about it except President Barack Obama: When Congress votes on the administration’s request to use military force in Syria, the future of his presidency could well be on the line.

    A defeat, a distinct possibility, would hobble Obama in affairs both foreign and domestic, particularly if fellow Democrats collaborate in it.

    It will hurt him at a critical juncture, as he confronts not only Syria, but the nuclear activities of Iran and North Korea, another round of battles with Republicans over fiscal issues, an immigration bill, and a possibly difficult nomination fight over a new chairman of the Federal Reserve. [snip]

    My credibility is not on the line,” Obama said at a news conference in Stockholm on Wednesday, five days after he announced he would seek congressional authorization for a strike on Syria over an August 21 chemical weapons attack in that country.

    “The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’ credibility is on the line.”


    But if ever there was an “elephant” in a room, the Obama legacy is it.

    A ‘no’ vote would be a “catastrophe” for Obama, said David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official who is now president of Garten Rothkopf, an international advisory firm.

    “It would ratify the perception of him as a lame duck at one of the earliest points in recent presidential memory,” Rothkopf said. “He would appear to be weakened and unlikely to get much done during the remainder of his term.”

    “I think a ‘no’ vote would be a huge slap at the president,” said George Edwards, a presidential scholar at Texas A&M University. “It would seem to tie his hands.”

    It would hurt Obama even more if many Democrats – members of his own party – vote against him, which at the moment seems likely. [snip]

    Obama will confront a difficult challenge in October, when he faces Republican demands to make spending cuts in exchange for an increase in the nation’s borrowing limit, the debt ceiling.

    He faces another potential fight if he nominates Larry Summers, said to be his current favorite to replace Ben Bernanke at the Fed. Bernanke’s term ends January 31 and the White House has said an announcement on his successor is expected in the autumn.

    At stake domestically in the Syria vote is the president’s “political capital,” the influence that presidents gain with every victory and lose with every defeat, particularly if they have been personally engaged in the issue. [snip]

    No one doubts that Republicans would use a defeat to their advantage. A central Republican critique of Obama is that he is a weak leader. A ‘no’ vote on Syria delivered in part by Democratic lawmakers would strengthen their argument, just as the administration is preparing for the fiscal battles of the autumn.

    While the administration has sought to divorce the issue from Obama personally, the stakes for his presidency are on the minds of many Democrats in Congress as they consider their votes.

    “Sure, you weigh that,” California Democratic Representative George Miller, who has not decided which way to vote, told Reuters in an interview. “You obviously weigh that, but that cannot be the determining factor . … Obviously, I want the president to succeed.”

    But “when I run into my constituents,” Miller added, “I’ve been asking them their opinion. They are very, very deeply concerned about any involvement by us there.”

    Iran is the problem, not Syria. For those concerned that a defeat for Obama on Syria will weaken the United States – let them demand Obama resign.

  10. Such a beautiful message here today and I can add to it in a small way. But to do justice to content already here, I need to reread in greater depth. TY.
    …The president hasn’t won over liberal activist groups, either. The Associated Press reported late Saturday that MoveOn.org has spent “in the mid-five figures” to air a TV commercial urging Congress to oppose airstrikes against Syria. The 30-second ad, titled “Not Again,” SNIP
    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/08/wh-goes-all-out-to-win-syria-strike-support-ahead-obama-tuesday-speech/#ixzz2eJGiTJ4E

  11. It needs to be made clear to Congress that they are not there to save one man’s Presidency, they are there to whats best for the country not to save one mans humungous ego.

    I hope its clear to them now what a horses ass they voted in, it sure is the appropriate time to remember Hillary’s wise words.

  12. Moon, I loved that Hillary speech. A lot of noise is being made about Barack’s latest screw-up, but it ain’t coming from no “celestial choirs” lol.

  13. I have to confess that I am thoroughly amused with this whole “We want to protect Obama” meme. This is political grandstanding at its most pompous. It also proves what I have been saying for quite some time now.

    Politicians are in it for “WE THE PARTY” and not “WE THE PEOPLE”.

    I wonder how many of these Democrats up for reelection in 2014 are really willing to fall on the sword for King Obama vs. how many in the grand Obama tradition are just paying lip-service to this meme.

  14. freespirit

    September 8, 2013 at 9:06 am

    Moon, I loved that Hillary speech. A lot of noise is being made about Barack’s latest screw-up, but it ain’t coming from no “celestial choirs” lol.

    Thanks for that one, freespirit. My Pepsi just went up my nose from choking with laughter from that one. LOL indeed.

  15. This just gets curiouser and curiouser…did Assad even approve the chemical weapons?

    “BERLIN, Sept 8 (Reuters) – Syrian government forces may have carried out a chemical weapons attack close to Damascus without the personal permission of President Bashar al-Assad, Germany’s Bild am Sonntag paper reported on Sunday, citing German intelligence.

    Syrian brigade and division commanders had been asking the Presidential Palace to allow them to use chemical weapons for the last four-and-a-half months, according to radio messages intercepted by German spies, but permission had always been denied, the paper said.

    This could mean Assad may not have personally approved the attack close to Damascus on Aug. 21 in which more than 1,400 are estimated to have been killed, intelligence officers suggested.

    Germany’s foreign intelligence agency (BND) could not be reached for comment.

    Bild said the radio traffic was intercepted by a German naval reconnaissance vessel, the Oker, sailing close to the Syrian coast.

    Last week the head of the BND, Gerhard Schindler, gave confidential briefings to the German parliament’s defence and foreign affairs committees. Bild said Schindler told the defence committee that Syria’s civil war could continue for years.

    The chief of staff of Germany’s armed forces, General Volker Wieker, also told lawmakers the influence of al-Qaeda linked forces with within the rebels was becoming stronger and stronger.”


  16. SNIP Presidents come and go, but it is now obvious that virtually any ideological script—left or right—can be co-opted into service of the Imperium. The Obama White House’s preposterous drive to intervene in the Syrian tinderbox with its inherent potential for fractures and blowback across the entire Middle East is being ramrodded by the dogma of “responsibility to protect.” SNIP In case you missed it, Stockman nails the heart of US war-mongering hypocrisy with this question: “After having rained napalm, white phosphorous, bunker busters, drone missiles, and the most violent machinery of conventional warfare ever assembled upon millions of innocent Vietnamese, Cambodians, Serbs, Somalis, Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis, Yemeni, Libyans, and countless more, Washington now presupposes to be in the moral-sanctions business? There is much more to the article.SNIP
    Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/09/end-of-us-imperiumfinally-obama-about.html#sH4gxwR1k0mflTED.99

    [Mike Shedlock / Mish is a registered investment advisor representative for SitkaPacific Capital Management…You are currently viewing my global economics blog which typically has commentary every day of the week.]

  17. This NYT oped by Rep. Alan Grayson was posted at Still4Hill. I posted a couple of excerpts below. Note his statement about Hillary’s transparency with regard to the Benghazi investigation. Grayson acknowledges that “she made every single relevant classified e-mail, cable and intelligence report available to every member of Congress.” He contrasts her response to Kerry’s handling of the proposed attack on Syria. Not much info available. Hard to get access to classified information.

    Kerry is operating according to Barack’s play book: “Trust me, the facts support my position. What,? You want access to the facts? But, but, Uh Uh I just told you what the facts are. That’s all you need to know. Now, give me my way, dammit.”


    “On Syria Vote, Trust, but Verify


    “WASHINGTON — THE documentary record regarding an attack on Syria consists of just two papers: a four-page unclassified summary and a 12-page classified summary. The first enumerates only the evidence in favor of an attack. I’m not allowed to tell you what’s in the classified summary, but you can draw your own conclusion.

    On Thursday I asked the House Intelligence Committee staff whether there was any other documentation available, classified or unclassified. Their answer was “no.”


