Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Rick Moran

Bio

September 1, 2013 - 6:38 am

At present, there is no way to predict which way Congress will jump on the resolution to authorize force against Syria.

On the one hand. you have a sizable number of both Democrats and Republicans who could be considered non-interventionists. The libertarian wing of the GOP seems to have united around the idea of a “no” vote. Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are leading the charge against Syrian intervention in the Senate.

But there are also members like Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham who have already indicated they will vote against authorization because the president’s actions don’t go far enough. Taken together, the doves and hawks might unite, making it a tough coalition to beat and delivering a crushing defeat to the president’s meager plans for intervention.

Reuters reports:

Because Congress will not even begin floor debate until September 9 at the earliest, a question mark will hang over Washington’s Syria policy for weeks, punctuated by emotional and probably bitter debate.

That became evident on Saturday immediately after President Barack Obama’s surprise announcement that he would seek authorization for limited military strikes in Syria from members of Congress, many of whom, he has complained, reflexively oppose anything he proposes.

No one knowledgeable about Congress was willing to predict with any confidence how it would deal with a resolution to permit strikes in Syria.

The uncertainty is compounded by Obama’s often strained and distant relationship with Congress.

A House Democratic aide, on condition of anonymity, said “the vote will depend on the Republicans” because Democrats “will be split down the middle.”

Asked how the votes might go in the House and Senate, Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee said he thought it could be “problematic.”

PUBLIC OPINION FACTOR

Some members “may not understand what’s happening” in Syria, he told CNN, and “the American people today are not supportive of this. … I do not think the country is there.”

Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said: “The decision to get Congress on board when hasn’t had a huge amount of success working with Congress strikes me as a gamble.

“The president and secretary of state have tried to signal resolve, but the question becomes – what happens when they don’t get the support that they want and what does that mean about the administration’s ability to lead the country?”

The Syria issue is highly complex politically, causing divisions both within and between the parties, particularly at the extremes.

Some traditionally liberal Democrats, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus, have been skeptical of intervention, with several dozen Democrats signing a letter on Thursday worrying about getting into an “unwise war.”

Some of the most conservative Republicans, such as Michigan Representative Justin Amash, have also expressed skepticism.

There is also a question of timing. Some Congress-watchers are scratching their heads over the lack of urgency displayed by both the president and leaders in Congress. The fact that the president refused to call Congress out of recess for a special session (and that Speaker Boehner and Leader Reid also rejected the idea) points to an almost surreal situation where the country stands on the brink of war and Congress is still enjoying their fun in the sun.

As if to underscore the weirdness, after the president’s speech from the Rose Garden yesterday, he got in his limo and was driven to the golf course.

At this point, it looks grim for the president, but he may yet be able to rally his party and pick up just enough Republicans in the House for an authorization to squeak through. I doubt whether the GOP will be in any mood to pull the president’s hide out of the fire. Republicans will force Democrats to bear the burden if they want to save the credibility of their party leader.

Rick Moran is PJ Media's Chicago editor and Blog editor at The American Thinker. He is also host of the"RINO Hour of Power" on Blog Talk Radio. His own blog is Right Wing Nut House.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Sending million dollar missiles to hit a camel in the a__, because of Obama's wounded pride, is what this is all about. Leftists talk about how intelligent and talented Obama is, but would an intelligent and talented man with 5 years of experience still be making such stupid and obvious mistakes? There is no strategy, there is no plan, he has no clue how an attack will affect the balance between all the factions of the middle-east. And if by chance his attack weakens Assad enough that he falls, he hands Syria over to Al-Qaeda, the most ruthless of the Rebels. Yeah, that's a wonderful plan, give a country in the middle of Arabia to Al-Qaeda where they can train and supply attacks across the borders to most of the nations of the middle east.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Smart of Obama: if congress says yes he can share the blame when things go south. If they say no Obama can claim his humanitarian aims have been short-circuited.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
I supported the Iraq War because I accepted the claims that it was part of the larger "war on terror" i.e. stopping nation-states from subsidizing or using their status and territory to assist those committing acts of terror which was a legitimate and sensible policy of self defense. There is no doubt, btw, that Saddam Hussein was a supporter of terror albeit he was not involved in 9/11.

I have no idea as to how an attack on Syria would improve our security. I actually suspect it would do the opposite.

50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (24)
All Comments   (24)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬~ஜ۩۞۩ஜ~▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­▬

my friend's aunt makes $74 hourly on the laptop. She has been laid off for seven months but last month her pay check was $19184 just working on the laptop for a few hours. you can try this out

http://www.Rush60.com

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬~ஜ۩۞۩ஜ~▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­▬
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Y'all are missing something. You are looking at this as if the members of Congress will be considering the geo-political and domestic political realities as bearing on what their vote will be.

For the last 116 days we have known that:

a) the Federal government has been spying on everybody with total access to all forms of communications, all supposedly private files and activities, and with the active and paid cooperation of the private institutions who used to maintain privacy.

b) for the same period of time, we have had it rubbed in our faces that the Federal government has been acting to punish those who it considers to be political enemies; via IRS and other regulatory agencies. And that the information collected and collated in a) have been used in b). They ARE above the law, in practice.

c) elected politicians are by their nature morally and legally suspect, have generations of history of considering themselves above the law, and the Congress has a lot in common with a personal services "House of Negotiable Virtue". Up until now, with absolute impunity.

d) Since the beginning of Buraq Hussein's term, when the data collection began to be funneled through the White House political operation; politicians and judges have been .... unusually compliant .... with the wishes of the Obama regime. As in turning on their constituents, their background beliefs, the law, and the Constitution. The most likely explanations [I am a retired Peace Officer and have some small knowledge of human behaviour] are bribery, blackmail, and/or extortion.

e) to expect already compromised and complicit politicians to suddenly vote based on reality and the national interest as opposed to their personal benefit and safety makes Dr. Pangloss appear to be Machiavelli.

