On the record: Hillary backs Obama on Syria

posted at 8:41 pm on September 3, 2013 by Allahpundit

As someone (can’t remember who) said on Twitter, imagine if Hillary were still SoS and had to sell this shinolapile on TV today instead of Kerry. Good lord. She quit just in time.

But yes, she’s onboard. Mark your scorecard.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton backs President Barack Obama’s move to urge Congress to back a targeted effort in Syria, in the first comments from her camp since the president unveiled his plan, POLITICO has learned.

“Secretary Clinton supports the President’s effort to enlist the Congress in pursuing a strong and targeted response to the Assad regime’s horrific use of chemical weapons,” a Clinton aide told POLITICO.

That’s the safe move, actually, despite Democratic voters’ opposition to intervention. If she comes out against the attack and then, against all odds, it somehow succeeds, she looks like an opportunistic chump while Biden, her presumptive rival for the nomination, looks smart and resolute for backing it. If she backs it herself and things go to hell, well, whatever — so did Joe, so did Pelosi, so did Boehner and Cantor, and so will many congressional Democrats and Republicans. She tried to hide in a crowd once before in voting to invade Iraq and now she’s doing it again. Plus, chances are good that the GOP will nominate someone in 2016 who’s at least moderately hawkish himself, in which case this statement won’t matter. Only if Rand Paul’s the nominee will there be a strong contrast on foreign policy, and in that case Hillary can count on some Republican superhawks like McCain to cross the aisle and support her in antipathy to him. Only if Syria turns into a prolonged clusterfark would she pay a price vis-a-vis Paul, and I doubt O will let that happen. He’s not going to bleed away what little is left of his legacy on an intervention he doesn’t want to undertake in the first place. He’ll order a round of strikes to do some damage to Assad, then hope the retaliation isn’t too vicious and declare victory. End of Syria saga. I think.

Speaking of 2016 maneuvers on Syria, though, how is budding superhawk Marco Rubio likely to vote? He’s formally undecided and was cagey in his questioning of Kerry and Hagel today (as you’ll see below), but this isn’t really a tough call, is it?

On one side of the Florida senator is the anti-interventionist duo of Sens. Paul and Ted Cruz, both who are highly skeptical an air campaign would achieve any worthwhile goals and deeply distrustful of the president and his ultimate military objective. While Christie hasn’t issued a formal view on Syria, it’s presumed that he falls on the other side of the spectrum, likely falling in the camp of Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who advocate a strong, muscular response against a brutal madman…

If Rubio opposes intervention, he risks being lumped into the Paul-Cruz wing, which spooks many establishment Republicans who believe an anti-interventionist policy could hurt U.S. interests in the long-term. If Assad is somehow dislodged and conditions on the ground eventually improve, he also risks being on the wrong side of history.

Yet if he signs onto action, he will alienate the growing chorus of conservatives who ascribe to the notion that the U.S. needs to pull back from an ambitious foreign policy that seeks to influence the outcome of unpredictable world events in dangerous places. (For instance, in an extraordinary move, the chairman of the Iowa Republican Party forcefully weighed in against military action in a pointed letter.) And politically, Rubio leaves himself at the mercy of Obama’s strategy and implementation. If Obama’s Syrian war goes bad, Rubio’s on the hook for it.

He’ll end up voting no but framing it as a decision forced on him by Obama’s refusal to act sooner. Remember, Rubio’s already said that he would have armed the Syrian rebels long ago as commander-in-chief. There’s no scrubbing away that interventionist flourish; I doubt he’d want to even if he could, since that’s the sort of thing Republican establishment hawks want to hear. The only move now is to hedge by voting against an attack on the theory that O’s cocked things up so badly that no good could come from U.S. action at this point. That’ll give him a little cred with more dovish Republicans by showing that, unlike McCain and Graham, he’s capable of passing on military strikes if there aren’t obvious benefits. Paul will still criticize him for it, of course, and maybe Cruz will too, although Cruz has his own Syria “nuances” to contend with. The bottom line, as the NYT put it this morning, is that Rubio doesn’t want to end up on Obama’s side of another big vote when grassroots conservatives are on the other side. Voting for amnesty is one thing, voting for a pointless intervention on top of it is something else. One generation of McCains in the Senate is enough.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Cry Havoc! Oh and keep the money flowing to my Clinton foundation.

rob verdi on September 3, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Probably not comforting to U.S. Ambassador to Syria, Robert Stephen Ford …

ShainS on September 3, 2013 at 8:45 PM

Well, let’s look at what the result was the last time Obama and Her Royal Thighness teamed up…

Special report: We all thought Libya had moved on – it has, but into lawlessness and ruin

Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 8:45 PM

She is an authority to me on nothing except scumbag husbands.

TXMomof3 on September 3, 2013 at 8:45 PM

Hillary backs Obama on Syria

Alternate headline: Hillary Hates Reformers!

coldwarrior on September 3, 2013 at 8:46 PM

Well, I’m startled.

Axe on September 3, 2013 at 8:46 PM

“There’s a different leader in Syria now. Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months, have said they believe he’s a reformer.”

- Hillary Clinton

sentinelrules on September 3, 2013 at 8:48 PM

More evidence he’s wrong.