    “Over the last week the administration has run a full-court press on Capitol Hill, lobbying members from both parties in both houses to vote in support of its plan to attack Syria. And yet we members are supposed to accept, without question, that the proponents of a strike on Syria have accurately depicted the underlying evidence, even though the proponents refuse to show any of it to us or to the American public.

    In fact, even gaining access to just the classified summary involves a series of unreasonably high hurdles.

    We have to descend into the bowels of the Capitol Visitors Center, to a room four levels underground. Per the instructions of the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, note-taking is not allowed.

    Once we leave, we are not permitted to discuss the classified summary with the public, the media, our constituents or even other members. Nor are we allowed to do anything to verify the validity of the information that has been provided.

    And this is just the classified summary. It is my understanding that the House Intelligence Committee made a formal request for the underlying intelligence reports several days ago. I haven’t heard an answer yet. And frankly, I don’t expect one.

    Compare this lack of transparency with the administration’s treatment of the Benghazi attack. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, to her credit, made every single relevant classified e-mail, cable and intelligence report available to every member of Congress. (I know this, because I read them all.) Secretary Clinton had nothing to hide.
    Her successor, John Kerry, has said repeatedly that this administration isn’t trying to manipulate the intelligence reports the way that the Bush administration did to rationalize its invasion of Iraq.But by refusing to disclose the underlying data even to members of Congress, the administration is making it impossible for anyone to judge, independently, whether that statement is correct.

    Perhaps the edict of an earlier administration applies: “Trust, but verify.”



  18. Syrian Rebel American Allies Continue Christian Genocide – Obama Sends Fruit Basket Thank You – Halal of Course

    Al-Qaida Rebel fighters have taken over a Christian village northeast of the capital of Syria, Damascus. The slaughter of Christians continues as Obama’s allies cleanse the country of those EVIL Christians. This village speaks the language Christ spoke and now it is a ghost town.

    From Yahoo! News:

    A Maaloula resident said the rebels, many of them sporting beards and shouting Allahu Akbar, or God is great, attacked Christian homes and churches shortly after moving into the village overnight.

    “They shot and killed people. I heard gunshots and then I saw three bodies lying in the middle of a street in the old quarters of the village,” said the resident, reached by telephone from neighboring Jordan. “So many people fled the village for safety.”

    Now, Maaloula “is a ghost town. Where is President Obama to see what befallen on us?” asked the man, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal by the rebels.

    The barbaric Rebel advance into these towns and areas is led by the Nusra Front ­ Islamic extremists and BFFs of Obama – and they strike terror into the hearts of Syrians and religious minorities. They come to conquer – burn churches to the ground, murder, rape, pillage, torture and terrorize. And let’s not forget – cleanse in the name of Allah shouting Allah Akbar! You know, as McCain points out, just like Christians do. Hope he remembers that when the Islamists gear up in America. Moderate my ass.

    We have watched at every turn as Obama has courted Erdogan of Turkey, claiming him as his closest ally; bringing the Muslim Brotherhood into the White House; persecuting Christians at home and abroad; and forcing Islamic law and principles down our throats while disparaging America. Taqiyya reigns in our government halls and the enemies within are praying for a similar Christian cleansing and debasing in America, while Obama faces Mecca.

    See more at: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/09/syrian-rebel-american-allies-continue-christian-genocide-obama-sends-fruit-basket-thank-you-halal-of-course/#sthash.Fe5SXPxZ.dpuf

  19. I can’t wait until the denials of, “I didn’t vote for Obama!” start coming from those too ashamed to admit they voted for the color of a man’s skin over the best candidate, a woman.

  20. “Obama indeed is damned no matter what he does. It is a massive monument to his utter stupidity that he is the author of his own demise.”

    Hillary 2016

    Now that’s a bumper sticker I would love to wrap around my little car.

  21. Shadowfax 11:21 Yes. Words for the ages.
    9/8/13. Kass: As Obama stumbles on Syria, his allies doggedly spin
    SNIP But watching President Barack Obama stumble through his news conference from the G-20 summit last week and trying to talk us into war with Syria, I couldn’t help thinking about dogs. It was a stupid thought, yes, but I didn’t put it there. One of the president’s men put it there. A guy named David Axelrod, who brought it up on Twitter. Axelrod, the Democratic mouthpiece of Chicago mayors, is the guy who aligned himself with an inexperienced Illinois legislative back-bencher and ended up installing him in the White House. And after the president announced he would seek congressional approval for military strikes against Syria, Axelrod signaled his journalists by spinning them a tweet. “Big move by POTUS,” read Axelrod’s tweet. “Consistent with his principles. Congress is now the dog that caught the car. Should be a fascinating week!”
    Consistent with his principles? Like the drone strikes? Like the NSA surveillance? Like the IRS investigations of conservative groups? Like no answers about the dead from Benghazi? All those principles? If Axelrod thought last week was fascinating, this week should be even more entertaining.
    SNIP U.S. Rep. Todd Rokita, of Indiana noted the tension between the War Party neoconservatives and the conservative/libertarian wing. “There’s tremendous tension. You saw a lot of it during the sequester debate, you see it in the debt ceiling debate, and you see it in the budget process generally,” Rokita said. “Syria is a new iteration of that. … I’m not seeing an imminent threat to the United States, and that should be our standard.” America does not want to pick sides between two groups in Syria that hate us. America doesn’t want any part of this one. Only politicians and defense contractors want this war.
    Establishment Democrats and Republicans who are pushing for more American muscle in the Middle East keep talking about the need for America and the president to save face. If they truly want to save face, they’re should start with their own faces, not ours.
    They’re welcome to take their own faces to Syria and save them over there. And leave the rest of us alone.

  22. “If they truly want to save face, they’re should start with their own faces, not ours.
    They’re welcome to take their own faces to Syria and save them over there. And leave the rest of us alone.”

    Another one worthy of a bumper sticker, albeit a long one. Still, a great statement.

  23. foxy, thanks for the h/t, but I can’t take credit for posting the video. Moononpluto posted it. I can however, confirm after watching again, that it does get better with each viewing. 🙂

  24. And, not content to have been relegated to minority leader after the Dems blew the midterms, Nancy Pelosi places her credibility as leader on the line alongside that of her president, Barack. Nancy cajoled, bribed, and threatened super delegates to steal the nomination for her guy in 2008. Her ship has pretty much sunk already. It’s appropriate that it would complete the journey to the bottom side by side with Barack’s.

  25. freespirit – It’s appropriate that it would complete the journey to the bottom side by side with Barack’s.
    Yes. A tweet if too long for a bumper sticker?
    I don’t know what Greta is up to. She was a panelist on ABC this morning. I did not watch. Now out of the blue she has retweeted tweets generated by @gregmyre1 at NPR. The story nvolves a Palestinian family wiped out by Syrian gas attack. I smell Axlerod in this somewhere. I’ve blocked the NPR guy, protested to Greta, and now all that’s left is to pray this angle for sympathy does not gain steam.

  26. Admins says above:

    Obama indeed is damned no matter what he does. It is a massive monument to his utter stupidity that he is the author of his own demise. It’s justice at work that it is words, words, words that got him into trouble. We were all correct all along when we noted that his communications skills were not what his worshipers insisted they were (brilliant!). Obama is a treacherous boob and his ultimate treachery was against himself because he is such a boob. Justice at work.


    oh…how many times did we reflect here during the primaries and later beyond
    that Karma would come calling and O’s arrogant ego and “me,me, me, – I, I, I” would eventually do him in…

    a screenwriter could not make this stuff up…the ‘O peacemaker savior’ rides on to the scene…virtually no experience besides voting “present” as a state senator…and knocks off the ‘right woman for the right time’ labeling her a war monger and yesterday’s news…O will ‘turn the page’ on the “old and polarizing” leadership the Clinton’s provided…

    …he comes into his presidency and as usual has done nothing and is annoited with the Nobel Peace Prize (even his supporters are in disbelief)…then proceeds to increase all spying on Americans (see today’s WP link below) goes way beyond whatever Bush, Jr would even imagine to try to get away with…

    O goes back on all his campaign promises…transparency, Guantanamo, etc…force feeds his Ocare with no support of over half the country…

    …O starts his secret drone bombing and no ones knows how much collateral damage of innocent people…and children…that has caused…no one knows how much blood has been shed by those drones falling all over the place…he fumbles in Libya and Egypt…

    …and now O is leading the charge and provoking and instigating more violence and bloodshed…and at an enormous cost to the USA…he is, in fact, endangering us with his provocations…

    boob only begins to describe…



    Obama administration had restrictions on NSA reversed in 2011

    By Ellen Nakashima, Published: September 7

    The Obama administration secretly won permission from a surveillance court in 2011 to reverse restrictions on the National Security Agency’s use of intercepted phone calls and e-mails, permitting the agency to search deliberately for Americans’ communications in its massive databases, according to interviews with government officials and recently declassified material.

