Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

The Good News: Obama to seek Congressional approval to move against Syria … [Darleen Click]

… The Bad News: that a President following the Constitution is news.

66 Replies to “The Good News: Obama to seek Congressional approval to move against Syria … [Darleen Click]”

  1. JimK says:

    It was about the only move the Ditherer-in-Chief had left.

  2. sdferr says:

    Obazm has dolled himself up as the most unserious man in the history of democratic despotism. Long may he sit on the pot without productive effect (and be forever plagued with the hemorrhoids he so justly has earned).

  3. newrouter says:

    baracky and slo joe went golfing today so there’s that

  4. leigh says:

    You know, for the first time in my life I actually feel sorry for John LeKerry. It must suck to be him. Here he put it out there, sounded all sonorous and presidential-like yesterday. Resolute, he was. And today? Presbo whips the carpet right out from under him and left him swinging in the wind.

    And Kerry’s booked on all five Sunday shows tomorrow.

    Oh, my sides!

  5. sdferr says:

    In some respects (too many) it looks like FoxNews has decided to take on the funhouse mirror-role of William Randolph Hearst’s imperial war-drive for the imperious anti-imperialist, Obazm: “Eniam eht Rebmemer”.

    After all, there is tremendous prestige to be lost quite apart from the wrists to be slapped, and this is just the bunch to do it.

  6. BigBangHunter says:

    – sKerry will be fine. He’ll be against it after hes for it like he always is, and won’t bat an eye when someone points out how foolish he looks because he always looks follish.. You simply cannot embarrasse an idiot Leigh.

    – In the mean time Putin continues to punk Bumblefuck each and every passing hour and day. The Brits said bugger off, The Germans are poised to follow suit, and the French are reveling in the total triumph of white flag surrender. The community organizer is doing the best he can, which is to say nothing worth a fuck as usual.

    – The consensus on the Left is we shouldn’t do anything OMG OMG OMG, but whatever foodstamps does the Baggers will say its wrong, because you know, everything is about how bad the baggers are, jug ears and his stupidity/lack of any sort of leadership will not/isn’t/c\n’t be/won’t be discussed.

  7. leigh says:

    Heh. I was just kidding, BBH. Hell will freeze over before I feel sorry for that sob.

  8. BigBangHunter says:

    – Although I must admit some counter views are just starting to creep in to the comments sections over at HuffNpoop, which I attribute to Proggies who never got their free phones.

  9. leigh says:

    I was just asking the husband if he thought any lefties would have an epiphany and break ranks. He says probably not.

    What do you guys think? I’d be pissed off if I were one of Presbo’s cheerleaders. I would have to talk about it. On teevee. Repeatedly.

  10. BigBangHunter says:

    – Problem is Leigh the average Proggie is not really serious about any of it except hoping to score some free shit, so they’ll play the “poke-a-bagger” as long as they think theres a payoff, but as soon as they see the gravy train has gone off the rails they’re MIA and don’t know nothin’.

  11. BigBangHunter says:

    – I’ve decided that “Fantasy politics” is the Lefts equivalent to Fantasy football/Baseball/Basketball..

  12. newrouter says:

    lamont you big dummie news

    President Pulls Lawmakers Into Box He Made

  13. Blake says:

    leigh, there’s a book out, “Escape from Red China” in which the author details a trip he made to the USSR with a Chinese Communist. The author was shocked, because no matter how much evidence to the contrary, (elevators that didn’t work, buildings visibly crumbling) the Chinese Communist believed the USSR was the pinnacle of political and technical achievement.

    Same mindset.

    Hell, leigh, on some message boards, you still have leftists regurgitating “Bush lied, people died,” lied about WMD in Iraq, etc., etc. No matter how many times that crap is refuted, leftists refuse to accept evidence to the contrary, because it goes against their faith.

  14. serr8d says:

    Filed under ‘stopped watch’…

    “The president has mishandled this as badly as he could. Quite frankly, the chickens have come home to roost from Obama foreign policy of leading from behind and being passive,” he said on Fox News’s “On the Record.”

    “So a pinprick strike, giving an aspirin to a person who has cancer, is the worst of all worlds.”

    Not so shabby as far as nuanced word usage goes; he’s subtly defining Obama as one with a pin prick. But given the source, it’s pretty much a waste of air.

  15. BigBangHunter says:

    ….because it goes against their faith.

    – The true believer Progs far exceed the most viralent religious zealots ever known, but because they “hate” religious forms by rote they will never “see” it in their own actions. Like WMD’s, its invisable, even when people (Kurds) die its not enough to refute their blind beliefs.

