It looks like the House vote on Syria is not even going to be close

[David Krout]

Almost all decided Republicans will vote against war, while 63% of decided (or leaning) Democrats will vote no as well.

This is going to be an ass-whooping of major proportions.

I see no reason why the majority of still-undecided Congress members will split much differently from the decided ones.



http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/09/02/2561371/congress-support-military-action-syria-thinkprogress-whip-count/

[Purveyor]

1. Good to hear. Hope it holds and thank you for posting. eom +1

[TwilightGardener]

2. Whose ass is being whooped? If it gets voted down, it gets voted down.

The nice thing is, they will vote on it, instead of just carping from the sidelines.

[Egalitarian Thug]

3. All those fools backing this, including but not limited to, the President. n/t

[TwilightGardener]

8. I don't think they're fools. I don't think the President's ass is being whooped.

He took it to Congress--that was the right thing to do. If they don't think action should be taken against Assad, for whatever reason, that's OK. Good people can disagree.

[Union Scribe]

12. So long as he abides by their decision.

Otherwise, it's not good people disagreeing and ceding to the democratic process.

[TwilightGardener]

25. I hope he does. I don't think it's something to be undertaken without

at least some real consensus or support.

[kelliekat44]

53. That's the key. This is one vote I hope he loses (and secretly...I believe he does too.). nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

14. It's not the opinions, nor whether or not there is justification, It is the propaganda

mechanism that is used to sell bullshit in the pursuit of an agenda that they know full well would never be accepted if they were honest about it.

[TwilightGardener]

18. Except for Kerry getting a little overwrought in his speeches and testimony, I

don't smell propaganda. It makes sense to me, both the evidence and the rationale for a strike, even though I'm afraid there will be collateral losses, mishaps, and unintended consequences-- and that gives me pause. But I don't assume they're making shit up because it's not what I agree with or want to hear. I do doubt the number of casualties--I don't think the numbers necessarily matter, but there's a wide divergence among sources and that needs to be clarified.

[Egalitarian Thug]

30. No, no, no, I don't think they're lying about Assad, etc., at least not in any meaningful way.

The issue as I see it is the selectivity of which crimes are media propelled, responded to, and the reasons behind it.

The world is a 24/7/365 horror show and most Americans have no idea about 99.9% of those horrors. We daily ignore all manner of truly sickening events and crimes committed all over the planet, many of them committed by our friends, allies, and ourselves.

Pretending that Syria is only now a problem, after ignoring generations of international crimes committed by him and his father, is the problem from my perspective.

[nomorenomore08]

84. Exactly. Propaganda doesn't necessarily mean lying. It can also involve exaggeration

or over-emphasis of truthful information.

[Egalitarian Thug]

85. Or even simply the power to choose what is shown. That's how they've convinced the majority of

Americans that they should be afraid of everybody and everything despite the fact that America is more peaceful and law-abiding than its ever been in its history. You can see it here every day.

Somebody has, or is going to, post some story from somewhere alerting all the sheeple to the terrible danger they, their families, or their children are in due to some extreme event. 16 years ago three idiots robbed the BofA in Northridge and shot some cops before being killed themselves. 16 years later the LAPD is still paying stupid amounts of taxpayer money keeping M-16 assault rifles in every squad car on the off chance that something like that will happen again.

I swear, never in the history of humanity has there ever been a more perfect stock of gullible idiots bred, than the American sheeple. They will believe absolutely anything as long as they get it from their TV, from a "trusted source".

[sabrina 1]

52. And the way to verify the evidence always was to present it to the International Community where

there are procedures in place, agreed upon by the US, to deal with War Criminals.

It seems clear now that the 'rebels' have been committing attrocious war crimes in Syria and that too needs to be thoroughly investigated, who they are, who they are being armed and financed by, why they are in Syria in the first place.

The US needs to begin respecting the rule of law and stop attempting to convince the world that Bombs are the way to figure these things out.

The world saw this play out in Iraq, and while some Americans would like to separate that from the current policies, in Libya and now in Syria, the rest of the world has a much clearer picture of US Policies and are apparently rejecting them.

Let's take all this to the International Arena where many war criminals have been successfully prosecuted without killing any more innocents.

[SidDithers]

6. Some DUers think this is a personal defeat for Obama...

and are happy that they think he's being humiliated.

Sid

[TwilightGardener]

13. Ah, I see. All the pats on the back for presenting it to Congress for a vote morph into

"Ha Ha, GOTCHA!! ASS WHOOPIN'! WE WIN!!" I expect that from GOPers, but not Democrats. Weird.

[Whisp]

63. It's been like that for a long time, with the same familiar names

over and over and over.

let's give that Obama some whoop ass!