    In addition, the court extended the length of time that the NSA is allowed to retain intercepted U.S. communications from five years to six years — and more under special circumstances, according to the documents, which include a recently released 2011 opinion by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates, then chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

    Read the document

    Declassified 2011 FISA court ruling

    Opinion struck down an NSA program that unlawfully gathered thousands of electronic communications between Americans.

    Obama administration had restrictions on NSA reversed
    Move allowed agency to search for Americans’ communications.

    What had not been previously acknowledged is that the court in 2008 imposed an explicit ban — at the government’s request — on those kinds of searches, that officials in 2011 got the court to lift the bar and that the search authority has been used.

    Together the permission to search and to keep data longer expanded the NSA’s authority in significant ways without public debate or any specific authority from Congress. The administration’s assurances rely on legalistic definitions of the term “target” that can be at odds with ordinary English usage. The enlarged authority is part of a fundamental shift in the government’s approach to surveillance: collecting first, and protecting Americans’ privacy later.



    I guess O meant he would be the most transparent administration because he would have access to every citizen’s private information…and then throw it all into his Ocare HUB for everyone to dabble with…

    O is a cynical, self centered man

  27. CBS News’ Bob Schieffer announced the news on “Face the Nation” Sunday. The full interview will air on the “Charlie Rose Show” Monday night — the same day as President Obama’s recorded interviews with six networks. Portions of the interview will also air on Monday’s “CBS This Morning,” and other platforms across CBS News.

    Rose previewed the interview on Sunday, speaking on the phone from Beirut. He told Schieffer that al-Assad “denied that he had anything to do with the attack.”

    Rose traveled to the palace in Damascus for the sit-down. He was accompanied by Jeff Fager, the president of CBS News. The interview comes as the White House attempts to make the case for U.S. military intervention in Syria.


  28. Update: Barack Obama is the author of his own demise. He has no one to blame but himself for his treacherous boobery. To the extent cutting off his arms, legs and the shriveled appendage between his legs harms America, which is the rallying cry of the attack Syria crowd, the answer is not to give him more authority and more power to harm and get us all killed. The answer is to get rid of him.

    To give Obama authority was a catastrophic decision made by Hopium Guzzlers in 2008 and 2012. To give Obama more authority will be a damnable act by Congress. You don’t give liquor and matches to a drunk clown in a car. Now we hear more bad news in that China sending warship to Syrian coast:

    How bad of an international debacle does that turn out to be when we have ships in place, the Russians and Chinese show up, and we turn tail and leave? It wouldn’t be the reality of what happened, but that’s how it could easily be spun on the international stage.

    We’ve been writing for a long time that Obama will get us all killed. The answer is to cut off his hands, not give him more authority to do damage to the United States – and get rid of him NOW.


  29. huffpo viahttp://weaselzippers.us/2013/09/08/dem-jim-mcgovern-to-obama-pull-your-strike-request-its-not-passing/

    WASHINGTON — Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said Sunday that the Obama administration should accept that it doesn’t have the necessary support in Congress to authorize use of force in Syria and should stop asking for a vote.
    “If I were the president, I would withdraw my request for the authorization at this particular point,” McGovern said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I don’t believe the support is there in Congress. I think people view war as a last resort, and I don’t think people think that we’re at that point.”
    McGovern opposes intervention in Syria, along with other Democrats who have gone against the party line by opposing President Barack Obama. The Huffington Post’s whip count shows there aren’t yet enough votes for Congress to authorize the use of force, although many members are still undecided.

    Keep reading…

  30. The horrifying pictures of dead children being used by the Obama administration to justify an attack on Syria, with the claim that the Assad regime carried out the chemical attacks that killed those children, while emotionally heartbreaking, do not tell the story of those children and do not tell you the main point the Obama administration is trying to coverup.

    Those children were kidnapped over a week earlier, before they were slaughtered……. by the Obama backed Syrian rebels.

    August 11, 2013 a report discussed the rebels attacking the Latakia village and Sheikh Mohammed Reda Hatem, an Alawite religious leader in Latakia said ”Until now 150 Alawites from the villages have been kidnapped. There are women and children among them. We have lost all contact with them.”

    Some of those children were found less than two weeks later, in Ghouta, photos below:


  31. Collapse of American Influence Recalls Dis-Integration of Soviet Union, Fall of France

    Not since the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, and prior to that the fall of France in 1940, has there been so swift an erosion of the world influence of a Great Power as we are witnessing with the United States.

    The Soviet Union crumbled jurisdictionally: In 1990-1991, one country became the 16 formerly constituent republics of that country, and except perhaps for Belarus, none of them show much disposition to return to the Russian fold into which they had been gathered, almost always by brute force, over the previous 300 years.

    The cataclysmic decline of France, of course, was the result of being overrun by Nazi Germany in 1940. And while it took until the return of de Gaulle in 1958 and the establishment of the Fifth Republic with durable governments and a serious currency, and the end of the Algerian War in 1962, and the addition of some other cubits to France’s stature, the largest step in its resurrection was accomplished by the Allied armies sweeping the Germans out of France in 1944.

    What we are witnessing now in the United States, by contrast, is just the backwash of inept policy-making in Washington, and nothing that could not eventually be put right. But for this administration to redeem its credibility now would require a change of direction and method so radical it would be the national equivalent of the comeback of Lazarus: a miraculous revolution in the condition of an individual (President Obama), and a comparable metamorphosis (or a comprehensive replacement) of the astonishingly implausible claque around him.


  32. Obama has made the trip to Biden’s house while Biden is hosting an all Republican dinner tonight.

    IF the friggin Repubs send this vote to the plus column …

    WTF are they thinking??????

  33. The Rock, HTA, Foxy: You three expressed and interest in the letter I was writing to Congress, therefore this comment is addressed to you. The problem I have been wrestling with is what is really going on here, why is the mission constantly expanding and why Congress must not grant war authorization along the lines of what Corker and Menendez have proposed. I thought back to the Viet Nam era, when another imperial president managed to persuade Congress to pass the Gulf of Tonkin resolution and how that resolution was then used to cut Congress out of the loop in order to escalate that ill fated war. The final result is this last and final draft which you may wish to peruse in your own efforts to convince Congress to do the right thing here and deny Mr. Obama the authority he is requesting.


    Re. War Authorization Vote

    Dear Senator Murray:

    As you know, the United States and Britain have been conducting a covert war against the Assad regime in Syria for many years. That regime is supported by Iran and Russia.

    We and our allies Saudi Arabia and Turkey are supplying weapons and training to a violent rebel group which includes elements of al Qaeda. Those rebels are waging a bloody civil war against the Assad regime, which they are now in danger of losing.

    Consequently, President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron set the stage for direct military intervention in the Syrian civil war in the form of air strikes against the Assad regime. The scope and intensity of the proposed attack has escalated dramatically in recent days.

    For that reason, Obama and Cameron determined that it would be politically expedient to enlist the support of Congress and Parliament in this venture. However, when Mr. Cameron took the matter to Parliament, the duly elected representatives of the British People voted it down.

