General Discussion

jmowreader

(52,623 posts)

47. They're voting against Obama

Fri Sep 6, 2013, 01:43 PM

Sep 2013

If it was a President McCain (who downed five planes during wartime, and he was in every one of them) or a President Romney (who fought the noble battle of attempting to convince French people to give up wine) asking for authorization to strike Syria, they would think it the most noble idea they ever heard - Sheriff bombed? Innocent women and children gassed to death? We have to stop this immediately! Immediately! Immediately! Harrumph! Harrumph! I didn't get a harrumph out of that guy.

But it's President Obama. If Obama decided to declare Reagan's birthday a national holiday they would filibuster it. They probably all think bombing the shit out of Syria is a swell idea, but they can't agree to it because GOP policy is to oppose Obama on everything.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Per the NY Times--no vote would be tough love for Obama, good for America [View all] geek tragedy Sep 2013 OP

I was thinking that doesn't sound all that bad to me. dkf Sep 2013 #1

It sounds bad to Bill Kristol. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #2

Exactly. But he loves war. dkf Sep 2013 #3

It sounds bad to Bibi Netanyahu too. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #4

Maybe this will get them closer to a two state solution. dkf Sep 2013 #6

It sounds bad to Thomas Friedman too. avaistheone1 Sep 2013 #49

Agreed!!! Buddaman Sep 2013 #8

Not that I'm in favor of a military response, but I am curious. Baitball Blogger Sep 2013 #5

Of course not. half the numbnutz in the House still think Iraq was a swell idea. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #7

We should be thankful to have a president that understood that unilateral decisions Baitball Blogger Sep 2013 #10

Well, he understands that the President can't act unilaterally geek tragedy Sep 2013 #20

Let's be honest. Baitball Blogger Sep 2013 #23

We'd be having it, but we'd be in much more danger of losing it. nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #25

probably because they got filthy rich behind it. barbtries Sep 2013 #27

They're voting against Obama jmowreader Sep 2013 #47

No. Thank God the Reps are reflexive. At least they may have kept us out of WWIII. dkf Sep 2013 #9

I hear you. Baitball Blogger Sep 2013 #11

Would a Democratic president have as much trouble for a Kosovo redux? blm Sep 2013 #14

Congratulations to Bush for assuring the certain death of Geneva Conventions, and blm Sep 2013 #12

That's ridiculous. This belongs in an international court, not in the court of the US deciders dkf Sep 2013 #13

That will not happen ever again. blm Sep 2013 #15

Take your false equivalency and shove it. Maedhros Sep 2013 #46

I was being facetious - point being that the bottom line to forced inaction blm Sep 2013 #51

International courts are a joke and not an effective argument against military strikes. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #18

The US cannot be expected to be the sole enforcer of international treaties. That is ridiculous. dkf Sep 2013 #21

That is the argument. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #22

That's right. We have got to come to terms with the fact that sometimes a bad thing happens in this totodeinhere Sep 2013 #42

Or bad things in the rest of the world we can do something about (with positive results)... deurbano Sep 2013 #48

If the Geneva Conventions depend on the US illegally bombing other countries geek tragedy Sep 2013 #16

Then put Clinton on trial for Kosovo. blm Sep 2013 #30

Kosovo was a success, but is as outdated of a model geek tragedy Sep 2013 #31

Because weapons and their operators are dumber now? blm Sep 2013 #50

The US is weaker relative the rest of the planet geek tragedy Sep 2013 #55

What makes you claim that AlQaeda is the alternative here? blm Sep 2013 #56

Bush isn't the one that was supposed to be prosecuting Bush's war crimes. JoeyT Sep 2013 #52

I concur - and it will always be that way as long as Bushes live. blm Sep 2013 #54

OTOH, Obama and Kerry have been proven truth tellers now: freshwest Sep 2013 #57

Thanks for your post, freshwest.. and the link Cha Sep 2013 #61

Oh, please. You're describing Superman, not the US government. No heroes here, pal. n/t ocpagu Sep 2013 #58

I doubt the next group of victims of chemical weapons are looking blm Sep 2013 #59

Yeah, they are desperate asking Obama to save them by striking them with missiles... n/t ocpagu Sep 2013 #60

Oh, I didn't know the plans called for striking villages and towns. blm Sep 2013 #62

I actually see this as a way out for Obama, he did not jump when the report went out Assad had used Thinkingabout Sep 2013 #17

I think he's being honest here--he's a true believer in non-proliferation geek tragedy Sep 2013 #19

Which is funny because we have all the WMDs. Seems hypocritical doncha think? dkf Sep 2013 #24

Possession and use are two different things nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #26

So what is the statute of limitations on use of chemical weapons? rhett o rick Sep 2013 #28

I have been arguing that our official position on Syria's use of chemical weapons should be geek tragedy Sep 2013 #29

That doesn't seem like a morally tenable position. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #32

I see dozens of homeless people every week where I live. geek tragedy Sep 2013 #34

Maybe "so what" is not the best answer. But spending 200 million on bombing Syria is rhett o rick Sep 2013 #35

There is a continuum between bombing someone and callous indifference/nt DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #37

Humanitarian aid to the refugees is a good thing. I hope that we can all agree that the world totodeinhere Sep 2013 #43

Well right now its "so what", "who cares" Iliyah Sep 2013 #44

I misunderstood. nm rhett o rick Sep 2013 #36

I would like the precedent. whttevrr Sep 2013 #33

My brother says this is all due to Bush's invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. Mellow Drama Sep 2013 #38

Yes, Bush showed us the folly of overseas adventurism, nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #39

Even without context, bombing Syria is stupid Demeter Sep 2013 #40

Your brother is right dem in texas Sep 2013 #41

I'd rather look like the chicken in this case, rather than glowing Sep 2013 #53

No it does not make sense. Your post that is. Rebellious Republican Sep 2013 #45