    – Pearl gets his head chopped off for his trouble but the Islamists are a “peaceful group”. Once you drink the Koolaide you have to untether from any form of reality to maintain even a semblance of sanity. In other words its the ultimate “sellout” and the biggest hipocracy of all.

  16. palaeomerus says:

    Oh! His majesty deigns voluntarily this one time to follow the law. I think I’ll throw a party.

  17. palaeomerus says:

    Obama’s administration begins work on third wicker tower and chalk runway project but cargo plane still nowhere in sight. Blames interference from residents of island living to the right of his lodge for lack of visible progress.

  18. Blake says:

    BBH, I don’t know many on the right who will defend many of the policies of GW. For the most part, the left will defend everything Obama does..except if they think his policy prescriptions don’t go far enough.

  19. fnhaole says:

    Jugears says he only wants to fire a shot across the bow but the AUMF he sent to Congress is so open ended as to authorize any action from slingshots to nukes. Before I voted on this AUMF I’d have to know exactly what the plan is – if there really is one – so would demand a personal explanation from Vallery Jarrett to see what she has in mind.

  20. sdferr says:

    Obazma’s 2002 anti-war speech, railing against the preparations for an attack on Iraq.

    Whatever you do as you read it, don’t make the mental substitution of Syria for Iraq, or al-Assad for Saddam. Don’t ask where all that domestic oil development had gotten to, to “fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil”. Don’t compare the clear-eyed strategic thought of a Perle or Wolfowitz with the utter absence of strategic thinking we see in Obazm today.

    That just wouldn’t be kosher.

  21. geoffb says:

    Perhaps the upcoming AUMF vote is just to set up a test as to whether we have a monarch yet.

  22. sdferr says:

    Draft resolution text.

    Completely boundless, as is befitting an Emperor.

  23. McGehee says:

    the AUMF he sent to Congress is so open ended as to authorize any action from slingshots to nukes

    Any chance it specifies where and against whom?

  24. geoffb says:

    As in Egypt, trying to have his cake and eat it too seems to end in having none and eating none also.

    Classy pose there too. You’d almost think he’d paid for the desk himself.

  25. geoffb says:

    Ilya Somin at Volokh on the AUMF.

    This wording is narrow in one sense, but very broad in another. It is narrow in so far as the purpose is limited to dealing with chemical weapons and other WMDs, as opposed to pursuing broader objectives such as the overthrow of the Assad regime. It’s broad, however, in the sense that it allows the president to use force against a wide range of possible adversaries, not just Assad and his government. For example, it is certainly broad enough to allow Obama to target the Syrian rebels if he determines that they have chemical weapons or are likely to acquire them soon. The radical Islamist terrorists among the rebels surely qualify as “terrorist groups or other state or non-state actors” that the resolution would allow the president to target if it seems likely that Syrian WMDs might be “transfer[red]” to them. Indeed, if US air strikes weaken the Assad regime sufficiently that the rebels end up capturing some of its chemical weapons stockpiles, we could end up fighting both sides in the Syrian civil war simultaneously.

  26. sdferr says:

    “. . . we could end up fighting both sides in the Syrian civil war simultaneously.”

    And that would be a bad thing, how? But The Great Obazm is in no way going to fight the enemies of the United States, for cryin’ out loud. The Great Emperor took the side of the Mullahs in 2009, he’s surely not going to start killing them now. The Great Emperor has known al-Qaeda and its affiliates have been in Syria for over a year, yet has never moved to kill them where they stand. The Great Emperor makes not even the slightest gesture to indicate that he even knows enemies of the United States are to be killed in Syria. What a joke this Somin makes.

  27. geoffb says:

    After a 45-minute walk Friday night, President Barack Obama made a fateful decision that none of his top national security advisers saw coming: To seek congressional authorization before taking military action in Syria.
    […]
    Aides said the decision was made by Mr. Obama and Mr. Obama alone. It shows the primacy the president places on protecting his hoped-for legacy as a commander in chief who did everything in his power to disentangle the U.S. from overseas wars. Until Friday night, Mr. Obama’s national-security team didn’t even have an option on the table to seek a congressional authorization.
    […]
    Yet Mr. Obama made no secret to aides he felt uncomfortable acting without U.N. Security Council backing. Current and former officials said his decision reflected his concerns about being seen as acting unilaterally—without political cover from Congress and without the U.K. at his side.

  28. geoffb says:

    This is about avoiding responsibility if things go wrong and avoiding being mocked. There must always be another party involved to take the blame and on whom any mockery can be deflected toward.