    Mr. Obama was unmoved by this development. His administration blamed Parliament’s rejection on the incompetence of his British counterpart. He vowed that the same result would not occur here. And he indicated that even if it does, he will proceed with military action.

    As a result, the question of war authorization has been tossed into your lap. Ultimately, you must choose between the agenda of President Obama and his hawkish Republican supporters, and the interests of the war weary and financially strapped American People you represent.

    If past is prologue, it will be hard for some Democrats to withhold war authorization, because the President is a Democrat. And, it will be hard for some Republicans because of their traditional support for national defense. To do what is right will require courage.

    Congress is a co-equal branch of government. As such, it is not required to defer to the president on this issue. On the contrary, it has a constitutional duty to decide the question of war on the merits, without regard to partisan politics, or pressure from those who would for their own self interest commit this nation to a course of action inimical to its future.

    The American People are relying upon you and your colleagues to weigh the equities of the proposed course of action with the utmost care, in terms of its legality, the comparative risks it would entail and the likelihood of success.

    To that end, the following observations are pivotal:

    1. ELECTIVE WAR: The war which the President intends to launch is an elective war, as opposed to a war of self defense. The United States has not been attacked by the Assad regime. The strategic interests of this nation are not directly affected. And, a military strike will not restore the credibility we have lost in the region in recent years due to an incoherent Middle East strategy, Arab Spring and other causal factors. In sum, we are not compelled to attack Syria.

    Obviously, Mr. Obama attempt to convince you otherwise. He will portray the civil war in Syria as America’s war. He will remind us that we are a great power. He will accuse his critics of isolationism. He will offer graphic evidence of atrocities. He will say that he has tried everything short of war to resolve the issue. He will present an air strike as a fait accompli. And he will assure us that this will be a limited war for limited humanitarian objectives.

    At this point those arguments should be greeted with a healthy dose of skepticism. It is readily apparent that outside forces are pushing this nation to war. The American People will bear the cost. And, far from a fait accompli, the military strikes he will launch are only the beginning,. Our opponent(s) are certain to retaliate in some manner.

    2. PROHIBITIVE COST: A war of this nature would consume massive amounts money which we would have to borrow from China, and our grandchildren. The preliminary estimates by the Pentagon are merely the tip of the iceberg.

    But those costs are as nothing compared to the impact which an additional war would have on the staggering economic problems which exist in this country from the collapse of the welfare state, to the bankruptcy of major cities, to the new phenomenon of permanent unemployment, to the implementation of Obamacare.

    In sum, we have neither the time, the capital nor the inclination to engage in yet another war which will benefit the few at the expense of the many. http://www.redstate.com/2013/09/06/many-miles-away-from-syria/

    3. THE SPECTRE OF IRAQ: This is hardly a case of first impression. In fact, it bears an eerie resemblance to Iraq. There as here, the war was elective, the pretext was weapons of mass destruction, and the evidence was suspect.

    The end game of that misguided endeavor was a loss of American lives, the emergence of a government hostile to American interests, a society riven with sectarian violence and the expansion of Iranian influence across the region.
    We must learn from past mistakes, lest we repeat them.

    Hans Blix, who headed the UN monitoring, verification and inspection commission charged with searching Iraq for alleged weapons of mass destruction, sees the connection. He points out that striking Syria today would be a repeat of the Iraq invasion by the US a decade ago, and would suggest that the western powers “can intervene militarily when they feel politically impelled.” http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/29/321125/blix-who-is-west-to-play-world-police/

    4. TAINTED EVIDENCE: The Administration has presented evidence to prove that Assad used chemical weapons. However, that evidence is suspect. The following articles by Larry Johnson, former CIA analyst, national security maven and featured expert on CNN explain what is really going on here, behind the scene:


    Also, a respected British journal has examined the evidence that Assad launched a chemical attack and found it to be inconclusive.


    5. FAUSTIAN PACT: Before we commence devastating air strikes on the sovereign state of Syria to aid and abet the Syrian rebels, it behooves us to know who exactly these people are.

    One Congressman posed that very question to Secretary of Defense Hagel and Secretary of State Kerry. They assured him that the rebels were trustworthy, but could not tell us very much about them. In fact, their response was nuanced and evasive. That is highly problematic because there is substantial evidence to the contrary.

    For example, there is proof that the rebels include elements of al Qaeda and other Muslim extremist factions. There is proof that that they have killed Christians. There is proof that they have executed government soldiers without a trial and buried them in mass graves like the SS once did. There is proof from the United Nations inspectors, Russia and rebel defectors, that the rebels have used chemical weapons themselves in an effort to draw the United States into their civil war. Finally, there is proof that the character witness that Senator Kerry relied upon when he assured Congress that the rebels are okay is in the employ of the rebels.

    In other words, the core strategy of Mr. Obama is to use the devil to cast out the devil, to hope that the cure is not worse than the disease, and to send a message to Iran.




    6. MISSION CREEP: The goal of the proposed military strike has escalated dramatically over the past sixty (60) days. Initially, it was to allay fears that Mr. Obama would be seen as hesitant and passive if he failed to do something. Later the goal changed to include regime change in Syria at the apparent behest of Saudi Arabia and Turkey. And, now we are told that the military strike will be much larger than previously anticipated.


    Initially, we heard that Senator McCain would vote against military authorization because the proposed strike would not be destructive enough for his appetite. Now we see Senator McCain who jokes about bombing Iran grinning like a Deaths Head and enthusiastically supporting the strike.

    It therefore appears that the goal has expanded, from a showing of strength, to regime change, to sending a clear and unambiguous signal to the leaders of Iran that that if they continue the development of a nuclear bomb and their sponsorship of terrorist groups like Hezbollah, they will be the next target. Tragically, as the goal expands arithmetically, the risk calculus expands geometrically. Before this is over, there will be many more candles to light.

    7. MEGAPOLITICAL RISKS: Former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s observation about the Iraq War proved to be true, i.e. we did not know what we did not know. And so it is here. Iran has threatened to attack Israel if we attack Syria. This would touch off a major regional war, which could set this nation on a collision course with Russia.

    If we topple Assad then al Qaeda or Muslim extremists will rule Syria, and they will have access to chemical weapons which they have used before. Escalation is likely and there is no way to backstop it.

    In advocating action, Republican neo-con John Negroponte has characterized the Syrian adventure as a Hobson’s choice between bad and worse. But if that is true, then to launch military strikes not knowing where this will lead, and given the legacy of Libya, Iraq, and Viet Nam, is madness.

    8. DIPLOMACY: I will not comment upon the failure of grand strategy and leadership which have led to this impasse. I will simply point to a quotation which sheds important light on the question which you and your colleagues must decide, i.e. whether to grant war authorization.

    “There is a very good historical precedent for a thesis which belongs to the cream of the diplomatic tradition in better times. It is the thesis that if two rivals are offering an alternative threat to the existing order and if you are unwilling to let the rascals fight it out themselves then choose carefully the time of your intervention in their struggle and see that you intervene only in time to save the weaker of the two. For as long as there are two combatants the world can breathe; but if you destroy one of them in the name of self righteousness then you are using your blood and treasure to build up the other into a greater monster than ever, and you will infallibly have to face it at the next stage of the story. In other words, the policy of ridding the world of aggression by a war of righteousness is like using the devil to cast out the devil.” (See The Conduct of War, Major General J.F.C. Fuller, p. 309).

    Turkey, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Germany and France support an air strike by the United States against Assad. However, to my knowledge none of those countries are willing to pay for it. And, with the sole exception of France, none of them are willing to put their own people in harm’s way. Their support is based on words, as opposed to action. Meanwhile, Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, Italy and Iran are unalterably opposed to such action. How they will express that opposition in the days ahead remains to be seen.

    9. THE QUESTION OF LEGALITY: Mr. Obama contends that as president, he has the right to launch such an attack without UN approval, the consent of Congress, or the support of the American People. Not surprisingly, the architect of the Iraq War, Donald Rumsfeld agrees.