[Blaukraut]

15. That's exactly right!

I've been on the fence about Syria until a few days ago and am now opposed to a unilateral strike without waiting for the UN report and exhausting all other avenues. However, I refuse to align myself with the DU contingent that pounces on anything and everything Obama does (or might still do) wrong, yet is oddly silent when he does something commendable. For them it is personal, which is extremely distasteful, and it makes their arguments so much less believable.

[Bobbie Jo]

56. This contingent lost their credibility

on all things Obama a long time ago. I hold teabaggers in this regard for the same reason.

[mindwalker_i]

17. And some just think this is a really bad idea

And they don't care who proposes it, it's still bad.

[Adrahil]

19. That's fine, but then why the vitriol?

Can't reasonable people disagree.

As a fairly new member here, I must admit, I'm kind of dismayed at how some here seem to hate Obama more than Daryl Issa!

[mindwalker_i]

34. I think people want Obama to meet their vision of a perfect Democrat

And when he goes and does things like massive NSA spying or bombing other countries, they get riled up.

Here's the thing: a lot of people here believe in democratic ideals, myself included. So when Obama goes against those, we're pissed. I try to stop short of purely demonizing him and can say he's done some good stuff (ACA). However, this Syria and NSA stuff really sucks, and I get pissed off at people who support Obama doing them just because he's Obama, or a Democrat. I follow the cause, not the person, not their brand.

[pscot]

20. I give him full credit

for taking it to the Congress, as long as he accepts the result.

[JI7]

22. this is all it is for them, they can't even seriously debate this issue

the same exact things are being said on other sites from the wingnuts.

[Cha]

23. Exactly. The hate comes screaming through. Poor thing, major ODS sufferer.

President Obama took it to Congress to have this debate and we're having it.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

32. Have you ever thought to look at wider issues than loyalty oaths to the President?

We don't really need a hall monitor here--although I think you'd be a perfect fit for that position if a rec ever opens. But there are lots of things that are more important than whether or not some DUer showed sufficient devotion to the President in General Discussion. War, and whether or not to wage it, is one of those things that's more important. We need to be able to discuss it openly, without a chilling effect from a forum host who regularly talks about the posters he'd like to see banned. Unyielding and unthinking devotion to the President (even when he's wrong), combined with a Zimmerman-style self-appointment to the Loyalty Cadre, starts to look a little bizarre from where I sit, when we're discussing matters of actual importance. Thanks.

[kestrel91316]

41. It is in no way a defeat for him. He's not bloodthirsty, certain DUers' rants notwithstanding.

He wisely decided to let the people decide this one, since they clearly didn't want HIM deciding it.

[David Krout]

42. So...if Congress votes Yes, it's a Obama's victory, and if they vote No, Obama wins too?

That doesn't sound like a very unbiased opinion, if you ask me.

Doesn't one of the situations have to be bad for Obama?

[morningfog]

48. It would be a personal defeat, he is heavily invested in this.

Even preparing a prime time address on it. I still think the votes will be there when the roll is called.

I would very much like to see the resolutions defeated but don't see it as Obama being humiliated, nor does that prospect make me happy.

[WilliamPitt]

62. ...and some DUers are...oh never mind.

[SomethingFishy]

78. Awww you little mind reader you...

Actually some of us are happy that for once dropping bombs isn't seen as the goddamn answer to everything.

[SidDithers]

79. walldude! How you been?...

Haven't seen you in ages.

Sid

[SomethingFishy]

81. Yeah working two jobs to make ends meet.

Tough economy. Thanks for asking though

[pinboy3niner]

16. I agree--reducing it to an "ass-whooping" makes me wince

The decision on whether or not to launch cruise missiles at another country is a serious matter, not one of "whooping" those on one side or the other--or the President.

I refuse to make the President the issue--and I think he'll be better off in the long run if this strike doesn't happen.

[Cha]

24. Mahalo, pinboy!

You're right.. it is a critically serious matter.

[Turbineguy]

4. Kind of bizarre really

The Democrats against it because it's a bad idea, republicans against it because Obama wants it.

[Little Star]

5. Exactly.

[RiffRandell]

11. That's been their game all along. nt

[Turbineguy]

26. It must chap the repubs to say "no"

when everybody knows they love to bomb stuff and kill people.

[Marr]

7. Something about Obama's previous comments makes me think he'll go ahead and do it anyway.

When he first discussed going to Congress, the message I was received was that he was giving them a chance to express their support for something he intended to do in any case.

[NoOneMan]

35. They've stuck their necks out way too far to let this stop them

If anything, I predict the resolution will be tinkered enough to garner support for the war.

In any case, the administration is in the clear. If they don't bomb, they can blame Congress and claim the highground while the Civil War goes on. If they bomb, they can blame Congress for the potential screw-up.

