Loose Talk about Red Lines May Give Iran a Green Light

Syria 2For the mullahs in Iran, the light may have just turned green.

When he was running for president in 2012, President Obama drew a red line in the sand and said if the Syrian regime crossed that line, by using chemical weapons on its own people, there would be a price to pay.  They’ve done just that several times since the President spoke and so far there has been no price to pay.

Now President Obama tells us that he wants to use force against the Assad regime, but wants Congress to get on board before he takes action.

“This menace must be confronted,” Mr. Obama said, as he argued for using force to punish the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Not acting, he said, “risks making a mockery of the global prohibition on the use of chemical weapons.”

“I’m ready to act in the face of this outrage,” the president said. “Today I am asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move forward together as one nation.”

This may be the right thing to do, but on the Arab street caution may look like dithering; it may look like weakness.  Could it be, they must be wondering, that the American president never wanted to get involved in Syria in the first place and is now hoping Congress gets him off the hook by withholding authorization for the use of military force against the Assad regime.

Staying out of this mess may also be the right thing to do.  After all, no one knows how things would turn out if we launch missiles into Syria.  Will they retaliate by attacking Israel?  And what happens when the Israelis retaliate?

How could the president look at those pictures of so many dead children, victims of poison gas, and then do nothing – especially after he warned the Syrian regime that there would be consequences for their actions?  But what if an American attack leads to a wider war and other civilians, including even more children, are killed in the maelstrom?  No one can know what will happen if we introduce missiles into a neighborhood that’s already unstable.

No, there are no good answers.

But this president is aware that most Americans are weary of war, especially if it involves attacking a country that poses no direct threat to the United States.  So the president brings Congress in.  If it  votes no on war, the president is off the hook.  If it votes yes and things go badly, he can say, I didn’t do this alone.

This brings us to the mullahs in Iran.  They see what we all see:  an American president who said he wouldn’t let Syria cross a red line, but before this is over, may wind up doing nothing, despite his warning.  So why, they must be wondering, should we take seriously his warning, repeated many times, that he would never allow Iran to possess a nuclear weapon?

Just one day before the president spoke, Secretary of State John Kerry, sounding more presidential than the president, made the moral case for punishing the Syrian regime.

“It is directly related to our credibility, and whether countries still believe the United States when it says something. They are watching to see if Syria can get away with it, because then maybe they, too, can put the world at greater risk…

“It is about whether Iran, which itself has been a victim of chemical-weapons attacks, will now feel emboldened, in the absence of action, to obtain nuclear weapons. It is about Hezbollah and North Korea and every other terrorist group or dictator that might ever again contemplate the use of weapons of mass destruction. Will they remember that the Assad regime was stopped from those weapons’ current or future use? Or will they remember that the world stood aside and created impunity?”

Mr. Kerry, understandably, didn’t bother mentioning that it is President Obama, with his campaign talk about “red lines” and “game changers” that has put U.S. credibility into question.  It is President Obama’s loose talk during his re-election campaign that puts into question “whether countries will believe the United States when it says something.”

There is no easy way out for the president.  Not now anyway.  He should never have made off-the-cuff remarks about red lines in the first place.  But it’s too late now to do anything about that.

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • Jesse Salazar

    Once again this President leads from behind on the world stage no less. He has made a fool of himself in the process. AMERICA is all the weaker because of him.

  • Neal from PA

    “If the United States does not act to punish Assad it will send the wrong message
    to every rouge regime in the world.”

    That message was already sent three times: (1) Obama’s election in 2008 (2) during Obama’s “Apology Tour”; and again
    in 2012 upon Obama re-election to a second term.

    America is now weaker than it has ever been, an Obama is the proof.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    Shock and awe went President Bush,
    Obama preferred sitting of tush,
    til tomahawks shot,
    his face saving bought.
    Now his policy foreign is mush.

  • Drew Page

    We are going to drop bombs and missiles on a country that poses no direct threat to the USA? That’s an act of war. Would we do the same thing if it were China or Russia? The leaders of Iran are nuts, as are most of the leaders of these middle east countries. If they decide to attack Israel because of our strike on Syria, then what do we do? Israel is our ally, we would have to side with them and attack whoever attacked Israel. Russia is Syria’s strong ally, will they feel compelled to attack whoever attacked Syria?
    As I recall, Mr. Obama seemed quite willing to believe that Iran was developing its nuclear program “for peaceful purposes only”. When Israel appealed to America to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, Mr. Obama said it was none of our business. A nuclear bomb would seem to be a more dangerous weapon that nerve gas. If we are going to be the world’s policeman should we not invade Pakistan and take away their nuclear weapons? Do we dare try this with the Chinese and the Russians? Hey, if we are going to be the police, we can’t just disarm the little guys; we’ve got to do the same with the big guys, right?
    Do you see how absurd this all is? I love America and would fight anyone who attacked us, but no one has attacked us. No one in the middle east is pointing an ICBM our way. We are playing with fire. Are we ready to risk Armageddon to police the Muslim world? Are we really that stupid? Don’t answer that.

  • steve

    im for the war in syria but the Pres. gave them to much time..if he had any gutts,,he should of had congress come back earlyer…but u have to remember who is Pres..and not expect anything being done right for America,,from him,,or this is a stall so he could say on a trip to the middle east,, i did what i could for u..because he wants muslems to be looked at as a great people,,not war mungers,,and wanting to fight from the time they go to bed,,to the time they get up,,every day..great people.. steve

  • justaguest

    If you read Obama’s book, he says when things go south he will be on the side of the Muslims. He is doing what he sad he would do. He is what he says he is in his book “Dreams of My Father”. Israel should be very afraid because I doubt we will help them.

  • D Parri

    It was a flip–yes–but not a very graceful flip. Pres O has turned the ‘red lines’ over to: the world, humanity, Congress, the U.N., and anyone else within proximity. It was inevitable and expected. The important thing to remember is how he managed to draw political points and favor over a year ago based upon such a deceitful tactic. Trust? Eroding quickly.

  • Wil

    Bashar al Assad is certainly not my kind of guy, but he has not turned his nation into a war-making expansionist machine that threatens his neighbors with its designs on their territory.

  • gold7406

    The red line has turned into the yellow brick road and may end up being the highway to hell. A 30-90 day attack will topple assad’s regime very quickly. Military defections will happen fast and who will be left to pick up the pieces?
    I can even see syria asking us to rebuild everything we destroyed.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      This could be the action that opens up the gates of hell. The prophets predicted it would all come to an end in the Middle East and the pieces of the puzzle are ready to be put into place. If Syria or any country retaliates with attacks on Israel, Israel will not go gentle and the world will see it as an over reaction on their part and the UN will demand the world respond for their massive retaliation. Just saying!

  • D Parri

    The reality of the situation has not changed. If there is enough imperative to require a military strike against another country, then there should be sufficient demand to properly plan such a strike. I feel that given adequate proof of chemical weapons being used by Assad, then the justification for action is met. This would not leave the question unanswered and requiring Congress’ approval.

    What is left unanswered–even now–is how we will deal with Assad in the future–regardless of the outcome of the pending action currently being debated. This is where a foreign policy statement is necessary, and it can come from one–and only one–source. The president is responsible for formulating and stating his own foreign policy and it cannot be relegated to any other branch of government. Congress has the opportunity to support or oppose a clearly stated policy, but it is the president who is responsible to develop that policy. Secretary of State personnel might be the messenger to take it to the public, but the president is responsible–unequivocally.

    Now, the relevance of a clear policy relating to Syria, Assad, and other potential forces that might come to power in Syria has never been clearer than the present time and in light of the pending actions being debated. A policy should state, among other things: What will the U.S. do if evidence of chemical warfare agents have been used? Who will the U.S. support if a regime change is indicated? What limitations will be placed (duration, strength, etc.) upon U.S. military operations? Is the U.S. prepared to act in the face of opposition from its allies?

    If such a policy existed today, it is likely that much of the current debate would not be taking place and U.S. military action would be rest squarely upon the shoulders of the Commander-in-Chief. This is one of the purposes of formulating such a policy statement, and it would lead to greater respect from world leaders by following a more clear and decisive course of action with respect to the Syrian crisis, as well as future U.S.-Syrian relations.

    Unfortunately, the lack of a definitive policy is core to the problems now landing on the desk of both the president and Congress. If the criteria for action had been stated two years earlier, and if those actions had been carried out–given a proper justification, then the “red line” rhetoric would not have remained simply rhetorical, and it is likely that a much greater stability in that region would at least be in the pipeline.

    As it stand today, however, the policy is currently being developed, sans presidential delegation.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      I am not going away as many here at Bernie’s blog would like. I am saying it again, most Republicans do not trust this fraud. They think there should be a response and the response should be to take out Assad and then let Allah sort it out. They don’t trust Kerry, Hagel, McCain nor Obama to be those in charge of the operation. I predict the House does not give this fraud the votes he wants.
      Lt. Mike Zullo has been briefing Congresspersons with the evidence he and his investigators have collected over the past 23 months proving Obama has been using fraudulent documents (birth certificate and Selective Service registration). Some of these Congresspersons now realize that they were duped by this fraud. This needs to be investigated before Congress votes to give this Fraud in Chief the power to use our military again. He is our biggest national security risk.
      Can you explain to me why Bernie Goldberg and other contributors to Fox News are not reporting or looking into this scandal. How difficult would it be for any of them to just call Lt. Mike Zullo and interview him. Obama is our biggest national security risk, not Syria and none of these folks give a crap.

  • Tim Ned

    I would say stay out of it. However when I look at the picture of gassed children I say take this butcher out!

    • Wheels55

      We are sending in Dennis Rodman to calm Assad down.

  • Chuck_Borealis

    I know! Let’s go golfing! That, and perhaps some ‘Chemical Weapons Free Zone’ signs should do the trick! I will be accepting my Nobel Peace prize in person, provided there is a golf course nearby.

  • Wheels55

    This is a no-win situation. Do nothing, innocent people may still die in Syria. Do something militarily, we probably will cause much worse to happen. I say do nothing – we should just let that civil war play out.
    We need to stand by Israel, but do nothing else.
    Hopefully Obama has learned what happens when he just flaps his gums to sound tough. He isn’t tough, just stupid.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    I find it fascinating, that so many pundits are justifying military action because (of Obama’s red line rhetoric) the U.S. needs to save face? So some folks now actually think it’s in the National interest to kill people to save face? Argue self defense, argue National interest, argue proxy war with Iran and Russia, But argue save face? Really?