    However, Constitutional experts like Judge Neopolitano strongly disagree. They point out that military action would be illegal under international law because it meets none of the four accepted standards for military intervention. Therefore, it would constitute a war crime for President Obama to proceed with an air strike against the sovereign nation of Syria. Rarely if ever do we find a public figure who is both a Nobel Prize winner and a war criminal.

    The law is well settled that the President is the chief agent of the United States with respect to foreign policy. However, under Article 1 Section 8 clause 11 of the Constitution, Congress alone has the power to declare war. And, under Article 6, the Constitution takes precedence over Acts of Congress, such as the War Powers Act upon which Mr. Obama relies.

    Secretary Kerry recognizes this problem and claims that the military strike in question would not constitute an act of war. Therefore, it does not require Congressional approval. That is a fine piece of panache from a former Yale debate team captain. But it fails to explain how a two day long bombardment of missiles and long range bombs fired from B-2 and B-52 bombers plus a relentless assault of Tomahawk missiles from four Navy destroyers upon a sovereign nation can be anything but an Act of War.

    Therefore, let us be crystal clear on this point. Unless the English language has lost all meaning the action Mr. Obama intends to take is war.


    Former UN official Hans Blix concurs with Judge Neopolitano’s interpretation of international law. He points out that the UN charter only allows the use of armed force in self-defense or with an authorization from the Security Council. Since neither of those conditions apply to the proposed US strike on Syria, it is not sanctioned by international law. Also, he dismisses Mr. Obama’s counter factual assertion that he (Obama) never established a red line which would justify an attack upon Syria, the international community did so through the Chemical Weapons Ban. Violations of that ban do not justify attacks upon a sovereign nation.


    Finally, and most significantly, we have been to this well before. In 1964, Democratic President Johnson asked Congress to authorize the use of conventional military force without a formal declaration of war. Congressional Democrats Wayne Morse and Ernest Gruening objected to “sending American Boys into combat in a war in which we have no business, which is not our war, into which we have been misguidedly drawn, which is steadily being escalated.”

    Nevertheless, Congress failed to heed those objections and passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution confident of the President’s assurances that this would be a limited war for limited objectives. But after Congress passed that limited resolution, the President relied upon it to begin a rapid escalation of American military involvement in South Viet Nam, and open warfare with North Viet Nam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Resolution.

    For these reasons, Congress should be loathe to authorize a military action which lacks international sanction, fails to attract a coalition of allies, constitutes a potential war crime and raises serious issues of Constitutional law if it is pursued without Congressional authorization.

    10. YOUR VOTE IS CRITICAL: Mr. Obama has deployed our military assets and announced his intention to strike Syria. It is hard to imagine how he can back down. Therefore, a cynic might ask what difference does it make how Congress votes? He will attack Syria either way.

    The answer is in three (3) parts:

    First of all, in the past 60 days, we have seen more factions climb aboard the air strike initiative, and each of them has its own agenda. As a result, the goal has expanded from a slap on the wrist to regime change to sending a bellicose message to Iran. Meanwhile, the personal relationship between Mr. Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin has deteriorated. The confluence of these factors has raised the risk of a super power confrontation.

    Second, it is imperative that Congress maintain its leverage and not be marginalized by an Imperial President, whether Democrat or Republican. Can this be achieved through a limited war authorization resolution like the one that defense industry Senators Corker and Mendez have put forward? The answer is no. The problem with that strategy is that as the war escalates, those limitations will be superseded by events. But the core authorization will remain in force because Congress will be hard pressed to withdraw that authority in the midst of war. And it will be used as basis for escalation, as we saw with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.

    Therefore, if Congress hopes to maintain its leverage to deal with the unknown contingencies of this improvident venture, then the only viable course of action is to withhold authorization on a military strike. That would preserve the argument advanced by Judge Neopolitano that under Article I Section 8 clause 11 Congress alone has the power to declare war, and because it did not do so in this instance, the war is unconstitutional. That argument could then be used by Congress to rein in this president if a superpower confrontation eventuates.

    Third, on an issue of this magnitude, each Member of Congress owes it to his or her constituents to declare where he or she stands. If that Member votes for this war, and the concerns noted above materialize, then it is only right that his constituents hold him accountable for his improvident decision. He may have a bright future on K-Street, but he does not belong in a deliberative body charged with protecting the interests of the American People.
    In that vein, the following is duly noted:


    In conclusion, the Framers of the Constitution anticipated that this day would come. They trusted you and your colleagues in Congress, not the President, to make the ultimate decision on whether to take the nation to war. When you took the oath you pledged to support the Constitution which codifies their vision. The future of this country is in your hands. We do not have the power as individuals that you have. We are depending on you and your colleagues to do what is right. The stakes could scarcely be higher.

    Very truly yours,

  34. Correction: Therefore, let us be crystal clear on this point. Unless the English language has lost all meaning the action Mr. Obama fully intends to take this to war.

  35. Oh please Hillary just stay out of it, why throw yourself into this mess……

    Fmr Secy Clinton to comment on Syria at White House tmrw:


    Hillary Rodham Clinton will use a previously scheduled visit to the White House on Monday as an opportunity to comment on the crisis in Syria, a topic she has quietly advised government officials on, but has avoided speaking publicly about.

    Both Mrs. Clinton and her daughter, Chelsea, will attend a White House event on Monday to discuss wildlife trafficking, a topic that the former secretary of state has adopted as part of an array of charitable causes. But the visit will also serve as an opportunity for Mrs. Clinton to reinforce her support for President Obama’s decision to strike Syria and urge lawmakers to authorize at the move.

    Last week, a Clinton aide released a statement saying “Secretary Clinton supports the president’s effort to enlist the Congress in pursuing a strong and targeted response to the Assad regime’s horrific use of chemical weapons.”

    Although she has not made public statements about Syria, Mrs. Clinton has been in close contact with White House officials, said one person with knowledge of those discussions who could not discuss private conversations for attribution.

    “She’s mindful of letting her successor do his job the same way her predecessor let her do her job,” this person said.

    The topic also could prove a political minefield as Mrs. Clinton contemplates another run at the presidency, political pundits say. The White House has not asked Mrs. Clinton to personally reach out to lawmakers or make televised appearances in support of Mr. Obama’s decision, said two people with knowledge of the matter.

    Mrs. Clinton is also expected to briefly address the Syria strike in her remarks in Philadelphia on Tuesday when Jeb Bush, the former Republican governor of Florida who is also a potential 2016 presidential candidate, presents her with the National Constitution Center’s Liberty Medal award.

    As part of her paid speaking circuit, Mrs. Clinton–who earns roughly $200,000 per speech–will also deliver remarks on Monday at a gathering of investors at the Carlyle Group.

  36. wbboei

    September 9, 2013 at 12:03 am


    Just sent my signed letter to my House member. I’m in a solidly red district and all of my reps (Cruz, Culberson, and Cornyn) say they are solidly against AUMF, though I’m not so sure about Cornyn.

    Thank you.

    Hillary 2016

  37. moononpluto

    September 9, 2013 at 3:20 am

    Oh please Hillary just stay out of it, why throw yourself into this mess……


    I am very concerned about this. Whatever she says, they will twist her words.


    Hillary 2016

  38. Is this the anti-clinton wings prospective 2016 schmuck…….she’s already hinting at running against Hillary, the unions new lovefest. Good luck trying to paw that fake indian credentials outside Massachussetts love.

    LOS ANGELES, Calif. — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) will address a key faction of the liberal base Monday as speculation intensifies that she will someday seek the presidency.

    Helping to open the quadrennial AFL-CIO convention, Warren is expected to be celebrated by rank-and-file union members as labor’s liberal bulwark in the Senate. The Massachusetts senator can strengthen her bonds with the key Democratic constituency that will play a big part in the party’s 2016 presidential primary.

    “The bottom line is, I think the world of her and I think the whole labor movement does. She is a woman of her word and she knows you never lose when you stand up for what’s right,” said Massachusetts AFL-CIO President Steve Tolman.