  29. sdferr says:

    geoffb, note the photoshop here (it’s enlargeable by clicking).

  30. newrouter says:

    at first impression it looked like baracky is trying to throw an accordion

  31. sdferr says:

    Only in bohunkia.

  32. sdferr says:

    Buckwheat is there man.

  33. geoffb says:

    The WSJ piece makes it sound as if he walked alone and made the decision alone but here it says:

    Obama changed his mind as he walked across the South Lawn with Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, the officials said.

    So he walks for 45 minutes with his “Leaker of Classified Secrets In Chief” and returns with a punt play.

  34. sdferr says:

    It’s a great comfort to know that The Great Emperor has his finger on the stupidity button at all times.

  35. geoffb says:

    Bad link repaired, here.

  36. sdferr says:

    Fixing Buckwheat too.

  37. geoffb says:

    There is no difference in the two links is there?

  38. sdferr says:

    There is no difference in the two links is there?

    There isn’t. The bum prefix gets added after I hit the “post comment” button. Don’t know why, but give in for now.

  39. McGehee says:

    You have to include http:// in what you paste into the link tag. I’ve fixed both bad links in the original comments.

  40. sdferr says:

    Thanks McG.

  41. newrouter says:

    the rubester channeling his inner johnymac

    Rubio Wants Congress Back Early over Syria

  42. BigBangHunter says:

    – Looking back even the most pessimistic of us did not come close to anticipating just how empty this idiots suit was going to be.

  43. LBascom says:

    I can sympathize with the idea of making whomever pay a price for using chemical weapons, but I think in this circumstance there is no way to do that, short of doing what we did in Iraq. Which is impossible today. And which we did partly as an object lesson that obviously didn’t take anyway, so why imagine it would take this time?

    I like this guy Jeff linked to the other day, and he pretty much sums up my thoughts on the deal.

  44. sdferr says:

    Write your Congressman to say where you stand on authorizing Obazma to use military force against Syria. Tell ’em, just vote no.

  45. newrouter says:

    This is rank amateurism. Obama has no idea what to do, so he punts. He has kicked the ball to Congress, hasn’t called them back to the game, just told them you guys debate it, and let me know. Oh, and, of course, this is more important than defunding Obamacare, investigating Benghazi, looking into the IRS or Fast and Furious. No hurry. We can leave our ships out there for months if need be. Joe, let’s head for the links!

    link

  46. LBascom says:

    Ya know, I can’t help but think that picture with Obama’s foot on the desk is a clear message to the middle east. It isn’t just happenstance to release it now. We all know how they take the soul of a shoe on an enemy as an insult.

    I really, really think Obama digs humiliating the US. ‘Cuz of how he is an enemy of the US.

  47. newrouter says:

    baracky will take care of this enemy of the state

    An Unidentified Naval Officer’s Opinion on Syria

  48. LBascom says:

    Jeez, here’s another disaster scenario I hadn’t thought of…

    Is Obama setting up two-prong Constitutional crisis?

    […] But there is another component of what such a position might mean. Suppose my hypothetical news story comes true and Obama order the attacks even though Congress specifically withholds authority.

    I would maintain that our flag-rank military officers are duty bound to disobey those orders. […]

    There is no oath of loyalty or even obedience to the president. I say that for a general officer, from the chairman of the joint chief of staff on down, to commit acts of war against another country that have been actually forbidden by Congress would be one of the grossest violations of Constitutional military duty that can be imagined. That’s the second prong of a potential Constitutional crisis.

    Because if Obama ignores a Congressional vote against the war and sends in the missiles with the military obeying, then we will have entered the darkest place in our history indeed: a president with literally monarchical power to use the military as he wishes and a military leadership that agrees.

  49. LBascom says:

    Oh, and I forgot to add, what happens if Obama orders the military to strike, and they refuse? Wouldn’t THAT send a message to the world our suddenly hawkish progressives would go insane over?

  50. sdferr says:

    “. . . that have been actually forbidden by Congress . . .

    This remains the initial and crucial order of business. But how is that looking with idiots the like of John McCain and Peter King on the loose?

  51. guinspen says:

    Myron Floren, phone home!

  52. sdferr says:

    Easier on the eyes — Ksenija.

  53. guinspen says:

    Massive retaliation it is, then.

  54. sdferr says:

    Bombs away.

  55. newrouter says:

    i see french going hunting

  56. newrouter says:

    stl 7 pgh 2 today

  57. serr8d says:

    Here’s a new(er) word for the grokking: ineptocracy.

Comments are closed.