    • Seattle Sam

      Worked well for the Japanese. Oh wait . . .

  • Dennis

    When will people figure out that the real problem with Pres Obama is the same one he has always had? He has absolutely no leadership ability at all. It is an always has been about image over substance, looking cool and getting people to like him over being President and doing what is in the best interest of the nation and not just about his image. Now he is looking for Congress to bail him out of his foolishness

    • fitzsimmons Photography

      No one talk’s about his narcissism and his inability to do anything unless he can campaign and get a following behind him. Narcissists need a source(like a drug) if one source runs out or disappears they find another. The source in this case is voters and followers. Every decision they make has to do with them and their needs. I,I,I,I and I.

      • legal eagle

        Can you tell us, which President, was not a narcissist or which politician is not a narcissist….
        By the way, what’s wrong with being a narcissist?

        • Integrity

          Do you take pictures of yourself in front of a bathroom mirror? QED

          • legal eagle

            I know your getting an erection just thinking about it….LOL

          • George Williams

            He’s a eunich, Integrity. Nothing to see.

        • George Williams

          Narcissists are obsessively in love with themselves and cannot view any objective except in the light of what is good for them personally. Rather than do what is good for this country, Obama promotes himself. You’re a fool if you can’t see where such obsessions are not good character traits.

          These are some trait of a narcissist. You tell my why these should be admired or even acceptable in a president.

          An obvious self-focus in interpersonal exchanges

          A lack of psychological awareness

          Difficulty with empathy

          Hypersensitivity to any insults or imagined insults

          Flattery towards people who admire and affirm them

          Detesting those who do not admire them

          Using other people without considering the cost of doing so

          Pretending to be more important than they really are

          Bragging (subtly but persistently) and exaggerating their achievements

          Claiming to be an “expert” at many things

          Inability to view the world from the perspective of other people

          Denial of remorse and gratitude

    • legal eagle

      When one has no substantive argument to make they usually have to resort to a pejorative argument….I am not sure how one judge’s another’s leadership ability but I guess it’s a comparative standard…So tell us, in your opinion, Obama has no leadership ability compared to whom?

      • Integrity

        Just about anyone. QED

      • Wheels55

        All other Presidents. Even Presidents that make bad decisions take responsibility for the decision and accept the blame. I have a hard time naming one good decision Obama has made and one bad decision that he has owned up to.

        • legal eagle

          How about saving the auto industry? Was that a good decision?

          • DonaldYoungsRevenge

            Saving the auto industry by closing down dealerships owned by Republicans and screwing the investors. They should have taken them through the bankruptcy process and that way the over bloated pensions would have been scaled back. That would have been fair. Obama is a FRAUD.

          • legal eagle

            I understand your need to argue for argument’s sake…I would check with your doctor and seek treatment for Obama Derangement Syndrome…

          • DonaldYoungsRevenge

            Here is some more facts about this pervert and fraud. He claims he “evolved” in his opinion about homosexual marriage when in fact their is bountiful evidence from his former church brothers and sisters that claim he is bi-sexual. They refuse to give their names for fear that they will end up like their brothers Donald Young and Larry Bland, both homosexual friends of Obama.
            Obama and his lovely wife support wholeheartedly Klan Parenthood, a racist organization that takes pleasure in aborting black babies by the tens of thousands. There have been 16 MILLION black babies aborted (murdered) since Roe vs Wade. This Obama guy is a really nice guy, what a leader and example for his black brothers and sisters. If I am “deranged” what the hell does that make Obama and yourself for supporting this scum.

          • legal eagle

            Are you still off your meds?

          • George Williams

            I can tell that you’ve never been off your drugs.

          • George Williams

            Obama is a Marxist in a party that is nothing but the rebranded Communist Party of America. You’re the one who’s deranged, as are all of Obama’s sycophants.

          • Wheels55

            The best way to save a business is to let it fail, file for bankruptcy, re-emerge as a stronger business. Instead, Obama’s actions screwed shareholders and rewarded unions. Obama, like most politicians, is clueless when it comes to business.
            Supply and demand will ultimately dictate whether there is a need for all of the US automakers. I for one, hope so. I drive an American made vehicle – but do so because it was the best one for me.

          • legal eagle

            Wheels…So, if it went bankrupt shareholders would not have gotten screwed? You have no idea what you are talking about….
            So you think Obama personally negotiated the auto bailout? I understand you need to criticize Obama even when his policies.
            As someone who worked on Wall Street for many years I can tell you that the auto bailout has been a huge success. You want to deny the obvious…that’s your problem..

          • George Williams

            Preferred shareholders were screwed, and they’re now in court, along with non-union workers who were done out of their pensions, like the white collar Delphi workers. Of course Obama didn’t personally involve himself. He never does. He’s like Hitler. Hitler didn’t sign one document pertaining to the extermination of the Jews. Obama only appoints people he knows are loyalists; people who know his objectives and what’s good for the party, as Hitler’s minions did. The truth has come out that the White House was fully involved in negotiations that resulted in the screwing of non-union employees and the preferred shareholders, in spite of their lies to the opposite.

            If GM is doing so well, then why does it want to buy back its shares from the government at a price less what the government paid for them as the result of the bailout? The truth is that the federal government would take a big loss today if it sold its shares. Another truth is that GM’s Volt, a project supported by Obama, is an abject failure. No, it is you that has the problem: Obama Sycophant Syndrome. You wouldn’t get far in Wall Street today. I surely wouldn’t trust you with a nickel.

          • Wheels55

            I certainly do know what I am talking about. Government should stay out of business.
            I do not think he negotiated anything personally. I believe he directed the effort. Just like he loves to stand up and say he has directed this organization and that committee to do something. He is all hot air – but is dangerous since some people actually think he knows what he is talking about.
            Obama’s arrogance is really showing these days with his statement that he does not need congressional approval and seems to not care what the UN thinks about attacking Syria. Fortunately, his M.O. is to do nothing. Let’s hope he stays true to form.

          • George Williams

            And how many industries is Obama prepared to save? What business is it of the government in a capitalist society to pick and choose which fail and which succeed. The auto industry would have filed bankruptcies, as provided by federal code. They didn’t need Obama to save it. They would have restructured, as provided by law, and all the creditors would have been treated fairly under the law. Instead, Obama the socialist, didn’t like the way the law was written and, expecting payoffs from the unions, violated the law, as is his habit.

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        Obama has been proven to be a fraud by a team of career law enforcement officers who conducted a 23 month long criminal investigation. Lt. Mike Zullo has been briefing Congresspersons and other Washington VIPS by showing them the overwhelming evidence to prove Obama to be a fraud. There is no leadership when there is fraud involved, period. This Fraud in Chief will not finish his 2nd term.

      • George Williams

        It’s just like the failed progressives to declare that we can’t judge Obama because there’s no standard to do so. I think most Americans are finally getting the picture though, and that Patterson comes closest to speaking for the humblest of us.

        I think that this writer sums up Obama…

        I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
        By Matt Patterson (columnist – opinion writer)

        Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

        Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

        He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

        Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.

        Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

        Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

        Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.

        And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

        What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

        The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)

        And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.) But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

        In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      Key adjective left out, he has been proven to be a FRAUD and that will soon be exposed. He will not survive this second term.

  • Neal from PA

    Actually, Obama is hoping the Congress will say NO WAY; because he really doesn’t want to take any action at all…unless that action can indirectly help his Muslim friends through some consequence of the action taken.

    I say indirectly, because Obama knows he could never directly show support for the Muslim Brotherhood or Al-Qaeda; but that is exactly what he desires most.

    Obama is not a leader, he is a follower; else he would not make statements that he has no intention of acting upon. He “talks the talk”, but fails to “walk the
    walk”. Pay no attention to what he says, only what he does. And what he does
    hurts America every time he acts.

  • ksp48

    I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
    By Matt Patterson (columnist – opinion writer)

    Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

    Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

    He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

    Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.

    Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

    Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

    Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.

    And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

    What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

    The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)

    And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.) But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

    In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

    • D Parri

      I believe that it will go down in history as one of the most astonishing ‘grooming’ projects ever carried out. It would be interesting to know if Pres O had a personal agent, when the grooming for office was started, and some of the details associated with the coordination and coagulation of political powers along the way. Don’t expect to get the truth from his own autobiography–that will filter out slowly in the years to come.

      • legal eagle

        So there was a secret plot to get Obama elected President and one day we will find out what it is and who his personal agent was?
        Make sure you inform everyone when it starts filtering out so we can all read about it….

        • D Parri

          There were many interesting aspects to the political success story known as Barack Hussein Obama. I am positive that the details are not known by most, but I am also confident that the potential commercial success for such a disclosure is quite enticing.

          Since it was you who first mentioned the ‘secret plot’, perhaps you have something to tell. I’m sure you’ll have an attentive audience.

          And, as I mentioned above, it would be interesting to know IF he had a personal agent. It sounds like you might be willing to confirm that fact. Otherwise, I guess we’ll just have to wait till later.

          • legal eagle

            You brought up “secret agent” and now you’re asking me about it?….LOL

          • D Parri

            Yeah, LOL is right. I used the term “personal agent”, which is a far cry from a “secret agent”. You brought up the notion of something being “secret”–not me. Since you do not understand the difference between a personal agent and a secret agent I find that any continuation of this discussion has become fruitless. fous le camp!

          • legal eagle

            Ok…I’ll change my statement to personal agent…Is that like Ari Emanuel of CAA or Scott Boras, the sports agent?

          • DonaldYoungsRevenge

            Personal agents would have been a better term. The Democrat Party, David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, Bill Ayers are far from “secret.” They could have only succeeded with a lap dog state run media with their heads so far up this corrupt administrations ass that they cannot see the light and will never see the light. Add to that you have a Republican Party that is scared to death of this so-called “black President.” (Remember he is 50% White, 43.25% Arab – all those Arab names on his supposed Daddy’s side including his own, 6.75% African/Negro. Only in a dumb down political correct world does that compute to a “first Black President.”
            One thing I will say in defense of the Democrats, they stick together and will take a Republican to the wood shed. If any republican has a forged birth certificate or a fraudulent registration with the Selective Service and a flagged SS# he would have been taken to court and tried for treason.

          • D Parri

            Like I told ‘eagle’, Personal Agent IS the term I used in my original statement.