    Union officials buzz when asked about Warren’s 2016 prospects.

    “I am not thinking about the presidency right now, but I do know we have the greatest U.S. senator representing us. I want her in the Senate doing the great work that she’s doing,” Tolman said. “Give me a couple more years and let me find out she’s interested, and I will drive the train.”


    Such love from labor can help a Democratic presidential candidate’s campaign as well as divide union support during the party’s primary. Warren, the Columbia University professor, said if the Massachusetts senator decided to run, she could be a threat to Hillary Clinton, considered the party’s 2016 front-runner.

    “She can isolate labor support for Hillary that automatically would have gone to Hillary in the Democratic primary,” Warren said.

    “It would prevent labor endorsements for Hillary. … Labor still has an enormous amount of money and ground troops across the country.”

    Warren’s prominence elevates labor’s concerns into the national spotlight as well.

    Frank Moroney, executive director of AFSCME Council 93, representing public sector workers throughout New England, said Warren’s ideas “belong on a national stage.”

    “Her ideas and beliefs belong on a national stage and the sincerity and passion that she exudes when she speaks simply cannot be contrived. It can only come from someone who actually lives what they believe,” Moroney said in a statement.



    Looks like they are gearing her up……..

  39. This is the line that makes me choke with the hypocrisy……

    In September, 2012, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka went to Boston and gave a full-throated endorsement of Warren, telling union members to avoid sexism when walking into the voting booth.


    Which is exactly what they employed against Hillary when it suited them in 2008.

  40. She only just got the job and they want her out….lol.


    Berkeley Student Govt Considers Vote Of “No Confidence” In Big Sis

    The student government of the University of California, Berkeley is considering a vote of “no confidence” in incoming UC system president Janet Napolitano, a potentially devastating blow to the former Homeland Security Secretary and Arizona governor.

    The Daily Californian reports the Associated Students of the University of California (ASUC) will begin debate on a “Bill in Support of Undocumented Students and Immigrant Communities,” on Monday, the student government’s first meeting of the year.

    “The ‘no confidence’ comes from a lot of history—she has deported over 2 million undocumented immigrants,” ASUC senator Sean Tan, who authored the bill, told theDaily Californian. “There’s a lot of fear in terms of what is her main priority as UC president, because she comes from a background of surveillance and apprehension and security.”

    A UC student workers’ union also decried Napolitano’s appointment.

    “We call for a president devoted to rebuilding our capacity for teaching, research, and learning—not a specialist in cyber surveillance, law enforcement, and border security,” the union’s release states. “We demand that the UC regents retract Napolitano’s nomination for appointment and reopen the process for selecting the UC president.”

    Friday is Napolitano’s last day as Secretary of Homeland Security, after which she will take over as president of the University of California system.


    Kick her ass out…….

  41. OMFG


    Nanny Bloomberg Accuses Dem Frontrunner For NYC Mayor Of Running “Racist” Campaign For Featuring His Black Wife, Biracial Children…

    Outgoing New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg laced into surging Democratic mayoral frontrunner Bill de Blasio in an interview published Saturday, saying he’s run a “racist” campaign with just three days left in the primary race.

    The remarks from Bloomberg about de Blasio, the city’s Public Advocate who has showcased his biracial family on the campaign trail, came as the frontrunner is within striking distance of clearing the 40 percent mark in the primary vote that would prevent a runoff three weeks later.

    “… there’s Bill de Blasio, who’s become the Democratic front-runner,” New York Magazine’s Chris Smith asked Bloomberg early on in a wide-ranging interview. “He has in some ways been running a class-warfare campaign …”

    “Class-warfare and racist,” Bloomberg interrupted him.

    “Racist?” Smith asked.

    “I mean he’s making an appeal using his family to gain support,” replied Bloomberg. “I think it’s pretty obvious to anyone watching what he’s been doing. I do not think he himself is racist. It’s comparable to me pointing out I’m Jewish in attracting the Jewish vote. You tailor messages to your audiences and address issues you think your audience cares about.”


    Left eats left.

  42. VotingHillary
    September 9, 2013 at 2:16 am
    Someone was earlier asking what Greta was doing on “This Week”….she nailing Obama
    That was me VH and I’m delighted to hear this of Greta! TY. It will be shared with my FB family and friends.

  43. moononpluto
    September 9, 2013 at 4:38 am
    I’ll side with Bloomberg on this. I saw the first ad many times and much of it was the son talking of how great de Blasio, who looks white, is. This child is well-spoken, appealing. And his last statement is: I’d vote for him even if he weren’t my father.
    Well the public ate this up with a spoon and soon deBlas was up double digits over most eveyone else.

    It plays on race in a subtle way and it worked very well for deBlasio who has a campaign line similar to that of the First Campaigner (WH).

    Eventually candidate Thompson, who is AA and did very well against Bloomberg in the latter’s 3rd campaign, felt it necessary to involve his family in the ads.

    Of course the Mediots were letting the racial tone idea slide.

  44. Alas, I think Greta was weak and she blamed Congress at least as much as WH for long vacation. Rest of thing often erupted into shouting competition. Kinzinger was way too confident for my comfort. I don’t like how it turned out.
    Update of War Authorization statement noted. TY.

  45. Bashar Assad tells Charlie Rose U.S. should “expect every action” in response to Syria strikes
    SNIP In a clear reference to his allies in Iran and the Islamic militant group Hezbollah, Assad warned that his government is “not the only player in this region.”
    “You have different parties, you have different factions, you have different ideology. You have everything in this region now,” said Assad, who has been accused by the White House of killing 1,400 of his own people in an Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburbs.
    Asked by Rose whether any retaliation for U.S. strikes could include the use of chemical weapons, Assad — whose government has never confirmed officially that it even has chemical weapons — said it would depend “if the rebels or the terrorists in this region or any other group have it. It could happen, I don’t know. I am not fortune teller.”
    Rose said Sunday on the “CBS Evening News” that the Syrian dictator was “remarkably calm” during the interview as he addressed the claims that he had gassed his own people. SNIP

  46. and you wonder why we think these societies are sick and treat women as nothing more than a owned on demand sex and a breeder. May as well just have cattle. totally sick culture.

    Manama: Kuwaitis have called for stringent action against a family in Yemen after their eight-year-old daughter died of internal injuries on the first night of her arranged marriage to a man more than five times her age.

    Rawan died in city of Hardh in the Governorate of Hajjah in northwestern Yemen, Kuwaiti daily Al Watan reported on Sunday, quoting Yemeni media.

    She is believed to have suffered a tear to her genitals and severe bleeding.

    Yemeni activists urged the local police to arrest the “beastly groom” and the girl’s family and transfer them to a court where justice would be served and the case would be used to help put an end to the practice of marrying very young girls in the impoverished country, the daily said.

    In Kuwait, bloggers offered their prayers for the “bride”, but lashed out at the “groom”, saying that he was a beast who should be severely punished.

    Angry Man, a blogger, posted that the man was “an animal who deserved to be punished severely for his crime.”

    “All those who supported such a crime should also be punished,” he said.

    Under the moniker “Sad”, another blogger said that everybody should have realised that Rawan was too young to get married.

    “Her family and her groom could have waited for some time before having this marriage,” Sad said. “It was not fair at all and the marriage should not have happened even if some tribes believe that it is a good custom.”

    Bu Omar said that he was disturbed by the death report.

    “Rawan’s family members are not humans. They do not deserve to have children,” he said.


  47. John Kerry gives Syria week to hand over chemical weapons or face attack

    US secretary of state tells London press conference with William Hague that US intelligence blames Assad regime for gas attack

    The US secretary of state has said that President Bashar al-Assad has one week to hand over his entire stock of chemical weapons to avoid a military attack. But John Kerry added that he had no expectation that the Syrian leader would comply.

