Obama owned on Syria, folds like a Wet Noodle. Putin & Assad 1- USA 0

[Incorruptible]

One out of millions. But that's beside the point. The fiscal policies of the conservatives over there are pretty much to the left of the democrats. Not to mention gun control, health care, etc.

That's because they aren't real Conservatives but support big government. Many of them support multiculturalism and political correctness as well.

 

[Gintaras]

Just wonder...why no one has attacked hypocrites that used chemical weapon on others:

Napalm bombing Vietnam, Ride of the Valkyries

Vietnam Napalm

Famous Vietnam Napalm Bombing Run Video

 

[werepossum]

Just wonder...why no one has attacked hypocrites that used chemical weapon on others:

Napalm bombing Vietnam, Ride of the Valkyries

Vietnam Napalm

Famous Vietnam Napalm Bombing Run Video

Napalm is not a chemical weapon, dude. It's an approved method of warfare. Burning people alive or blowing their limbs off is respected.

 

[zinfamous]

lulz...Napalm? really?

 

[palehorse]

It matters deeply for some Republicans, since the president having a position on something means they must find a way to uphold the opposite position.

What really should happen is the president should troll the republicans and get them to like something because he's against it, then turn around and say "just kidding!"

For example, if the president said he was against buttsecks, suddenly you'd hear Rush Limbaugh talking about how great buttsecks is, then Faux News would have this big set of stories on how to have good buttsecks, then all the chirping birds in this forum would be parroting their talking points, going over personal stories of buttsecks that they encountered.

Hey jackass, a few things you need to know about me:
1. I'm not a republican, nor a member of any other party. I even voted for Obama... once.
2. I'm in the service, so the goalposts are very important to me.
3. The goalposts have changed so frequently in recent weeks that I have no idea what our nation's end-goal is in Syria. Do we still want Assad removed? Are air strikes still on the table if he doesn't comply, or not? Does the admin still insist that it was Assad who used chemical weapons? If so, will he ever be held accountable? Etc etc

I'm sorry to ruin your little fantasy wherein everyone you meet falls neatly into little boxes labeled "us" and "them."

 

[Gintaras]

Napalm is not a chemical weapon, dude. It's an approved method of warfare. Burning people alive or blowing their limbs off is respected.

Respected....so was 9/11....respected...

You told that...not me....

 

[werepossum]

Respected....so was 9/11....respected...

You told that...not me....

There is no approved method of intentionally making war on civilians unless you can show a specific tactical direction (i.e. an attack at part of the war machine, such as an armament factory.) Even that is greatly frowned upon in today's world.

I used "respected" intentionally - it's a tongue in cheek way to point out that there are much more horrific methods of dealing death that are perfectly acceptable in today's world. Oddly enough, napalming one's foes or blowing their limbs off with explosives or crushing their bodies from over-pressure of suffocating them with fuel-air explosives come to mind as more horrific than a relatively quick death from gas. Although again, intentionally targeting civilians isn't acceptable with any of them.

 

[OrByte]

The OP wants it four ways: Obama would have been a power-hungry despot if ordered attacks against Syria without consulting Congress. But Obama was a wimp for consulting Congress. But Obama would be a ruthless dictator if he ignored a Congressional thumbs-down and attacked anyway. But Obama is a worthless leader for pursuing an alternate solution in the face of a Congress that was probably going to give him a thumbs down.

qft

 

[michal1980]

qft

no truth at all. Asshole is putting words in my mouth, and now you are too.

 

[yllus]

Mr. Friedman nails it pretty well in his piece today (though I had to skip some unrelated bits to get to it):

The New York Times

...

The fact that Americans overwhelmingly told Congress to vote against bombing Syria for its use of poison gas tells how much the divide on this issue in America was not left versus right, but top versus bottom. Intervening in Syria was driven by elites and debated by elites. It was not a base issue. I think many Americans could not understand why it was O.K. for us to let 100,000 Syrians die in a civil war/uprising, but we had to stop everything and bomb the country because 1,400 people were killed with poison gas.

I and others made a case why, indeed, we needed to redraw that red line, but many Americans seemed to think that all we were doing is drawing a red line in a pool of blood. Who would even notice?

Many Americans also understood that when it came to our record in the Arab/Muslim world since 9/11, we were 0 for 3. Afghanistan seems headed for failure; whatever happens in Iraq, it was overpaid for; and Libya saw a tyrant replaced by tribal wars. I also think a lot of people look at the rebels in Syria and hear too few people who sound like Nelson Mandela — that is, people fighting for the right to be equal citizens, not just for the triumph of their sect or Shariah. It’s why John McCain’s soaring interventionist rhetoric was greeted with a “No Sale.”

I also think the public picked up on Obama’s ambivalence — his Churchillian, this-must-not-stand rhetoric, clashed with his “On second thought, I’m going to ask Congress’s permission before I make a stand, and I won’t call lawmakers back from vacation to do so.” The bombing was going to be bigger than a “pinprick” but also “unbelievably small.” It just did not add up.

Finally, there was an “Are you kidding?” question lurking beneath it all — a sense that with middle-class incomes stagnating, income gaps widening and unemployment still pervasive for both white- and blue-collar workers, a lot of Americans were asking: “This is the emergency you are putting before Congress? Syria? Really? This is the red line you want to draw? I’m out of work, but this Syria thing is what shall not stand?”

 

[Matt1970]

Mr. Friedman nails it pretty well in his piece today (though I had to skip some unrelated bits to get to it):
-snip-

Finally, there was an “Are you kidding?” question lurking beneath it all — a sense that with middle-class incomes stagnating, income gaps widening and unemployment still pervasive for both white- and blue-collar workers, a lot of Americans were asking: “This is the emergency you are putting before Congress? Syria? Really? This is the red line you want to draw? I’m out of work, but this Syria thing is what shall not stand?”