        • DonaldYoungsRevenge

          There is no secret plot. The evidence is right out there on broadway but both the conservative media and the libtard media refuse to examine the evidence to points to use of fraudulent documents. There has been a 23 month long criminal investigation of this criminal activity and no one is covering the event. Do you think if this were a Republican President being criminally investigated that anyone would be ignoring the event. This is the scandal of the century, not a “secret plot.” These fraudulent crimes could have been stopped right in their tracks if they just investigated the fraud.

    • legal eagle

      So you paste some other right wingers opinion as a post….For what purpose? Who is Matt Patterson? Is your opinion not important?

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        So what will this White/Arab/African/Negro president’s library be like. LMAO!! It should be placed right in the middle of the worse ghetto in Chicago or right next to the headquartes of the American Communist Party. The man is a known FRAUD and he will not be around to finish his second term.

      • George Williams

        I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
        By Matt Patterson (columnist – opinion writer)

        Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

        Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

        He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

        Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.

        Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

        Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

        Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.

        And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

        What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

        The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)

        And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.) But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

        In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

    • Neal from PA

      Obama’s legacy is toast… HISTORY will record that what Obama did in Eight Years, it took a Generation to correct…he will not have the place in history he so eagerly covet; other than being the first elected Half White/Black President. Instead of ranking with Lincoln and Reagan and other giants, it seems more likely that he will be a case-study in presidential failure like Jimmy Carter.

      I could list at least a dozen or so reasons (facts)…Obama’s place in HISTORY…behind Jimmy Carter, as the worst President in HISTORY. For what he and his administration have done and will continue to do, he should be “IMPEACHED”.

      FACTS MATTER …

      (1) Great presidents and leaders not only have to enunciate their vision; they must lead by example and inspiration. Franklin Roosevelt spoke to the individual. He and Ronald Reagan had the ability to make each American feel that the president cared deeply and personally about them. Why is he planning vacations to Africa and Martha’s Vineyard this year? Why is he clueless about real world events? Why the corruption and lies? Why is Obamacare failing? Why the non-answers to questions on Benghazi, IRS, Fast & Furious, etc.?

      (2) Looking at what has transpired over these past 5 years and the current scandals in this administration is the very real reflection of the real Obama. The staggering arrogance and self-absorption in Obama and his administration, is it any wonder these scandals occurred in the first place. Should it be any surprise that they are indignant when asked to respond to legitimate questions from congressmen or news reporters? This is a group of Chicago politicians, transplanted to Washington, who believe they are above the law and whose personal and political agendas trump all else.

      (3) Obama’s obsession with so called social justice, spreading the wealth around and in fundamentally changing the United States. Politicians will come and go, but if Obama expands the power of the bureaucracy, he expands the power of the Left, with the managers and minions who share his view of the world. (Obama isn’t the leader of the free world; he’s the front man for a permanent liberal/socialist bureaucracy, the face hiding the merciless deep orifice of corrupt politics.)

      (4) What is currently taking place in the Middle East is directly caused by Obama’s weak leadership. His “apology tour” did nothing to strengthen him or America in the eyes of those who have declared WAR on us and want to see us dead; or anyone else. After all…Obama has said he is a “spy behind enemy lines”.

      (5) Obama is a man and CIC that; as a civilian, because of his background and associations could never hold a security clearance of any kind; now has access to very high-level secrets of not only the US, but other nation’s secrets they have shared with us. Make me shutter at what Obama MAY DO or NOT DO.

      (6) What other countries think of Obama… The Russians think he’s a putz. The French think he’s rude. The Germans want him to stop spending. The Indians want him to get his nose out of their environmental business. The North Koreans think he’s a joke. The Iranians won’t acknowledge his calls. And the British can’t even come up with a comprehensive opinion of him. As for the Chinese, he’s too frightened to even glance their way. (After all, China now owns a large portion of the United States).

      (7) Obama appears to be a man filled with bitterness, anger, and scorn for anyone of an opinion or view other than his. He acts in the most detestable, malicious, vindictive ways in order to manipulate and maintain power and control over others. Using every crisis whether real or manufactured to push his immoral and unconstitutional agendas.

      (8) Obama is void of the basic emotions that most true Americans feel regarding this country and insensitive to the instinctive pride we have in our national heritage. Oddly and perhaps even inevitably, his political experience, a cakewalk, has positioned him to destroy the Constitution and the Democrat Party’s hold on power in Congress because in the end it was never about the Party; or his swearing to defend and protect the Constitution of these United States of America. It was always about his Communist/Marxist/Socialist ideology, learned at an early age from family, mentors, college professors, and extreme leftist friends and colleagues.

      (9) Obama uses his Office to threaten and create fear while demeaning and degrading anyone who opposes his policies and actions. A true leader, who has noble self-esteem and not false confidence, refrains from showing such dread of critics and displaying a cocky, conceited attitude, (only conmen and immoral politicians act this way).

      (10) Not a day goes by that Obama is not attempting to defy our laws, remove our rights, over-ride established procedures, install controversial appointees, enact divisive mandates, and assert a dictatorial form of power (and with help from the Judiciary and the MSM, sometimes succeeding; and has no fear of, nor respect for our Constitution, Congress and We the People).

      (11) Obama creates chaos for the sake of keeping people separated, envious, aggrieved and ready to argue. He incites people to be aggressive toward, and disrespectful of, those of differing opinions. And through such behavior, Obama has lowered the standards for self-control and mature restraint to the level of street-fighting gangs (when he should be raising the bar for people to strive toward becoming more considerate, tolerant, self-disciplined, self-sustaining, and self-assured).

      (12) The hypocrisy of Obama and his Administration is why “We the People” are at the breaking point. We did not elect these people to make up their own rules as they see fit; to change or ignore the laws to benefit them and not us. We also didn’t elect the President to sign executive orders to get his way just because Congress didn’t agree with him.

      (13) Never have we had a President who used such tactics to harm and hurt the people and this country. Never have we had a President who spoke with a caustic, evil tongue against the citizenry. Never, in this country, have we experienced how much stress one man can cause a nation of people – on a daily basis! (Obama has promoted the degeneration of peace, civility, and quality of cooperation between us. He thrives on tearing us down, rather than building us up. He is the Architect of the decline of America and the changing of our Democratic Republic into a Marxist/Socialist State).

      I could go on and on and on…Obama’s place in HISTORY…behind Jimmy Carter, as the worst President in HISTORY. For what he and his administration have done and will continue to do, he should be “IMPEACHED”.

    • hihoze

      Matt Paterson hit the nail on the head with this piece. Perfectly said.

      • legal eagle

        Who is Matt Patterson?

        • George Williams

          How does it feel being one of Obama’s whores?

          I Too Have Become Disillusioned.
          By Matt Patterson (columnist – opinion writer)

          Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

          Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League, despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer;” a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.

          He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?

          Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.

          Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?

          Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.

          Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.

          And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

          What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

          The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.(An example is his 2012 campaign speeches which are almost word for word his 2008 speeches)

          And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. Remember, he wanted the job, campaigned for the task. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. (The other day he actually came out and said no one could have done anything to get our economy and country back on track.) But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

          In short: our president is a small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        When John McCain was vetted by the left wing nut jobs concerning his “natural born Citizen” status the dumb ass Republicans should have done the same with Barry Soetoro. They would have found out that he had NO legitimate American birth certificate which we now know to be true via a criminal investigation that lasted 23 months. He was forced to produce a computer generated 9 layer PDF file as a birth certificate and it is a forgery. Republicans are so so stupid.
        That being said, many Republican Congresspersons now know the April 27th, 2011 document is a forgery by testimony to the document expert used by Obama, Reed Hayes. He has written a 40 page affidavit attesting to that fact. Oh, you haven’t heard about this scandal, that is because Fox News and the likes of Bernie Goldberg refuse to discus it when invited onto various news shows and in his blog.

  • Richard Crane

    All this anti-Obama rhetoric is really quite amusing. There is absolutely nothing that the current President could do that would placate most of the commenters here. The article’s main thesis is that he’s damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. If he went to war without getting Congress’ support, you’d lambaste him for abusing warpowers. If he did nothing, you’d call him a wimp. And you question the veracity of the claims that Assad really did use chemical weapons. Did you all believe Bush and his claims that Hussein had WMD’s before you blindly supported his rush to war in Iraq? And Joe Potato who knows that the White House ID is phony. Just how do you know that?

    I don’t mind pure debate when there is a give and take with facts and opinions, but for Pete’s sake, be consistent. If it was OK that Bush took us to war based on the now unfounded claim of WMD’s, then why do you automatically question Obama? Yes, Obama is asking Congress to go to war, because that’s what the Constitution requires him to do.

    • D Parri

      A year ago it did not appear that Pres O’s intended course of action in the case of clear and compelling evidence showing that chemical weapons were being used would be to seek Congress’ approval for a military strike. His ‘red line’ comments clearly indicated that as POTUS he had the authority and did not need Congress’ approval, and he stated unequivocally that he would respond. These are the facts.

      It is a clear consensus of opinion that holds Pres O responsible for the comments and actions that he takes, or does not take. He made the comments. He has chosen to not act without Congress’ approval, and this appears to be a shifting of the burden of responsibility away from him and onto Congress’ agenda.

      Furthermore, the scenario taking place from a broader perspective of world leadership and powers has now taken a less than favorable hue as a result of this indecisiveness and lack of consensus among nations who are normally supportive of actions we pursue–especially for those with a humanitarian basis.

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        The Russians know he is a fraud. The Brits know he is a fraud thanks to the many writings of Lord Christoper Monckton on his discovery of the April 27th, 2011 forged birth certificate. Israel knows he is a fraud and if necessary they will let the world know about it. I wouldn’t be surprised if some in the Middle East know he is a fraud. The Egyptians recently declared that they have proof that Obama is part of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    • ksp48

      Perhaps its because whenever OBAMA opens his mouth, disaster seems inevitable.

      • legal eagle

        Is this mow an issue of Obama’s dental work…LOL

    • legal eagle

      Most of the people on this site are just Obama haters…They wouldn’t care what happened they would complain…If the economy is doing well, they complain about the deficit…If their is civil unrest in the Middle East, they blame Obama..
      Most of the people on hear are ideologues who don’t care about facts they just need to criticize…99.999% did not vote for Obama so at the end of the day it’s a cathartic experience for a lot of bitter older men..