[pampango]

40. I don't think he will but I agree he might. If he does, the House may try to impeach him after all.

[eissa]

9. Hope it holds for the next few days. n/t

[JVS]

10. You think Boehner will bring it to a vote?

[Adrahil]

21. That's a good question.

Quite possibly not. It would terribly weaken and President's theat of force if in the face of a "red line" (regrettable rhetoric, I think we can agree). If that happens, get used to the phrase "nuclear Iran."

[TroglodyteScholar]

55. Not just bring it to a vote, but support it as well...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/03/john-boehner-syria_n_3860505.html

[cali]

27. oh, I bet the vote is very close. I think it's a mistake to

put too much stock in this.

[Hydra]

44. I agree

I'd like to believe this is a good sign, but the Obama Admin had to have counted votes before they even considered bringing this to Congress.

If there's a surprise backstab, maybe...but this is gravy train, and nobody stops the gravy train for humanitarian or partisan reasons.

[morningfog]

49. Yeah, there is plenty of time to catapult the propaganda.

Obama is going to deliver a prime time address (it seems). There will be "more evidence" as we have discussed. I think Obama has probably twisted a few arms at G20, so some support may come from other nations.

When the roll is called, I expect the votes to be there. What will be interesting is the exact language of the final resolution.

[cali]

50. exactly.

and I think that for a sizable number of dems, there's a reluctance to weaken a dem president with a no vote.

[woo me with science]

57. Yup. Stay tuned...

[Kablooie]

28. I hate agreeing with these Republicans but I can't help it.

Unless we get confirmation from the UN inspectors and other countries join in an effort that will be likely to have a concrete effect on the use of chemical weapons, we have no right to use military force of any kind.

[DCBob]

29. Yeah, the GOPers simply cannot vote for anything the President wants to do.

If its a blowout no vote, then I cannot imagine the President going ahead with the attack plans.

[PoliticAverse]

31. Don't count on the votes before they're cast... n/t

[mick063]

33. The sour grapes from those that swear fealty to the President will come to fruition soon.

As a person who is dead set against much of the President's agenda, I do not take delight in the alleged humiliation.

I take delight in holding financial moguls accountable, holding the security/military complex accountable, and doing what is in the best interest of workers and ordinary citizens.

If the President needs reminded of what the expectations are, then I am delighted it has been done. If he, or those that support him, are humiliated by this reminder, perhaps it is because the President pursues an agenda that doesn't align with our collective best interests.

[woo me with science]

37. Very well said.

Thank you.

[Carolina]

83. excellent post, mick063

If the President needs reminding of what the expectations are, then I am delighted it has been done. If he, or those that support him, are humiliated by this reminder, perhaps it is because the President pursues an agenda that doesn't align with our collective best interests.

From chained lack of a public option to chained CPI to this... truer words were never spoken. Blind fealty to the D is a dangerous thing!

[bvar22]

36. AND...The Democratic Party Leadership hands ANOTHER issue to The Republicans.

Its like these guys don't WANT to win the next election.

[Junkdrawer]

38. Unless *something* happens between now and the vote....

[pampango]

43. I was thinking of that. If the rebels have the advanced chemical weapons that could make a new

attack appear to be the fault of the regime's forces again, there would be no better time to try it.

There are those who believe that the rebels were responsible for the August 21 attack while the UN inspectors were in Damascus. If they can really time and execute these attacks that precisely and do it with weapons that are similar to those the army uses, they would be smart to launch another attack in the next week or so.

I am convinced that Assad's forces did it. They will not repeat that, at least while the vote is pending. If I am wrong and it was the rebels did the previous attack, they will likely do it again before the final vote.

[Thinkingabout]

39. This may be one of Obama's wisest moves yet, he has not rushed to make the strikes and with

The vote going to Congress the final decision will be their choice and out of his hands. It is time to get them to do something. If this turns out badly he is clean and the excuse will be he could nit get the strike authorized.

[gopiscrap]

45. Wow God I hope Obama doesn't attack

[gopiscrap]

46. Welcome to DU

[David Krout]

47. aww, I made you mad nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. The gentleman or woman welcomed you.

Your response doesn't sound particularly gracious.

[David Krout]

58. I'm not blind. I know he welcomed me

He meant it as a way to highlight the fact that I have a low post count, as if this weakened my argument.
The funny part is that you know that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

60. Wow. You can divine my intentions over the internet.

Does your supernatural power extend to predicting the future?

Can I have the five numbers for Powerball, please.

I will remember you.

[David Krout]

61. You want me to type 'In my opinion' each time I issue an opinion?

That would be cumbersome. By the way, How did your divine self guess that the other member was genuinely welcoming me?
In my personal opinion, you KNEW this member was welcoming me in the sense that I mentioned.