The New York Times

That's kinda how I see it. Obama is yet another politician out of touch with how things are in the real world. When unemployment was over 10% he decides the biggest problem facing our nation is healthcare. When he was out pushing for businesses to pay higher taxes, or whatever the hell he was doing at the time, he decided the best way to do that is to ridicule business owners reminding them who built the bridges they drive over.

 

[AViking]

Obama is a lame duck president way too early in his second term. Why he invested political capital on this half hearted idiotic saber rattling is beyond me. Russia made him look like an idiot. He's not fully to blame though. Kerry is a half wit and pretty much handed Putin a diplomatic victory and the pie to throw in Obamas face at the same time.

 

[waggy]

That's kinda how I see it. Obama is yet another politician out of touch with how things are in the real world. When unemployment was over 10% he decides the biggest problem facing our nation is healthcare. When he was out pushing for businesses to pay higher taxes, or whatever the hell he was doing at the time, he decided the best way to do that is to ridicule business owners reminding them who built the bridges they drive over.

/this

I had high hopes for him being president. I bought into the hype. some of his decisions and comments over the years made me go "WTF".

Syria is just the latest blunder.

That article was right on.

 

[OutHouse]

Just wonder...why no one has attacked hypocrites that used chemical weapon on others:

Napalm bombing Vietnam, Ride of the Valkyries

Vietnam Napalm

Famous Vietnam Napalm Bombing Run Video

lol fail.

 

[OutHouse]

Respected....so was 9/11....respected...

You told that...not me....

go take your meds.

 

[OutHouse]

Obama is a lame duck president way too early in his second term. Why he invested political capital on this half hearted idiotic saber rattling is beyond me. Russia made him look like an idiot. He's not fully to blame though. Kerry is a half wit and pretty much handed Putin a diplomatic victory and the pie to throw in Obamas face at the same time.

 

[Jaskalas]

The President became "lame duck" the moment we had that furious healthcare "debate" resulting in a backlash in 2010. Without Congress or a super majority in the Senate there is little that can be done.

 

[AViking]

I might have missed it but what furious healthcare debate? He passed, partially, his healthcare reform.

 

[AViking]

Just wonder...why no one has attacked hypocrites that used chemical weapon on others:

Napalm bombing Vietnam, Ride of the Valkyries

Vietnam Napalm

Famous Vietnam Napalm Bombing Run Video

I'm going to assume English is a foreign language to you. When they are talking about chemical weapons they are not talking about weapons that need to be ignited. Thermobaric weapons and napalm are NOT chemical weapons.

 

[SaurusX]

I might have missed it but what furious healthcare debate? He passed, partially, his healthcare reform.

What didn't he get that he said he wanted?

 

[zinfamous]

What didn't he get that he said he wanted?

Single payer.

And replaced that with the mandate, which he didn't want.

 

[Fern]

Obama is a lame duck president way too early in his second term. Why he invested political capital on this half hearted idiotic saber rattling is beyond me. Russia made him look like an idiot. He's not fully to blame though. Kerry is a half wit and pretty much handed Putin a diplomatic victory and the pie to throw in Obamas face at the same time.

Yeah, I've been hearing that from Washington insiders (journalists and Dem strategists) on TV news programs lately. These are people from the left on MSNBC, not Fox.

They claim Obama has very little leverage or influence on Dem legislators now, and those legislators are not looking from any help from him for the 2014 elections. Also, I sensed from their remarks that the Dems felt Obama didn't do much to help them in the 2012 or 2010 elections.

Obama seems pretty isolated.

Fern

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Yeah, I've been hearing that from Washington insiders (journalists and Dem strategists) on TV news programs lately. These are people from the left on MSNBC, not Fox.

They claim Obama has very little leverage or influence on Dem legislators now, and those legislators are not looking from any help from him for the 2014 elections. Also, I sensed from their remarks that the Dems felt Obama didn't do much to help them in the 2012 or 2010 elections.

Obama seems pretty isolated.

Fern

I was reading HuffPo this morning and they wrote about how the media supported Syrian strije far more than the public. Support for was about equal except for MSNBC which overwhelmingly went for a strike. Maybe Chris Matthews wanted to show he want racist.

 

[Fern]

I think you may be mistaking 52% of all voters for 52% of Republican voters. Republican/conservative support for gay marriage is usually in the 20's-30's somewhere. In contrast, in recent years polling always shows majority Democrat support for gay marriage, usually somewhere 60%+.

Republican support is higher than it used to be, but I'm not aware of any polling that has shown majority Republican support for gay marriage or anything close to it.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/31091/republican-support-for-gay-marriage-jumps-to-52-percent

That's apparently what I saw, but the title is a bit misleading:

An ABC News/Washington Post poll published last week shows that 52% of Republican and Republican-leaning voters under 50 now support gay marriage, as do 81% of Republicans under 30.

I didn't see any numbers for all Republicans, i.e., a poll including those over age 50.

Fern

 

[shadow9d9]

The President became "lame duck" the moment we had that furious healthcare "debate" resulting in a backlash in 2010. Without Congress or a super majority in the Senate there is little that can be done.

They never had a supermajority.. unless you count the few weeks that kennedy was alive and a member that was kicked out of the democratic party.

There was also no "backlash." The Republicans have used record breaking fillibusters to the tune of 2x ever before.. they have never even tried to do anything about healthcare despite 12 years of control(they couldn't care less), so they definitely didn't want Obama to get anything accomplished.