Subotai Bahadur
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Leaked Documents – U S Framed Syria in Chemical Weapons Attack August 26th, 2013

http://investmentwatchblog.com/leaked-documents-u-s-framed-syria-in-chemical-weapons-attack/
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Both sides hate us. Both sides commit atrocities. Both sides are of a religion that, when they stop killing each other, will try to kill us. They will ALWAYS bite the hand that feeds them. So why are we even having this "debate?"

The government can share its "classified" information with the American people so we can make our own decisions. After all, we're "cleared" for ridiculous.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Both sides are bad. For the win, bomb either one. For a win-win bomb them both. To make it a Trifecta bomb them both and blame Iran for executing a brilliant act of subtrefuge. However, if going to war is supposed to be about genuine American interests, stay home.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
An estimated one hundred thousand people killed so far in a civil war carried out by one bunch of Muslim terrorists supporting the Assad regime, including Hezbollah and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, who hate us and would love to see all us “Infidels” dead--fighting another bunch of Muslim terrorists, including a front group consisting of Al-Quaeda and other mujahedeen groups, who also hate us and would also love to see all us “Infidels” dead--and nothing but some low level rhetorical outrage from the Obama regime and its leaders about the situation and Assad, who former Secretary of State Clinton just a few months ago praised as a “reformer,” and, oh yes, a few months back Obama’s “red line.”

But, fourteen hundred or more gassed—with what and by who isn’t really clear just yet (remember WMD and Iraq when, pre-invasion, all the major intelligence services, the U.S., Britain, and the UN, virtually everyone agreed that the WMD was there—a “slam dunk,” and then, after the MSM and its flying monkeys got through doing their work, how nobody but deluded warmongers, just looking for an excuse to invade, did and, then, there is Kerry saying today that in terms of proof “slam dunk” was out and “high confidence” was in)—the President shoots his mouth off and does his usual tough guy posturing, then, says Obama’s very own crack Dumb and Dumber National Security Team; at Intelligence, Mr. “...the loosely organized... Muslim Brotherhood has no religious agenda...and is primarily a social welfare organization,” and “least untruthful answer” (testifying to Congress) Clapper, at Foreign Affairs, very well dressed and coiffured John Francois Kerry, fresh from his Yacht, who said about the war in Vietnam that “no one should be the first one to have to die for a mistake,” and at Defense the always bewildered “Chuck” Hagel as Secretary, no less—all saying, we gotta bomb Syria and get rid of Assad.

Has Syria, friend to all terrorists and host to innumerable terrorist training camps in its Bekaa Valley, directly attacked the U.S.? Is some vital national interest, that I’m just not seeing, involved here? Are we to take on; are we even able to take on, the thankless role of policeman of the world? The answer to each and every one of these key questions is a very loud NO.

Thus, we should stay the hell out of this fight, in which one group of our enemies is slaughtering another group of our enemies.

Moreover Iran—chief supporter of a Syria that could well be described as its hand puppet--would like nothing better than to have the U.S.—our military worn out from multiple deployments and battlefields, constantly being downsized, and already stretched very thin--get involved in yet another war in the ultra-violent and chaotic Middle East, and to use our involvement as an excuse/opportunity to attack our ally Israel and likely us, possibly setting off a regional war that could very possibly escalate into WWIII.

Bottom Line: Stay the hell out.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
I hope Congress doesn't fall for Dear Leader's head fake. He wants blame shifting because he's the "present" voter who can't make any decisions other than how to destroy the Republicans. That's the only war that interests him and Val.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Play Assad's hand here. After three of bombardment by the US fleet that craters most runways, breaks a bunch of stuff and kills a bunch of civilians, what's the first thing Assad will do? Easy, he's going to gas another 2,000 marginal (to him) people.
He'll empty his jails, collect Christians, key rebels and non-compliant journals and gas 'em all. Obimbo will attack again but Assad will be in a position where HE calls Obimbo's action. And, then, think of how hard it will be to back away.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Wrong. Bashar al-Assad will round up thousands of his political prisoners, blow them up and then film their bodies as innocent victims of Obama's Imperialist bloodlust. He'll display bombing victims if he has to kill them himself. Oh, and don't forget all the aspirin factories and "baby milk" factories that will have been hit.

He will also give rousing speeches mocking the wimp in the White House and touting his indestructibility (just like Osama after the "cruise missile up a camel's butt" raid). Obama won't care, he'll have made his gesture, the rest of us are along for the ride.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
NO MORE WARS!


Only ‘diplomatic support’: UK Foreign Secretary says Syria military action ruled out Published time: September 01, 2013
http://rt.com/news/syria-hague-military-parliament-276/
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
look at it from another pov...

The Republicans and conservatives who support this military 'intervention' are unwittingly telling us that John Kerry is a man of such upright and moral character that we can believe anything he says about the facts of Assad's guilt, and about the great and urgent need to attack Syria for this crime against humanity.

But they also claim that Kerry's a lying coward who couldn't be trusted to find his own butt with a flashlight and a map.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All

One Trackback to “Rocky Road Seen for Congressional Authorization of Syria Attack”