    Kerry also said he had no doubt that Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack in east Damascus on 21 August, saying that only three people are responsible for the chemical weapons inside Syria – Assad, one of his brothers and a senior general. He said the entire US intelligence community was united in believing Assad was responsible.

    Kerry was speaking on Monday alongside the UK foreign secretary, William Hague, who was forced to deny that he had been pushed to the sidelines by the House of Commons decision 10 days ago to reject the use of UK force in Syria.

    The US Senate is due to vote this week on whether to approve an attack and Kerry was ambivalent over whether Barack Obama would use his powers to ignore the legislative chamber, if it were to reject an attack.

    The US state department stressed that Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the one-week deadline and unlikelihood of Assad turning over Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile. In an emailed statement, the department added: “His point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons, otherwise he would have done so long ago. That’s why the world faces this moment.”


  48. D.C. Denies Permit To Patriotic “2 Million Bikers To D.C.” Rally To Protest Planned Million Muslim March On 9/11…

    The countdown to Sept. 11 commemoration demonstrations by patriotic bikers versus a fringe Muslim “truther” group is taking shape, and despite some confusion about the technicalities, the court of popular opinion isn’t even close:

    Let the good guys roll.

    Denied a permit by the nation’s capital for a special “non-stop” ride through town with a waiver for red lights, stop signs and other traffic controls, organizers of the “2 Million Bikers to DC” ride to remember 9/11 are undeterred.

    Just riding on a public street doesn’t take any special permission after all, even if you have a million people doing it. They just sought the permit to make life easier on the city’s residents and businesses.

    So the ride will go on. It’s just going to take a little longer.

    “We find this regretful for the residents and businesses of that great city, and humbly offer our apologies,” organizers wrote on Facebook Saturday. “What could have been a one or two hour ride through will now likely be an all-day event. We will be obeying all laws. We will be stopping at all stoplights, stop signs, and yielding to all pedestrians.”


  49. Kerry made major fuck up today, making a complete new policy up on the go live at press conference offering Assad giving up weapons within a week and then tried to backtrack it within minutes. The guy is a total muppet and not fit for purpose, WH apparently furious at Kerry. Has the botox gone to his head.

  50. Tells you everything you need to know, this is not about chemical weapons its about getting control of Syria :

    Breaking : U.S. will take “hard look” at Russian proposal but has “serious scepticism” about putting Syria’s chemical weapons under int’l protection.

  51. Could it be any clearer Vladimir is calling the shots and Bambi and Kerry are having rings run round them. So much for Kerry’s foreign credentials and Bambi looks like a total dick.

  52. moon…I am having the same exact thoughts and probably many others are too

    Is Putin boxing O into a corner on the eve of O’s big rollout for war…will Putin pull the rug from underneath the Nobel Peace Prize Warmonger’s feet…and ‘lead the world to a peaceful solution?’

    …this is just too rich and ironic…talk about O and Kerry looking like the warmongers and amateurs when the world is screaming it does not want the US to strike…O looks like he just wants to drop his bombs and get it over with it so he can get back to things he likes doing…

    Hillary is crafty…she is leaning towards the Russians solutions…and speaking out about it from the White House…and stating that she had hammered out an agreement to do so when she was Sec of State…amazing…

    from the WH, Hillary looks like the mediator for diplomatic solutions…amazing!


    RFK Jr: ““Al Sharpton has done more damage to the black cause than [segregationist Alabama Gov.] George Wallace. ”

    He goes on to call Sharpton a “buffoon” who has never escaped the “stench” of his advocacy for Tawana Brawley and at Cesar Chavez’s funeral, Jesse Jackson pushed “Cesar’s friends and family out of the way to make himself lead pall bearer.”


  54. More agreement with us that this is about Obama’s credibility, not America’s:


    Congress, if it votes not, would not be refusing to back up an American treaty obligation, nor would it even be rejecting a painstakingly negotiated international agreement. In other words, it would neither be going back on America’s sworn word, nor undermining the ability of the Executive to negotiate. It would be refusing to endorse a decision to take aggressive action that is not required by any treaty obligation and that appears to have been prompted by an off-the-cuff remark. If, in future, foreign capitals doubt whether such remarks are to be taken seriously unless they either fit into longstanding policy or are corroborated by other policymakers, that’s all to the good.

    The Obama Presidency will indeed likely suffer a serious blow if the President is rebuked by Congress. The only plausible reason why the President went to Congress at all is the fear of undertaking such an unpopular (not to mention ill-conceived) military action with no political cover (not to mention legal warrant) whatsoever. He is patently looking for somebody to back him up. If nobody does, it will be plain that he has suffered what in a parliamentary system would be a loss of confidence, which in such a system would result in a change in government.

  55. AP Correction…..

    Police: George Zimmerman hasn’t been arrested; officers at house trying to determine what happened –

    All the stories about arrest is coming from wifes attorney……This is from police themselves, he has not been arrested as of yet.

  56. http://hotair.com/archives/2013/09/09/video-wh-worried-that-syria-loss-will-cripple-obama-presidency/

    In a parliamentary system, a rejection of a war authorization pushed by a prime minister could easily turn into a vote of no confidence and the end of a government. In the American system, it might just mean the end of the President’s credibility — and a historic humiliation for the Commander in Chief. Chuck Todd tells Today that this is what is driving desperation at the White House, as Congress grows increasingly hostile to hostilities:

  57. Nothing short of a disaster…

    Just now : CNN 63% disapprove of Obama’s handling on Syria.

    and they actually broadcast that number…sharks are circling.

  58. So funny, best tweet…..

    Obama trapped. Putin is playing field and taking BHO by the arm & escorting him off battlefield.

    Its excruciating to see such an amateur at work, the whole US can see it now, the man knows NOTHING.

  59. Kerry flailing around like a fish in a sharks mouth…..

    WH already backing off Kerry’s chemical weapon blunder on CNN. Tapper really pressing him on Kerry’s screw up. “gaffe.” “Mess up.” disaster.

  60. I think its safe to say, Kerry’s too many years sat behind a senate desk pontificating on anything especially the foreign affairs committee proves, he was all mouth an no action, basically, he could sit there and mouth off but when it came to doing the actual job, he’s a total failure. Yup the ultimate Post Turtle

  61. John McCain: John Kerry ‘unbelievably unhelpful’

    When even McCain ditches you, you know your ass is in the firing line.

  62. moononpluto

    September 9, 2013 at 3:02 pm


    From the article – {EMPHASIS MINE}

    Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton also backed the idea Monday afternoon, noting as Carney did that it came as a result of a credible threat of military force, and urged Congress to support President Barack Obama’s request for authorization to strike.

    This is unsettling. Can anybody shed some light on this? Made me sick to hear Chuck Todd say that the WH was ‘trotting out Hillary’ as though she was a pawn. That said, if she is supporting this farce, then maybe she is….

    Hillary 2016?

  63. moononpluto
    September 9, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    The sharks are circling Kerry. He has been nothing short of a disaster, Could he get canned?

    Ain’t it great, Horseface has only been a bride for a little over 6 months and he is already gone so far of the reservation that the Queen is calling, “Off with his head!”

  64. US official to ‘Post’: Russia proposal to put Syria chemical arms under global control will go ignored

    A US government official told The Jerusalem Post on Monday that a Russian proposal urging Syria to place its chemical weapons arsenal under international control, in order to avoid a US strike, would be ignored.

    “There’s no mechanism to implement what the Russians are proposing,” said the official.

    The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is the only organization that has monitoring power over chemical arms, the official noted. But the OPCW only has jurisdiction over signatories of the Chemical Weapons Convention, of which Syria is not a member. And the OPCW does not tolerate the existence of such weapons, but oversees their destruction, which the Russians have not proposed.

    Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who called a news conference to announce the proposal, said he had already conveyed the idea to Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem at talks in Moscow.

    Moualem, who spoke to reporters through an interpreter after Russia expressed hope the proposal could avert military strikes against Syria, stopped short of saying explicitly that President Bashar Assad’s government accepted it.