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        As if you are not an “ideologue.” LMAO!! This man is a FRAUD and that is a great reasn to despise him. Anyman that would lie and cheat his way into the White House becomes the biggest national security risk this country has ever faced. He needs to be exposed before that most important vote is taken.

      • George Williams

        And today, less than half would vote for the charlatan community organizer. Have so many aged so quickly?

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      Here you are lying, Bush did not take us to war based on WMDs, that was one of at least 14 reasons why we went into Iraq to take out Saddam and his sons who were putting their opposition into wood chippers. You liberals are always confused. Remember it was most of the former Clinton administration who gave those eloquent speeches as to why Saddam needed to go, better than GWs speech. There were WMDs in Iraq and a top Saddam General has written a book about how he helped move them to Syria while GW was dithering with the useless UN and the Democrats. You are not including all the facts when you talk about Bush taking us to war. The Democrats and Republican in Congress voted to take us to war, not just President Bush. The Constitutional lawyer Obama and his cabinet have declareed that the Fraud in Chief does not need to go to Congress to attack Syria, who is right you are the Constitutinal lawyer?

  • Brian Fr Langley

    So how does one extend democracy to a civil population whose religion means submission? And how does one pick, one’s catastrophe’s? If Assad loses it will be a catastrophe for a multitide of groups including the minority Christians in Syria along with Israel, and the many Sunni sects. If he wins tens of thousands have died in vain. The Syrian situation is now and always has been above Obama’s pay grade. The only real solution here is to let the Arabs settle this mess themselves, and focus on the real threat to the national interest, Iran and their nukes.

    • cmacrider

      Well said Brian

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      In other words, “Let Allah sort it out.” I think I have heard those words before.

      • Brian Fr Langley

        Since both sides in this conflict are calling on Allah for victory, I think he’s sitting this one out. A fine example Obama should follow.

  • Homer

    The difference between clever and smart persons, is that smart person can get out of a situation, that the clever one won’t get into in the first place.
    Now, Obama got himself into that messy situation, so he’s not clever.
    He didn’t get out of the mess, so he’s not that smart either.

    That is, if anyone needed any proof.

  • 633

    Congressional override should be clearly phrased in such a way that the Iranians cannot assume or infer that the Congressional veto has a linear implication for any subsequent Iranian response. As an example: a concurrent resolution which indicates that the Congressional rationale is based on a keep your powder dry concept and that concern actually motivated the veto.

    • Seattle Sam

      The Iranian government will derive their assumptions from the Congressional record rather than observable behavior? The Iranian government is on record that their development of fissionable materials in no way should suggest that they intend to create weapons from them. You buying that also?

      • legal eagle

        Who cares what the Iranians assume?

  • Melvin_Udall

    The green light for the Mullahs was the Neda video during the Green Revolution, and Obama clearly not giving a damn. That ship sailed long ago.

    The green light was the constant capitulation to Russia, especially his “flexibility” comment caught on a hot mic. Again, that ship longed sailed.

    If there was to be intervention in Syria the Obama Administration should have in the beginning, as they instead cheered the “Arab Spring”. What is happening now was predicted by all, and is their desire of the Arab Spring. ***Obama even all but admitted it*** with his comment in his Saturday speech, “unleashed the forces of change”. He may as well have waved a neon sign!

    Look to the Weathermen Manifesto from his buddy Bill Ayers. Overextending the military while empowering the “oppressed peoples” of the world is precisely the goal. Interfering in Syria when no matter who wins they hate the US does exactly what the Weathermen would wish.

    • legal eagle

      Always good to see that the Vietnam apologists still remember Bill Ayers…
      “You don’t need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows”
      Bob Dylan

      • Melvin_Udall

        huh?

        • legal eagle

          What is the huh for…Bill Ayers or Bob Dylan?….LOL

          • Melvin_Udall

            Obviously there is no huh for either of them. Maybe it would be the rest of your comment as it pertains to mine. But clearly that’s too complex a thought to come to you so I no longer care.

          • legal eagle

            Thanks for the snotty response…Makes as much sense as your comments regarding Bill Ayers…figured it was a little to complex for you..

          • Melvin_Udall

            Yes. because it can’t possibly be you. bye

          • legal eagle

            Happy Labor Day…

      • ksp48

        Its just legal eagle troll. don’t expect it to make any sense.

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        We also remember John Hanoi Kerry and all the lying he did in the early 70s and now the scum is Secretary of State after a couple of hundred Swift Boat Vets and a handful of Congressional Medal of Honor receipients declared him UNFIT FOR COMMAND.

        • legal eagle

          Where were you during the Vietnam war? Hiding behind your mother’s skirt?

  • dontbslow

    War could be the cost of satisfying his id & ego. A man with zero experience, no wisdom and a radical ideology is a dangerous person to have as commander-in-chief.

    Is there proof Al Assad deployed the chemicals?

    A president that has destroyed his own credibility with deceit, lies and misdirection, can only muster minimal support with humility . . . unfortunately, humility doesn’t exist in a narcissist.
    The time to act has long past, stay home. Obama looks & acts very confused, this was not supposed to happen in his Utopian world.

    • legal eagle

      Too bad that John McCain is not the President…We could be fighting 4 or 5 wars to show what a tough decisive old man would be doing as POTUS…

      • D Parri

        Or, how about a tough, decisive old man who is capable of making good decisions that result in bringing our troops home after accomplishing their mission.

        • legal eagle

          I thought that’s what Obama did?…While McCain was whining about the US leaving Iraq and Afghanistan?

          • D Parri

            So, you would score those as ‘mission accomplished?’

          • legal eagle

            Yes…he got us out of Iraq and will shortly have us out of Afghanistan….

          • D Parri

            So, your criteria for measuring success appears to be retreat. That says a lot.

    • legal eagle

      There is plenty of proof….if you want to read the “proof” it’s available…

      • dontbslow

        Kindly refer me to a a reliable source, because I find many references that chemical weapons were used, but none that definitively credits the source of deployment.

        As a factual basis, the rebels have a much greater motivation than Assad. He has been winning with his military, over 100,000 casualties, vs chemicals 1,429 casualties.

        What obama says is insignificant, there hasn’t been much truthfulness out of this administration the last five years.

  • joepotato

    Sorry Bernie, the vast majority of citizens don’t give a rip about O’Soebaba’s bruised ego, or the Syrian dilemma, although it’s a tragedy. There are no “good guys” in that fight and Osama Obama saying that our national security is threatened is pure BS. Furthermore, other sources claim this latest gas attack was done by the “rebels” with material supplied by the Saudis, which they probably got from the CIA. The war hawks are in line but the vast majority of US citizens don’t see the need for a possible intro to WW III. Osama Obama supports the Muslim Brotherhood so maybe he should resign and join the jihadis in another nation. It’s obvious he doesn’t work for the USA. He’s probably not even a USA citizen.

    • legal eagle

      What sources say that the chemical attacks were done by the rebels? This is a possible intro into WW III? Di you major in hyperbole in school or do you work for Fox News?

  • JANE CURTIN

    THIS IS THE SAME THINK CLINTON DID WHEN HIS SCANDAL WAS GETTING IN HIS WAY. LOBES. OFF 3 TOMAHAWKS AT AN EMPTY TENT AND SAY ” LOOK WHAT WE DID TO THE ENEMY” bARRY HAS 4 SCANDALS THAT WE COMSERVATIVES AND FOX ARE KEEPING ALIVE…SURE NOT THE LSM SO BARRY DOES HIS OWN WAG THE DOG.

  • D Parri

    Word for the day:
    vacillate — to practice the pendulum-swinging style of decision making carried out by Pres O wherein opposite ends of a spectrum of choices may be taken up and supported as needed in order to curry favor with any number of political factions appearing to hold substantial political influence; usually engenders a loss of credibility in the long term

    • Seattle Sam

      Prevaricate is a more accurate word.

      • D Parri

        The intent was in pointing out Pres O’s lack of a clearly defined stand on issues. Get involved? I could support it if the case were made and followed through. Avoid involvement? Same answer as before.

    • legal eagle

      Vacillate before bombing another country and killing people? Outrageous. What kind of black wimp do we have as POTUS?

      • D Parri

        Character is more than skin deep, so I would avoid the racial innuendoes. Vacillator? Yes. Wimp? Maybe. Leader? No.

        • legal eagle

          Whether someone is a leader is an opinion…..Who is the last POTUS that you considered a leader? I get it..You hate Obama?…You didn’t vote for Obama? When have you voted Democratic on a presidential election?

          • D Parri

            The last one I voted for was Jimmy Carter. I feel he was a fine person, but a lousy President. Yes, and if you have an a**hole, then you have an opinion too! No, I did not vote for Obama. I did not vote for Reagan in his first term, but I did vote for him in his second term–and I changed parties at that time. Reagan was a true leader.

            Finally, no, I do not hate Obama. I also do not feel that he is a good leader–like Carter.

          • legal eagle

            Reagan’s been gone 25 years…Anyone since then?

          • D Parri

            Yeah, Bush. Except for his character flaws, Clinton was a good leader.

  • gold7406

    dichotomy…..why is it that all the countries that promote the “religion of peace” are so brutal towards their citizens and neighbors.
    muslims whacking muslims is okay, but if an infidel whacks or speaks ill of a muslim it’s racist and bigoted.
    it appears that they are guilty of anti-assimilation.

    • dontbslow

      Dichotomy is a great word, especially when describing the moral dilemma of which is worse; killing 100k with bullets & bombs, killing 1,429 with chemicals or killing 100,000 per month just because a mother doesn’t want to be bothered with her new baby?
      Anyone else consider it strange; that an entire political party would support & finance the killing innocent babies (100k victims p/month) but point their self-righteous finger at one that commits the same horrible act (1,429 victims) with chemicals?

  • ssquared

    President Chicken Shoot strikes again….or maybe not.
    Is there anything left that could make this man look more incompetent or foolish…NO!
    He has already bested himself and proved to be worst President in history.

    • joepotato

      He’s a phony POTUS… Check his phony ID on the WH website… It’s pure fabrication…

  • DonaldYoungsRevenge

    No matter what you may think about the Christian Bible one can make a very good case that there could be a big chunk of Bible prophecy about to be fulfilled before our very eyes. Bible history basically started with the creation of the Nation of Israel through the miracle birth of Isaac to Abraham and Sarah, the son of promise. One can make a great case that the Bible has much prophecy that declares that Bible history ends in the Middle East in and around the Nation of Israel and in particular, Jerusalem. It would not take much for this mess in Egypt, Libya and now Syria to spread right into Iran and all hell to break out against Israel. With a timid and pathetic fraudulent American Commander in Chief things could go down hill very quickly for Israel and the world. One can even see the possibility that things could get so bad for Israel that they would be willing to sign a peace pack of 7 years with the devil himself. The clans of Ishmael and Isaac have been going at it for a very long time. The Jewish prophetic clock could begin to tick again shortly. Just saying!!!