Boom!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. There wasn't much to divine or self guess there, pardner.

"Welcome to DU." is what the gentlemen said.

If you told me it's going to rain I wouldn't have to guess if I should take an umbrella with me.


Oh, welcome to DU, parndner.

[David Krout]

65. Why he typed it is the point of our debate

But since you have no argument, you have to state the obvious: that he typed "Welcome to DU."

DUH. Remember the part about me not being blind? Remember when I asked you whether he was genuinely welcoming me? Do you know what genuinely means?

Since you know he meant it as a way to highlight my low post count, you are left but no choice but to simply repeat what he typed, without discussing the motive.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. We addressed that, pardner. I am incapable of divining one's motives over the internet.

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

[David Krout]

67. divine vs. opine

Different things. Your opinion was that the person who said "welcome to DU" did not mean it as a way to highlight my post count. My opinion is that he did, and that you are pretending not to know it.

May I add that you're mad that Congress is about to vote against the Syrian war and that's the reason you pretended the other member was genuinely welcoming me to DU?

Oh by the way, that was an opinion.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. First, you imputed the other gentleman or woman's motives.

Now you are imputing my motives.

Do you impute the motives of people who have been nothing but gracious to you in real life?

If the answer is in the affirmative I would respectfully inquire as to why and what their reactions are.

Thank you in advance.

[David Krout]

69. You imputed a polite, welcoming motive to the gentleman or lady who welcomed me

How did you acquire the divine power to know that this person had that motive?

And did you know that motive-imputing is a bad thing? Why don't you practice what you preach?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. There was nothing to impute

The posters said "Welcome to DU."

If you went to Olive Garden and the host or hostess said "Welcome to Olive Garden" would you impute a nefarious motive to him or her? When you answer that you will reveal to yourself that there is no motive in saying "Welcome" to somebody other than to make that person feel invited.

And you told me I was "mad" because I welcomed you and asked why you imputed the motive of a fellow poster that welcomed you. Saying you imputed my motive and the motive of the gentleman or woman that welcomed you wasn't a bad thing. it was a logical inference.

[David Krout]

71. Wait. Is 'Welcome to Olive Garden' often used to highlight diners' low dining count?

Your analogy was terrible!

And speaking of logical inferences:

1) Since you want war in Syria, and 2) My post is obviously not popular among war supporters, then it follows that your motive-imputing contradicting my imputing likely originated in your anger about Congress being about to vote against the war you want.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

72. In both instances the person was welcoming a newcomer.

My analogy is apt.

[David Krout]

73. And we go back to square one

Why did the member say "welcome to DU"? Your opinion was that he meant no harm. My opinion was that he tried to highlight my low post cont.

You're welcome to repeat your previous posts as necessary. I'll be here to copy and paste mine as well.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

74. I like to be neighborly. I was looking at the other poster through those lens.

I'm sorry if i upset you.

[David Krout]

75. Ok nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. I'm glad we could be friends. There's too much enmity in the world./nt

[David Krout]

86. agree nt

[Demeter]

51. From your keyboard to God's ears

[IronLionZion]

59. Taking it to Congress is the right thing

When the teahadists claim that Obama is weak/feminine/etc. on national security while pretending that Bin Laden and Gaddafi never existed, we can tell them their people in congress voted against it. They'll just have to claim he's indecisive in spite of his many excellent decisions.

Anything Obama does is wrong if you're a teapublican or an EvilDUer, but in this case he did the right move. Some people will never be satisfied.

[Jackpine Radical]

76. There's only one possible response.

We gotta smart-bomb the House to take out the supporters of terrorism.


Hastily edited to add

[DonCoquixote]

80. Sad fact is

If this was Mitt as president, we would be in Syria already.

[Carolina]

82. I sure hope so

This is one time when I'm actually counting on repukes to save us (US) from madness. How twisted is that? We elected Democrats who turned out to be neo-neocons, so now wehave to join forces with teabaggers

[revmclaren]

87. I think Obama knew exactly what he was doing

turning the decision over to Congress. He knows the House Dems wont vote for an attack en-mass. If we can see the 'If Obama wants it, we must vote against it' attitude in The Teapublican majority, does anyone here at DU even have the slightest doubt that Obama...the one that all the vitriol has been focused on for the last 5 years..doesn't also see it? Perfectly played Mr President. Now you will keep your word and not attack as promised (unless of course Assad is foolish enough to use gas again, then all bets are off) and Syria will be left with a thousand CHINESE boots on the ground and a fleet of Russian warships there simply to 'help' Assad. Now Big brother Putin will be watching and protecting his investment. If I was Assad, I would be 10 times as worried as before and watching by back every second...and my health. Putin doesn't F$#k around. People who screw him over DO die or disappear!