    “I state that the Syrian Arab Republic welcomes the Russian initiative, motivated by the Syrian leadership’s concern for the lives of our citizens and the security of our country, and also motivated by our confidence in the wisdom of the Russian leadership, which is attempting to prevent American aggression against our people,” he said.


  65. I think Hillary is deciding to weigh in after being explicitly asked by the press (in light of her stature with respect to 2016), and probably being begged by the WH to help rescue Obama from being officially declared “Dead Duck”.

    I think she this allows her to show her nuanced and experienced foreign policy chops, in a way that seems to help Obama (what many Dems would want), but also quietly reaches out to Putin and other world leaders. And it is a none-too-subtle way of showing that the word “retirement” is not in her version of Webster’s dictionary.

  66. foxyladi14
    September 9, 2013 at 4:24 pm

    Here she is. 🙂


    Sure sounds like Madam President is speaking from the sidelines. She tells them to follow the road map she helped work out in Geneva, and the Intl. Community needs to work together on this solution. She isn’t calling for war at this point, but she is telling folks to very serious about keeping this weapons out of the hands of Hezbollah and from them being stolen and used on even more people.

  67. BREAKING: Zimmerman, wife accuse each other of being the aggressor at her father’s Florida house, police say

    Per police Chief Bracknell, both Shellie Zimmerman and her father signed papers declining to prosecute.

  68. foxyladi14

    September 9, 2013 at 4:24 pm


    My doubts have been quelled. My goodness but isn’t she presidential? She addressed the situation in the terms that can be related to a strong intervention, while never sounding the drumbeats for war. She even threw a lifeline to Uncle Botox rather than throwing him under the bus (which is what I would have done). She never explicitly came out and said she endorses bumbles actions. Its the press that says she has. The closest she came was at the end where she said that she supports bumbles efforts towards a diplomatic resolution.

    Putin is just giddy that he isn’t facing her instead of bumbles the asshat.

    Hillary 2016!

  69. Update: A week ago, I speculated that Vladimir Putin who has a working relationship with Assad might rescue Mr. Obama from his latest ultimatum, since he has a working relationship with Assad. It now appears that he has done exactly that. In what the media characterizes as a surprise move Mr. Putin has promised the world community to push Syria to place its chemical weapons under international law and then dismantle them in order to avert U.S. air strikes.

    Obama will portray this as a personal victory. Others are saying that Putin called his bluff. I doubt it was a bluff. I am a negotiator, by background and training. What I see in this end game is a man who became a prisoner of his own tactics, namely the promiscuous use of ultimatums, and had to be rescued for the good of the world.

    If chemical weapons were the sole reason for Obama’s ultimatum, then I am wrong, the problem is resolved, and we can turn our attention to other matters. Sometimes in life, it is better to be wrong.

    But, if the real objective of the contemplated military action was to effect regime change and to send a message to Iran (the center of gravity in the Middle East), then this resolution will not suffice because it preserves the status quo ante which favors Assad, and it eliminates the rationale for American intervention which was intended to alter the status quo, under the pretext of chemical weapons violations.

    Therefore, I see this as a victory for Putin, Assad, and the American People, which only goes to show that war makes strange bedfellows.

    Therefore, if I am right that regime change and sending a message to Iran were the real objectives behind military intervention, and those objectives have been thwarted for now by Vladimir Putin’s peace initiative, then it is not unlikely that the dogs of war will find (or manufacture) some new causus belli to justify military intervention.

    In that case, Obama is likely to come back to Congress with another request for war authorization, and this letter will be relevant once again.

  70. Russia was an economic disaster zone. Russian currency was so worthless that I joked that I could go exchange a 20 dollar bill and buy the Kremlin. But since that time Russia has roared back to life. Once Vladimir Putin became president, the Russian economy started to grow very rapidly. Today, Russia is an economic powerhouse that is blessed with an abundance of natural resources. Their debt to GDP ratio is extremely small, they actually run a trade surplus every year, and they have the second most powerful military on the entire planet. Anyone that underestimates Russia at this point is making a huge mistake. The Russian Bear is back, and today it is a more formidable adversary than it ever was at any point during the Cold War.

    Just check out the following statistics. The following are 18 signs that Russia is rapidly catching up to the United States…


  71. Dear Senator:

    A week ago, I speculated that Vladimir Putin might rescue Mr. Obama from his latest ultimatum, since he can control Assad. It now appears that Mr. Putin has done exactly that. In what the media characterizes as a surprise move Mr. Putin has promised the world community to push Syria to place its chemical weapons under international law and then dismantle them in order to avert U.S. air strikes. The commitment however is open ended and there is no deadline. I fully expect that Assad, a Putin puppet, will comply.

    Obama will portray this as a personal triumph. Others are saying that Putin called Obama’s bluff. I seriously doubt it was a bluff. And, believe me, it was no triumph. I am a negotiator, by background and training. I believe that diplomacy is a game of chess not poker. It is clear to me that Obama became a prisoner of his own tactics, namely the promiscuous issuance of ultimatums, that he did not have the Congressional support for his improvident military operation, that Putin read the situation accurately and trapped him with an illusory offer. Obama accepted that offer without thinking, and announced that he was suspending the military operation. As a result, he has lost his leverage and will be bargaining from a position of weakness. The game is judo, Putin is sensei and Obama, who hoped to look strong, is now in retreat.

    Mr. Obama would have us believe that his entire goal was to hold Assad accountable for the alleged use of chemical weapons. And that is how his media allies will spin it. But the more you examine the evidence, and the experts I will cite below have done precisely that, the more you realize that the evidence is suspect and that this was nothing more than a pretext. The real objective was for attacking Syria was to topple the Assad regime and to send a clear and unambiguous message to Iran (the center of gravity in the Middle East) that if they persist in the development of a nuclear weapon and/or if they continue to aid and abet Hezbollah, then they will be next.

    The offer which Putin tendered and Obama accepted thwarts both of those objectives. So far as the world is concerned, it was a peace offer. In fact, it was a checkmate move on the United States, because it preserves the status quo ante in Syria, which favors Assad, not the rebels. Furthermore, it eliminates the American rationale for a shock and awe attack which was intended to send a signal to Iran. In sum, it was a victory for Putin and Assad, not Obama.

    For the good of the country, I believe it is essential to review what happened here. Prior to Obama’s latest “pivot”, Obama was prepared to lay out the case for war and Congress was poised to vote on war authorization. Now of course Harry Reid has pulled down that vote, not because of Obama’s change in direction but because he and his lieutenants were unable to whip the vote. On the assumption that you and your colleagues would be voting on the request for war authorization, I prepared a cogent 10 point analysis on the merits of that request. Given these new developments there is no sense of urgency for you to review it. But if you want my insights on what happened here, or if you believe that there will come a point when Obama realizes that he has been had, and comes back to you for war authorization, you may consider my analysis for what it is worth.

  72. One of the other things you learn in negotiation is to read your counterpart. Hoffa the elder was a master at this. If he had a tough negotiation to handle in his office he would have a shill call him on the phone and he would act like it was a real call and go ballistic in front of the management negotiators. That would either scare the hell out of them and soften them up for the kill. Hoffa the elder was a good guy until the end when Bobby and his lead negotiator Walter Sheridan was breathing down his neck and then he became less predictable.

    Appropos of that did you happen to notice how brilliantly Putin played Obama? He read Obama for the weak sister he is, a man in need of constant reassurance. Obama is contemptuous to the people below him and subservient to those above him, those who can hurt him, and those who can out celebrity him. That is his weakness. How did Putin exploit that weakness? Prior to G-20 he defamed him, at G-20 he gave Obama the cold shoulder and played on Obama’s sense of abandonment. As Obama’s deadline approach, played it out and let Obama sweat. Then as the pressure built and Obama could not get the votes the threw him what Obama took as a lifeline, which was really just an illusory offer, and like a big marlin, he reeled him in, with his shirt off of course.

Comments are closed.