  • MontanaMade

    So, are we absolutely certain that it was the Assad regime that gassed the civilians? Or, could it have been al Qaeda doing this in the shadow, framing Assad & expecting the U.S. to retaliate and do the very job they’ve been trying to do all along? Wouldn’t that be something- arm in arm, lockstep, with the very animals that have killed- murdered- thousands of Americans not so very long ago…

    What happens if the U.S. goes through with this and bombs Syria- what will they target- aspirin factories again?

    And yes, the rest of the world is watching and wondering the same thing I have been- how is Obama going to squeak out of this mess he created by his Red Line talk? Looks like he has some kind of exit strategy for himself now- blame it on Congress- again.

    • ssquared

      He can’t possible blame it on Bush so he has to blame it on Congress.

    • D Parri

      Remember, this is the same administration whose ‘State Department’ head official stated almost a year ago that it was without question that the attack on Benghazi was a result of a video and a spontaneous protest response that got out of hand. The comment made by Pres O that Romney had a habit of ‘shoot first, aim later’ probably did more harm to candidate Romney than most realize. It became crystal clear who was following the ‘shoot first…’ doctrine, so don’t forget that little lesson in history when you hear Kerry and Co. use terms such as “undeniable”, “without a doubt”, “unquestionably”, etc.

  • Jess Salazar Sr.

    Despite the civil war taking place in Syria with all the atrocities going on, it is still a sovereign country. If the POTUS orders a cruise missile strike it would be an act of war. Russia would then be obliged to come to Syria’s defense. The Russian’s already have their interest deeply rooted there. But I digress. The strike would not stop the war just slow the regime ability to wage it. The chemical weapons and their delivery systems will still be intact. It would take boots on the ground to secure them and that would mean at a commitment of at least 75k men. We as a Country have no national security interest vested in Syria. The cost alone are prohibitive. There is a time to wage war but America must not be pulled into this fight in spite of the moral reasons to do so. As a Vietnam veteran I ask my Countrymen have we not learned the folly of going to war when its outcome is not known and the sacrifices of our young in uniform a waste of precious life?

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      We certainly don’t want to wage war with this Fraud as Commander in Chief. This is a man who could not bare to sit in the situation room to watch the raid on the bin Laden compound. Via his lover Reggie Love we now know he was playing 15 games of Spades with Reggie that day. His cabinet allowed a photo shopped picture of Barry sitting in the situation room as if he was really there. Many people thought the picture was photo shopped and now we know it to be true via Reggie Love. This is a fraud. How do we know this, three of his personal documents are fraudulent – birth certificate, selective service card and flagged SS#, all of which enabled him to qualify to be a candidate. God help us!

      • legal eagle

        You seem to be obsessed about gays..Are you homophopic or just a regular bigot?

    • legal eagle

      Russia is going to come to Syria’s defense? What exactly do you believe Russia is going to do?

      • D Parri

        How about continue to supply arms, supplies, and Hezbollah troops–like they have been for the last 2 years and more.

        • legal eagle

          Russia has been supplying arms to Syria and others for many years…If Syria has money to buy Russia will sell ..just as we do in Israel, turkey, Egypt etc…nothing new there….

          • D Parri

            That is correct and we agree. So, what was the purpose of your question, “What…Russia…to do?”

  • BakerBabe

    Obama as always, is trying to cover his butt. The only reason he does anything.

    • joepotato

      The phony POTUS wont even take the blame for his phony LFBC… Of course that’s just felony fraud…. no biggie….

  • D Parri

    I actually do agree with some of the arguments for not striking Syria. However, what I cannot stomach is the constant vacillating of Pres O and the image it creates for the U.S. allies and opposition. What would you suppose is opinion of most of the radical Islam and Muslim extremists of the world regarding not only the Commander-in-Chief of the world’s mightiest military force but also of the country who elected him as President and leader? Are his comments and actions gonna’ be a deterrent to Iran? N Korea? Iraq? Russia?

    • D Parri

      In terms of deterrence utility, ‘Perceived Strength equals Actual Strength’.
      Unfortunately, Pres O has accomplished much during his time in office to diminish the world’s view of the perception of strength of the U.S. govt.

      • legal eagle

        You mean he hasn’t started enough wars ala Bush?

        • D Parri

          Which war? He ain’t gonna’ be responsible–one way or the other. Responsible for a military action? Only if it is successful.

          • legal eagle

            Is that unusual for a President to take credit for a successful military operation?

          • D Parri

            Yes. A true leader does not take credit for himself but, rather, gives credit to the personnel who place themselves in harm’s way. It is normal for President to take responsibility–regardless of the outcome.

          • legal eagle

            So ..getting back to my questions….which president did not take credit for a successful operation and which President did not give credit to the troops? Got a name?

          • D Parri

            Yeah, Obama. He never misses the opportunity to credit himself with the ‘order to take out Bin Laden’. Although it was a joint effort, he is always front and center for the credit shots. I understand, though, he has to take credit because it is the only thing that he could possibly claim.

          • D Parri

            Yes. It is normal for a leader to give credit to those who have placed themselves in harm’s way. A true leader will accept responsibility, regardless of the outcome.

    • legal eagle

      Of course you agree with some of the arguments for not striking Syria….Obama says good, you say bad….Obama says right, you say left…
      If Syria continues to use chemical weapons you say…What happened to the red line?

      • D Parri

        My only question remains, “What happened to the red lines?” Period.

        • legal eagle

          The red lines have been breached and Obama will now take action…Did you expect it to happen before there was certainty about the chemical weapons…Do you think Obama would follow the example of Bush and decide, without proof, that something occurred?

          • D Parri

            Absolutely not. Pres O will never follow the example of Bush because he does not have the strength of character to allow him to make a crucial decision and be prepared to accept responsibility for the outcome. Pres O must always protect his hind side by shifting the responsibility to another party. He was quite fluent in blaming Bush for the world’s woes when he first took office. The next shove-off point appears to be the Republican party and any leader within the party.

            Therefore, don’t expect Pres O to decide or take action regardless of what he might have said or indicated in the past. Red lines breached? Ok, then find out a way to get out of following through with what he said he would do. Simple.

  • docww

    I find it interesting that the President’s comments went from “a line in the sand” to “a punchline on Saturday Night Live”. Apparently it’s amateur hour at the White House.

    • Vivian

      A line in the sand…very interesting…I guess Barry meant the sand trap at Farm Neck in MV…Try a wedge…

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      It won’t be long from now where we will not be calling him “President.” The truth about his usurping the office will soon come to light and it won’t be pretty. The Brits already know he is a fraud thanks to Lord Christopher Monckton who knows full well his April 27th, 2011 birth document was an utter forgery. This man needs to be investigated before he gets all of us murdered.

      • legal eagle

        What will you be calling Hillary…Madame President?

        • DonaldYoungsRevenge

          I will be calling here what she was, Bill Clinton’s “Bimbo CZAR.” The Benghazi Queen. Obama’s bitch!

          • legal eagle

            very classy…..have you thought about seeking medical care?

        • D Parri

          How ’bout, “Hillary”?

        • Integrity

          What difference does it make!?!?!? QED

    • Drew Page

      Once again, his mouth wrote a check his azz couldn’t cash.

  • souvoter

    Now potus wants congress to vote to go to war without knowing about a plan or if there is a plan; sorta like obamacare (vote for it and find out what’s in it later)!!??!! He’s now falling back on the democrat political correctness nonsense that has gotten us here, thusfar. He will blame Republicans either way this turns out. That’s why he is seeking approval…He is only trying to save face for himself for shooting his mouth off w/o thinking; as usual. What a mess this incompetent has gotten America into!!!!

  • D Parri

    Isn’t it clear? Kerry just got finished with Chris Wallace on FOX and I believe he stated it exactly in the most apropos terms…”…President Obama has made his decision…he has now turned it over to Congress….” That sums it up. No decision to act as Commander-in-Chief until he gets Congress to accept responsibility.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      Is this the John Hanoi Kerry that lied about his fellow Vietnam Vets back in the early 70s? Is this the John Hanoi Kerry that bought his camera along with him during his tour in Vietnam to take pictures of himself? Is this the John Hanoi Kerry that had more than 275 Swift Boat Vets declare that he was NOT FIT TO COMMAND? Is this the John Hanoi Kerry that many Congressional Medal of Honor warriors signed on with the Swift Boat Vets and declared him NOT FIT FOR COMMAND? Is this the John Hanoi Kerry who has his picture all over the walls of buildings in North Vietnam as a hero? Is this the same John Hanoi Kerry who threw his medals away and then having them surface on the walls of his Senate office? Is this the John Hanoi Kerry that voted to send our troops to Iraq and then quickly started stabbing the Commander in the Chief of those troops in the back? What a piece of crap and we are to trust him?

      • D Parri

        One and the same. Trust him only to act true to form in maintaining the same character that helped him earn his current reputation. Do not trust him to act with integrity.

      • Drew Page

        Yep, this is that same John Kerry.

    • joepotato

      It’s a good thing he backed the ships up… we don’t need more ….

  • KAG505

    No wonder barry went golfing after his speech to congress. Being behind the desk where the buck should stop, is just sooooo stressful. It is extremely interesting though the idea that Bernie brought up that barry really did not want to get involved in Syria in the first place and is hoping congress will not vote to get involved. That way he can save face by not making a bad problem worse and he gets to blame his inaction on the Republicans.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      Thanks to Barry’s lover Reggie Love we now know that the situation room picture of the Obama cabinet watching the raid on bin Laden was photo shopped. Reggie said Barry couldn’t watch the event in the situation room so he decided to play 15 hands of Spades with lover boy. And we still call him Commander in Chief. Pathetic!

  • dlmstl

    Take this guy off of TOTUS and it’s ‘deer in the headlight’ time. Remember his now infamous ‘Joe the Plumber’ comment? How many uh’s, ah’s and eh’s do we hear during press conferences? His gaffs are numerous and embarrassing. The 57 states and corps becoming corpse are two of my favorites. The WH is in full panic mode. His only hope is that Congress says no. They will then crank up the linguistic jujitsu spin meisters and try to bs their way out. The Punk is getting punked.

  • D Parri

    Just remember though, Bernie, it’s never too late to do nothing, unless you actually take action or make a clear decision.

  • D Parri

    It appears that it is Business As Usual in the Whitehouse today. There was a stiff breeze of Hot Air as Pres O performed a strong undercurrent of abdication of responsibility while attempting to remain relevant for an extended period. Although the pertinence of any action has now already been diminished and this step will continue to accelerate the rate of loss of any future relevance, Pres O has chosen to maintain his near-perfect record of performing in the most powerful office in the world as a clear non-leader. This strategic move will allow Pres O to continue daily updates and to espouse more rhetoric using his now-famous ‘What did he just say?’ style of Pres O GarbO.

    Please stay tuned for the latest nothingness from the Whitehouse…brought to you dead as we hear it!

  • VermontAmerican

    Obama’s ploy is just like Ben Nelson’s Cornhusker Kickback. Nelson threw it back to the (Republican) Governor, saying that the governor should decide whether Nelson should give it back. Odious Democrats.

  • Paul Vasek

    Excellent article, Bernie. I agree that Obama’s big mouth got us into this and we now look weaker for it all around the world.

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      What the hell are we all expecting, the man was and is and will remain a complete and utter FRAUD. There is not one shred of legitimate evidence that can enable anyone to know who the hell this man is or where he came from.

  • Drew Page

    What’s the sudden concern with what is happening in Syria? Despotic rulers in Russia, China, N. Korea and in a number of African countries have been murdering millions of their own citizens throughout history. Are you suggesting that we should go to war with each of them? I have no problem with America refusing to trade with these countries, or going on TV and calling them nasty names. But we have spent too many American lives and too much American treasure in fighting in other people’s civil wars. And why, to stop communism? Have we learned nothing from Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan?
    I would rather stop the march toward communism right here at home. The current administration’s attitude is “let’s punish the successful by taking from them and reward the failures through “redistribution” in order to buy their votes Let’s punish employers with taxes and regulations, then bitch about there being no jobs.”
    Bernie, you seem to be believing the administration’s contention that is was Assad that called for the gassing of his own people. There seems to be no reservation in your mind. Is it possible that it could have been al Qaeda that did it and blamed it on the Syrian government, in order to get support from the U.S.? I really don’t know who was responsible for the gassing because I wasn’t there to witness it, but I have several reasons to call the veracity of this administration into question. Let’s see, first there are all the unfulfilled Obama promises made during his campaigns; Fast & Furious; the admitted IRS targeting; the Benghazi massacre; the NSA spying on millions of Americans’ by seizure and storage of their phone records, e-mails and other electronic communications, in direct violation of the Forth Amendment of the Constitution; and the Department of Justice seizure of Phone records of the Associated Press and its reporters and of Fox News reporter James Rosen. Then there are the continual lies being told to congressional investigating Committees by Eric Holder, the head of the NSA and Louis Lerner. I believe that anyone who takes the word of President Obama, Eric Holder, Jay Carney, the Director of the IRS, the director of the NSA, Louis Lerner or Susan Rice to be either extremely naïve or just plain self deluding.
    Back in the day, if you did something bad, be it lying, cheating, stealing, committing murdering or treason, even if it was only once, you were branded forever as a liar, a cheat, a thief, a murderer or a traitor. You didn’t have to do these things every day to be branded, once was enough. Today, it seems that unless someone engages in that kind of bad behavior 24/7, each and every day, there are some who will refrain from applying the appropriate label to such people because “labeling” is politically incorrect.
    Maybe Assad ordered the gassing of the rebels and maybe he didn’t; I wasn’t there to witness who did it. Based on their list of broken promises, their habit of lying, covering up and then lying about covering up, I am reluctant to believe much of anything this administration says, That’s not my fault, it is theirs.

    • Jess Salazar Sr.

      Drew your views are spot on. Good points!

  • Celsius1939a

    I never support anything Obobo wants to do. He is an incompetent f o o l.

    • Seattle Sam

      C’mon. I’ll bet you’d agree with this statement he made in March, 2006:

      “America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.”

      He’s still right about that today.

      • Celsius1939a

        I hate to admit that something he said might be true even though he would not say that now. Debt problem? What debt problem?

  • Joh

    I believe he has let his mouth paintt him into a corner and now he is left looking like the politician he is. Now, he has said he can wait until Congress is back in session for a vote. I believe he sees the “do nothing congress” as his way out. If they vote no, he can claim that he wanted to retaliate but the horrible Tea party Republicans would not back his play

  • sgtstriker

    Syria is 90% Muslim. Muslims all treat their people, their family members, their wives, their children inhumanely. No matter which side wins this battle in Syria that country will never be a trusted friend and ally to the United States. We should take no side in this action, send no arms, no money, and sure as hell – no troops… Let them do as they have done for thousands of years.

  • Tom

    Why is it the Muslim Community cannot police Assad them selves. He has to be a disgrace at least in some Muslim circles as what he does reflects on the entire Muslim culture. Is it they would rather see someone else’s blood spilled rather than their own to dispel this appalling human being?

  • Paul Borden

    Do we know for certain that it was Assad who used the chemical weapons? It would seem to be, but on the other hand, it wouldn’t be above the rebels to launch them on their own people to gain support and rally forces against Assad. This issue isn’t that chemical weapons were used. They were. Isn’t the question who really used them? Didn’t our intelligence (and that of our allies) “confirm” the presence of WMDs in Irag?

    • DonaldYoungsRevenge

      The intelligence concerning WMDS in Iraq was right. The intelligence came from many other intelligence sources besides the American services. One of Saddam Hussein’s top generals declared that he helped move the WNDS to Syria during those wasteful months Bush spent at the UN and in the halls of Congress. The same thing will happen in Syria as this fraudulent administration dithers with the UN and Congress. Syria is moving them or hiding them as I write. They are not stupid enough to let them remain in one exposed place.

      • Paul Borden

        I really didn’t phrase my comment right. I believe you are quite correct. My real point is that the people who are criticizing us for going into Irag with “incorrect” intelligence (in their view) are now accepting without question what is being said about Syria. And now we have a story from McClatchy News (hardly a right-wing source) that Russia has evidence that the rebels launched the chemical weapons attack, not Assad’s military.

  • rbblum

    A progressive American idealist dealing with a radical Islamist caliphate ? Now, what could go wrong ?

    • D Parri

      Yes, and does anyone still think that Pres O is not a Muslim? His actions speak louder than his words–and he’s got lots of words.

      • DonaldYoungsRevenge

        Barry Obama is whatever he wants to be at any given moment. There is a damn good chance that he is a Muslim since a faithful Muslim is permitted to LIE for the greater cause. It is the only religious system in the world that allows LYING for the greater cause. Being Muslim is not the more serious issue, the fact that he has used fraudulent documents to enable him to be eligible as a presidential candidate. Three of those documents have SERIOUS problems, one is a forgery and one is a fraudulent registration and the third is a flagged fraudulent SS#. Connect the dots!

  • Devil”s Advocate

    Supposing the US actually strikes Syria. Suppose we severely weaken their military and their ability to defend against the rebels. What choice would the Assad Regime have at that point than to resort to more chemical attacks? Does anyone really believe a “military strike” with no “boots on the ground” will stop further use of chemical weapons? Assad has shown he will do WHATEVER it takes to stay in power.

    • D Parri

      You are correct in your assessment that Assad is only limited by his capabilities–not his character or ethics, or respect for human dignity. However, when Pres O makes comments like his “red line” rhetoric for the sole purpose of ‘sounding strong’ and thus gaining political points, he obviously does not possess the depth of knowledge required to understand where the potential outcome could stand in making a clear threat in which he now appears to be backing away from. In attempting to shift the responsibility for making a decision to strike over to Congress’ plate, he is without doubt abdicating his earlier position of responsibility in making that decision. So, he gains points in making his comments and later instructs Congress to ‘take out the garbage’ for him. A clear mark of a true non-leader.

  • lark2

    The real threat to the United States is Barack Obama. This man’s incompetence knows no bounds. I hope we can make it to the end of this train wreck presidency. Still it is curious that inspite of all the failures , Obama seems blameless …… It is shocking. Are we all under the influence of some gas?

  • Brian Fr Langley

    Red line green light and a mushroom cloud over over Tel-Aviv. As horrible as the situation in Syria is, it doesn’t come close to the threat Iran poses. The Arabs will sort themselves out the way they always have. Very Messy. The Persians (Iranians) on the other hand, take a longer view, if they get the nukes they’ll use em. Nothing would assist them more, for establishing their long dreamed Shia caliphate, than “liberating” Palestine. Shia pre-eminence at last. Red line green light and a mushroom cloud over Tel-Aviv? It may begin on the shores of the Mediterranean, but once started, there’ll be no safety on the Atlantic.

  • legal eagle

    Looks like the foreign policy hypocrites are out in force…..War is great when John McCain and Bush says it is…a limited missile strike is very very bad when Obama
    proposes it…damn the reasons…

    • Drew Page

      War isn’t great, regardless of who thinks it is. We have wasted too many American lives and too much American treasure interfering in other countries’ civil wars. Have we learned nothing from Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan? Whether it was Truman, LBJ, Bush, McCain or Obama who thought it was ok to interfere in other countries’ civil wars, they are all wrong and ultimately responsible for the loss of life stemming from our interference.
      Obama has stated that the purpose of his proposed missile strike at Syria was not to affect a regime change, nor was it to destroy the alleged stockpile of nerve gas, nor was it to obliterate Syrian air power, nor to harm civilian centers. What good will be accomplished by dropping a few Tomahawk missile into the Syrian desert? Is it to show that Obama “means business” when he threatened Assad with “retaliation” if he gassed his own people? If we send money, arms or any other sort of aid to Syrian rebels, we may find those same resources used against us as they were in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya. Typically the rebels we support wind up being as bad or worse than the people they were rebelling against; the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt immediately comes to mind.
      Would any American president be so eager and willing to start lobbing missiles into China or Russia for murdering millions of their own people? No, I think not. But when it’s some dictator in a pipsqueak nation in the middle east or Africa decides to start killing the locals too many Presidents get real ballsy and want to start talking about “the civilized world’s outrage” and how the U.S. must take the lead. Horseshit. If the rest of the civilized world is so outraged over Syria’s actions, for once let them go in and clean up the mess. Let’s sit this one out. Then we will see how much of the rest of the civilized world is willing to stop the outrage.

      • lark2

        Amen brother!

      • legal eagle

        So you see no difference between shooting missiles into Syria and invading Iraq? What am I missing?
        Didn’t we do the same thing, quite successfully in Kosovo?

        • Drew Page

          Would you see any difference if Syria lobbed missiles into America or invaded America? Do you think the American people would see one as an act of war, but not the other?
          How successful were we in building U.S. – Islamic relations as of a result of our involvement in Kosovo? Does the Muslim world love America to a greater extent because we attempted to stop the butchering of Muslims there?
          Do the Muslims in Iraq love us any more than they ever did because we ousted Saddam? How about the Egyptians, the Libyans or the Pakistanis? We continue to send billions in foreign aid to them and we sent their rebels weapons to oust their dictators. Surely the Afghanis must love us after all the weapons and money we gave them to fight off the Soviets. How many of those weapons were turned against our American soldiers when we sent our troops into Afghanistan to rid them of the Taliban? How many of the weapons we sent to Libyans to oust Gadaffi were used to murder our Ambassador to Libya and the three other Americans? So tell me, will the world be safer if we launch a missile attack on the deserts of Syria? Will that have all the Muslim countries shaking in their boots in fear of “U.S. retaliation”? Or will it be a signal to the rest of the Muslim world they have nothing to fear from the ‘paper tiger’ in America?

          • legal eagle

            I’m not sure why you are concerned about who ‘loves us” and who doesn’t? We have a strategic interest in the middle east which is oil and Israel….Do you actually think that the only weapons available in the world to other countries are US weapons?
            Will the world be safer?…I’m not sure…Will the Middle East be more stable…absolutely…Will this send Iran a message…absolutely….

    • lark2

      So … if the Democrats perceive that a Republican has made a mistake … then they are entitled to make the same mistake. Interesting justification. For the record, Bush never said “War is great” … Congress passed a resolution authorizing military action in a timely manner AND we had a very broad coalition of countries who joined us in the actions we took. You appear to be one of the Obama supporters who wear blinders and hold him blameless for everything. BUSH is still to blame and now … add McCain. All your blameless fool needed to do was keep his mouth shut about “Red Lines” and “Game changers” and he wouldn’t have the problem he has. Let’s watch him turn this into political wrangling that makes him out to be a victim of the evil Republicans.

      • legal eagle

        It’s not a justification…There is a difference between a missile strike and invading a country ….but you know that already…

        • lark2

          It is not just “a missile strike” (singular)… more like a rainfall of missiles of relative short duration. You say, “There is a difference” between that and an invasion …… In this country, I wonder how we would perceive this “difference” if some country were to hit one of our cities with a rainstorm of missiles – however brief the duration. I wonder ….. Perhaps we would just blame Bush or evil Republicans, greedy Bankers, greedy oil companies, the rich, the Insurance industry, Wall Street, and on, and on, and on …… We certainly are not going to blame the Bamster … he was out playing golf. With all due respect, it’s time we ALL stood up for our country … the situation we find ourselves in is WAY beyond politics!

          • legal eagle

            False equivalence is always the sign of a political argument…You appear to hate Obama so no matter what he does you will moan and groan….If he does nothing you complain and if he does something you complain…..
            What exactly does the term “stand up for your country” mean? Didn’t you say the same thing when people were protesting the Iraq war?

    • Integrity

      I was totally opposed to the Irag war. I am totally opposed to intervention in Syria. Am I absolutely sure that this is the correct course or action? No. This is why character, ethics, leadership, morality and integrity matters. I have to trust that the decision President Obama makes is for the right reasons. This is the same trust that I gave President Bush. I sure wish President Obama had not uttered his red line comments. Rhetoric may sound good while you are campaigning, but his injudicious use of words has placed us in a very precarious position. What would I like to happen? President Obama getting all the credit for his smart diplomacy that prevented the need for military action and results in a free and peaceful Syria. This is a better pipe dream than having everyone work at Walmart; is it not? QED

      • legal eagle

        So why did you vote for Bush in 2004 and McCain in 2008?
        You cant see the difference between bombing Syria and invading Iraq?
        What, other than seeing the best possible information, do you attribute Obama’s motives to?
        Obama is not running for office. He doesn’t need your credit for doing what he was elected to do?
        Tell me why the Saudis are urging US bombing?

        • Integrity

          We haven’t had very good picks to choose from in recent years. Sadly, many of us are voting against someone rather than voting for someone else. Both political parties have done serious damage to our country. Why are you so enamored with the political party that intellectually indentures you? So, now that Obama is no longer running for office (sure could have fooled me!), he now has carte blanche to do whatever he wants? Then to hell with him, the Saudis and the dolts who will blindly follow him over the proverbial cliff! QED

  • Acu-Vue

    With 9-11 right around the corner, what perfect timing to divert our nation’s attention away from Benghazi, the IRS, the NSA, and the endless amount of scandals that were coming at us so “Fast and Furious” ly! Obama should be thanking Syria for their timely actions. Although from what has been reported, this has been going on over there for over a year now. So, was it good timing for Obama or did he his just decide to bring this to our attention at a juncture where his approval ratings were plummeting like never before!

    • Drew Page

      “Wag the Dog” is a movie based on that very premise. Due to a president’s falling poll numbers, members of the president’s inner circle decide it would be good to create a diversion. Through their contacts in the media, they create an illusionary civil war in Albania where U.S. intervening troops were reportedly attacked by Albanian rebels. A movie producer, hired by the inner circle, creates non-existent battle scenes between the Albanian government forces and rebels, with American troops rescuing innocent Albanian peasants. The movie producer creates scripts for the president to address the country about the success of the American troops there, lifting his popularity in the polls sufficient to get him re-elected. When the movie director wants to take credit for what he did, he is quietly taken for a ride by the inner circle operatives, never to be seen again.
      Let’s see if Obama’s gamble of waiting for congressional approval helps or hurts him. Hopefully a majority of Republicans will join with some of the Democrats in voting down this attack on Syria. Having done that, I think they should resume the investigations into the Benghazi massacre, the IRS targeting and the NSA spying on all Americans in violation of the Forth Amendment.

    • D Parri

      Yes, this has been going on for almost a year now, and I believe that Pres O has milked the ‘red line’ rhetoric far beyond what was a ‘normal’ political posturing. Once again he has been able to ‘increase the debt’, but this time it is a debt which he is finding rather difficult to throw off onto others. The corner he’s painted himself into comes as a result of the debt he owes to the American people because of acting and speaking carelessly in order to gain political points in his rather narcissistic approach to the presidency.

    • legal eagle

      Why does Obama care about his approval ratings when he’s not running for office? I think you’re confused..

      • Drew Page

        I’ll tell you why Obama cares about his approval rating, even though he will not be running for another term. The mid-term elections are coming up in 2014 and he wants Democrats to re-take the House and to keep control of the Senate so he can have free reign to raise taxes, retain Obamacare, grant amnesty to all the illegals, pass and implement Cap & Trade, sink more government investment, i.e. tax money, into “green energy” companies of his friends and campaign contributors and expand social welfare programs. THAT’S WHY.
        Are you really that stupid that you need this explained to you?

        • Acu-Vue

          Drew. Thanks for responding to that cool aid drinker for me. I vowed to never recognize him again. Thanks also for your recommendation of “Wag the Dog”. I am not a movie goer but I will check it out.

  • gbandy

    Our “paper tiger” President should of just kept his threats and ideology’s about red lines to himself. In this case he now has telegraphed his targets and already has made the comments of “limited attack” and “no boots on the ground”. So in actuality this really is a empty threat. I feel what he is doing now in an attempt to save face will give the option to Congress who will turn down the attack. My biggest question is why would Obama more than less give the terrorists a pass on killing Americans in Benghazi and now be so bent on attack? As we know the world has really lost faith in Obama and his foreign policies. If there are any.

  • beniyyar

    Obama painted himself into this corner by his wildly bellicose threats and “red lines.” In fact the party responsible for punishing the Assad forces for their use of chemical agents is the Arab League and not the United States. But Obama tried to show how tough and determined he was so he shot his big fat mouth off one time too many and now he has to put up or shut up. The problem with Obama is that he is all politics all the time, smearing his opposition, and using his bully pulpit to intimidate his enemies. Well the Syrians have called his bluff and all Barry can do is dither and hope that the Congress will save him from his own folly. Obama speaks loudly, wears a dress, and has no stick at all.

    • Drew Page

      All Obama knows is community organizing, getting people stirred up and turning them against each other. When it comes to the economy, world affairs, energy, health care and leadership, he is a rank amateur.

    • legal eagle

      The Arab League has less influence in the Arab World than the National Football League…WAKE UP..

  • Brhurdle

    I certainly agree that President Obama’s declarations about red lines were totally amateurish and totally unworthy of a President who should have had a well planned position with all the ramifications analyzed. It is obvious that it was a spontaneous comment that was unwise given the diplomatic implications. However, it is doubtful that it will change the perception that other countries have of the US. I think other countries see the same ineptness that we see and realize that Obama is easily out manuvered given his many positions on both domestic and foreign policy that illustrate naivety. The only thing that will change this is a President who presents a decisive, confident demeanor instead of the boorish academic approach of Obama.

  • FloridaJim

    Obama and his foolish 60′s radicals are lost and should be removed to save America from shame and humiliation along with bankruptcy. Obama, Biden, Kerry, Rice, Powers, Clapper, Hagel, Nuland, Lerner, frighten me.

    • legal eagle

      The ease with which you are frightened might lead one to believe you are paranoid…Are you?

    • Drew Page

      Left in office they scare me too. Out of office they couldn’t scare a rabbit.

  • hihoze

    What is the risk reward in throwing a few nothings into vacated real estate in Syria? By upping the ante with a symbolic attack what happens if Iran and others call him and raise the ante with a rainstorm of rockets falling on Israel? Is Obama trying to set off WWIII or exterminate the Jews or establish a Caliphate or arm the Muslim Brotherhood or al Queda or make new enemies everywhere??? I can’t see any rewards worth the risks.

  • Vivian

    By the way, Mr. Goldberg, you are the best in your business!!!
    THANK YOU.

  • savage24

    Obama’s whole presidency has been threatening talk and then it is Tee Time at the golf course. It takes more than talk, golf, fundraisers, and vacations to be the most powerful man in the world. Some backbone and attention to details would go a long way to restore the honor and integrity of our country, but the believers of the nanny state really do not care.

    • Vivian

      Amen

    • legal eagle

      Savage 24 appears to be another tough guy talking nonsense….

  • Seattle Sam

    Bernie, you seem to be under the impression that the government in Tehran EVER believed that Obama was someone they needed to take seriously. To them this man looks just like Jimmy Carter with a very dark tan.

    • legal eagle

      Which Administration has Syria taken seriously? What a bunch of nonsense…

      • JDinSTL

        Tehran is in Iran

        • Integrity

          Be careful, you are dealing with the superior intellect! QED

        • legal eagle

          Did I say Tehran was in Iran?

      • Drew Page

        I know of no other American administration that has given Syria such an ultimatum. do you?

        • legal eagle

          I know of no other instance where Syria has used chemical weapons….The Assad regime has been a source of concern for the past 20 years..

          • Drew Page

            Neither of us knows whether or not Syria has ever gassed its own people, but you seem to accept the administration’s charge that they did. I can recall a few years back when the intelligence agencies of Great Britain, Israel and the U.S. were convinced there were WMDs in Iraq. Is it possible that could prove to be untrue again? Don’t you think it’s a bit premature to start shooting up the place with missiles?

    • legal eagle

      Thanks for your bigotry…..

  • Vivian

    Typical Chicago Bully all talk no action…

    • hihoze

      Notice how our big talking president mouths off with “his” military, standing behind him? Now he’s finding out that our military is not “his” military and shooting off his mouth like a community organizer isn’t leading or responsible. In short, Barack is unprepared for the job and he’s way in over his head….and that’s being kind. He could be doing this on purpose.

      • Vivian

        Excellent point!!!

  • Don Huntington

    How pathetic does the USA look now that you have a weak and dithering president? There is no respect or fear from your enemies – only loathing. You picked a child to do a man’s job and now you are living with it. You decided that a silver tongue was better than a stout heart but those great swelling oratories of Obama have turned out to be an as empty as your collective pocket-books. Your once great country has quickly become a laughing-stock and this portends terrible days ahead for most of the world that once looked to you for leadership.
    Beside all that, you are now among those “nations that forget God”.

  • Craig1748

    This President is weak, weaker than Jimmy Carter and that is really weak. This President lies and has many working directly under him (Atty. Gen. Holder for one) that are even more corrupt and bigger liars than he is………..where is the GOP on this man and his henchmen? Just rhetoric is all you hear from the vaunted conservatives and nothing else!!

    • legal eagle

      Those educated colored folk like Obama and Holder sure are weak unlike those tough white guys like Bush and Cheney…….

      • Integrity

        Isn’t the current VP a dumb old white dude? QED

        • legal eagle

          Joe is anything but dumb…Craig1748 said that Obama is weak and Holder is corrupt and a big fat liar…I was just responding to a moronic statement…

          • Jeff Webb

            >>>Joe is anything but dumb<<<

            Apparently you're anything but sober.

          • Integrity

            My bad. Not exactly a strong endorsement for the VP. QED

  • Andy

    As usual, Bernie, right on point.

    • vivian

      Always

  • gold7406

    We “helped” iraq, afghanistan, egypt and libya and now they dislike us even more than before. The major powers and the rest of the world are content with sitting on the sidelines and watching assad gas his citizens. Maybe we should remain a spectator and not a participant.

    • legal eagle

      Who cares whether “they dislike us”? They like U.S. money…

      • JDinSTL

        Obama’s foreign policy proves that it’s more dangerous to be a friend of America than an enemy.

      • Vivian

        This is no US Money…it is in China…

        • Integrity

          You can’t fix stupid, even if it comes from the superior intellect! QED

          • legal eagle

            Thank you for your comments about me……Compared to you I am a genius…not that difficult a hurdle to overcome..

          • Integrity

            You are welcome. Your opinion. My opinion: I would mop the floor with you in a debate. QED

          • legal eagle

            I’m sure you have plenty of experience mopping floors…

          • Integrity

            I applaud anyone that works for a living, regardless of the job. Actually, I have vast experience mopping floors and have done it quite well. I also clean bathrooms and no one cleans a bathroom better than I can. “If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he
            should sweep streets even as a Michaelangelo painted, or Beethoven
            composed music or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so
            well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, ‘Here
            lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.” Every case turns on the facts. QED

          • legal eagle

            I an sure that those poverty wage workers in America are thrilled with your applause….In your fantasy world those with jobs should be thrilled even if the job pays Wal-Mart scale wages…

          • Integrity

            Perhaps not. However, I think the majority of them would appreciate respect in lieu of condescension. What is your obsession with Walmart anyhow? For some reason I can’t picture you even shopping there. QED

          • legal eagle

            My “obsession” with Wal-Mart is this…Sam Walton’s children comprise the world’s richest family… Despite being worth approximately $100 billion Wal-Mart still pays 20% less than Costco and offers few if any benefits to their workers.
            Additionally, Wal-Mart is America’s largest employer..70% of Wal-Mart employees are eligible for state benefits and food stamps because of low wages…

          • Jeff Webb

            Nice job pretending to care one iota about poor people.

            If the wages were raised to something you approved of, resulting in low income shoppers having to pay higher prices, I’m sure you’d still shout your compassion from the rooftops

          • legal eagle

            Amazing how you will always defend the indefensible….I don’t know anyone who defends Wal-Mart’s practices unless they are paid to do so…This is not about compassion…This is about Wal-Mart paying the same wages as Costco, one of their main competitors…

          • legal eagle

            This is not a compassion issue…This is an economic issue…The U.S economy is largely based upon consumer spending not the Waltons hoarding $100 billion dollars…I’m amazed at your lack of critical thought….

          • Jeff Webb

            >>This is not a compassion issue…This is an economic issue…The U.S
            economy is largely based upon consumer spending<>not the Waltons hoarding
            $100 billion dollars…<>I’m amazed at your lack of critical thought….<<

            I'm not surprised by your abundance of thoughtless criticism..

          • legal eagle

            So, does paying an employee a living wage make a difference when it comes to profits?

            Harold Myerson writes in a terrific piece published in today’s WashPo—

            “One lesson that emerges from the experience of low-end retailers is that putting workers in crummy, low-wage jobs tends to yield crummy service as well. McDonald’s earnings have fallen, the Wall Street Journal reports, and a management webcast to franchise owners acknowledged that customer dissatisfaction is rising in part because “service is broken.” Myerson adds, “Some of the most successful retailers follow a different path. As MIT management professor Zeynep Ton argued in Harvard Business Review last year, Costco and Trader Joe’s pay their workers far more than many of their competitors, offer their employees opportunities for promotion and enjoy markedly lower worker turnover and far higher sales per employee than their low-road counterparts. Sales per employee at Costco are nearly double that at Sam’s Club.(emphasis added)”

            As the old saw goes, you get what you pay for. Costco pays their employees a livable wage and gets sales per employee at double what Walmart subsidiary Sam’s Club gets from their employees who work for lousy pay.

            Maybe the time has come for Wal-Mart to take a lesson from Costco and consider the potential upside of treating employees like human beings.

            It might just prove to be good for business.

          • legal eagle

            At the end of 2012, there were 3,216 Wal-Mart employees who were enrolled in Wisconsin public health care programs, more than any other employer. Add in the dependents of Wal-Mart workers and the total jumps up to 9,207.

            Factoring in what taxpayers contribute for public programs, the report estimated that one Wal-Mart supercenter employing 300 workers could cost taxpayers at least $904,000 annually.

          • legal eagle

            At the end of 2012, there were 3,216 Wal-Mart employees who were enrolled in Wisconsin public health care programs, more than any other employer. Add in the dependents of Wal-Mart workers and the total jumps up to 9,207.

            Factoring in what taxpayers contribute for public programs, the report estimated that one Wal-Mart supercenter employing 300 workers could cost taxpayers at least $904,000 annually.

          • Integrity

            Ok, I will make your day and concede that Walmart and many other employers could and should treat their employees better. Will you concede that many policies from our benevolent government have not helped or may very well have exacerbated the problems? QED

          • Marilyn Matho

            All of this goes back to Clinton, with the start of Nafta!

    • Drew Page

      No “maybe” about it. We should stay out of ths civil war. Have we learned nothing from Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Pakistan? If, as Obama declares, “The civilized world is outraged at the actions of the Assad regime”, let’s see how many will join together to strike Syria on their own.

  • Rob

    Bernie: How does this affect Israel?

    • legal eagle

      That’s a question without an answer…

    • Drew Page

      Right now, Israel is on pins and needles. They are preparing their defenses against possible attacks from Syria, Iran or other of their Muslim neighbors. If their is no attack by the U.S. perhaps Israel will remain unmolested. If Obama does launch an attack, chances are better than average that retaliation will be directed at Israel. I may be wrong, but I believe that Israel thinks I’m right.

      • legal eagle

        Israel is always on the alert…It’s part of the culture for most Israeli’s…
        Israel military capability is far superior to that of Syria…
        Were you so concerned about Israel when the US invaded Iraq?

  • msmtl

    He should have focused on his friends in the Muslim brotherhood slaughtering the Christians of Egypt. He should have taken steps to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. He shouldn’t have been setting stupid red lines with Syria, and then wimping out. Instead, his most important Middle East policy goal was to send Israel on a suicide mission of negotiating with the ‘palestinians’ which for yet unknown reasons included releasing blood-soaked terrorists. The depth of his ineptitude and lack of knowledge and reasoning is astounding. And it’s killing people by the thousands.

    • legal eagle

      Obama should have stopped Iran, not threaten Syria, and prevent free elections in Egypt? What makes you think America has the power, or the will, to do all of these things?

    • larryl212

      Here’s something to consider. How do we know, for sure, Assad did the gas attack? How do we know the rebels did NOT do this? Are we really going to take the word of the same posse of goons that told us we lost an ambassador/SEALS because of a YouTube clip? One other thought… does anybody remember that WMD yarn from Bush, Jr? And before I sign-off… how’s that “Arab Spring” thingee going in Egypt? I hear from a few of my Coptic Christian friends it “ain’t” exactly a day at the beach for ‘em. When is a enough… enough?