Basilsbest on September 3, 2013 at 8:49 PM

hillary will inherit this boondoggle IF she wins

the obama/hillary war

cmsinaz on September 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

This should make for some interesting campaign commercials.

Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

Hillary’s possible 2016 opponent, Ted Cruz, opposes Obama’s plan for military intervention in Syria:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/ted-cruz-warns-on-syria-u-s-military-shouldnt-serve-as-al-qaedas-air-force/

bluegill on September 3, 2013 at 8:51 PM

can you hear the 2016 gop candidates…
we are inheriting obama’s war

cmsinaz on September 3, 2013 at 8:51 PM

This a primer in served to a conservative/libertarian running on 2016 to strike right at Hillary, the RINOs running of course will be tepid at striking her on this issue

journeymike on September 3, 2013 at 8:52 PM

If ‘Benghazi Betsy’s’ for the war, it must be right (LOL).

MaiDee on September 3, 2013 at 8:53 PM

I know this is incredibly naive, but just once I’d like someone to vote solely on what’s good for the country before considering what’s good for them politically.

BKeyser on September 3, 2013 at 8:54 PM

can you hear the 2016 gop candidates…
we are inheriting obama’s war

cmsinaz on September 3, 2013 at 8:51 PM

Put to music, say, Weber’s Les Misérables “Can You Hear the People Sing” I believe there is good potential for a campaign song or two there.

coldwarrior on September 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Rubio doing his best to support Obama as usual.

We have to support Al Qaeda because McCain told him so.

tetriskid on September 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

coldwarrior on September 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

heh

cmsinaz on September 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Hillary Clinton is Professor Weston on Perelandra.

Murphy9 on September 3, 2013 at 9:00 PM

I know this is incredibly naive, but just once I’d like someone to vote solely on what’s good for the country before considering what’s good for them politically.

BKeyser on September 3, 2013 at 8:54 PM

I know exactly how you feel. I can only hope Hillary’s cynical endorsement and Obama’s cynical saber-rattling are the permanent undoing of their political ambition and power.

http://therightscoop.com/heres-the-tweet-of-the-day-on-obama-and-syria/

OBAMA IS NOT CALLING FOR WAR. IT’S MORE LIKE A DRIVE-BY SHOOTING.

— Timothy Connolly CFA (@SconsetCapital) September 3, 2013

INC on September 3, 2013 at 9:01 PM

This should make for some interesting campaign commercials.
Bishop on September 3, 2013 at 8:50 PM

By who? (Tell me you’re not talking about the GOP nominee)

happytobehere on September 3, 2013 at 9:01 PM

coldwarrior on September 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

heh :)

cmsinaz on September 3, 2013 at 9:01 PM

I know this is incredibly naive, but just once I’d like someone to vote solely on what’s good for the country before considering what’s good for them politically.
BKeyser on September 3, 2013 at 8:54 PM

We have a name for those types: wacko birds.

happytobehere on September 3, 2013 at 9:02 PM

Will Billyboy notice the stench of the boy kings backside on Kankles hairy upper lip?

patman77 on September 3, 2013 at 9:03 PM

It’s people like Hillary Clinton and Bill O’dip-shit that will facilitate WW3, and they’ll go, “I had no idea this would happen”. Frikken morons.

Rovin on September 3, 2013 at 9:03 PM

I know this is incredibly naive, but just once I’d like someone to vote solely on what’s good for the country before considering what’s good for them politically.

BKeyser on September 3, 2013 at 8:54 PM

It would be refreshing, wouldn’t it?

kim roy on September 3, 2013 at 9:05 PM

Rubio doing his best to support Obama as usual.
We have to support Al Qaeda because McCain told him so.
tetriskid on September 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Rubio is a joke. Biggest disappointment in a long time.

bluegill on September 3, 2013 at 9:07 PM

Our next President!

happytobehere on September 3, 2013 at 9:10 PM

Big surprise said nobody, ever.

Jomama on September 3, 2013 at 9:11 PM

As someone (can’t remember who) said on Twitter, imagine if Hillary were still SoS and had to sell this shinolapile on TV today instead of Kerry. Good lord. She quit just in time.
=================================================

Serendipity Sumpins!!!

canopfor on September 3, 2013 at 9:11 PM

Who is this Rubio you speak of?
Hillary, really…going down Weiner style.

I hope and pray we follow SP advice and let Allah sort it out.

seesalrun2 on September 3, 2013 at 9:11 PM

But she’s got her Smart Glasses on!! Rubio is dead to me, and McCain is a God D@mn Traitor!

teacherman on September 3, 2013 at 9:12 PM

At this point, Barry could shit on the Constitution at high noon on the National Mall and Hillary! would back his play.

Is it 2016 yet?

GarandFan on September 3, 2013 at 9:13 PM

How did Obama win the 2008 primary?

1) He was against the Iraq war.

That’s what put him over the top against Hillary. His youth, skin color, and digital organization all helped feed the dream, but he was supposed to be different. Hillary is right back to where she was in 2008, and her support of Obama won’t matter when he is of no more use to the liberal base.

I am happy she went on record here. She supported Iraq, Libya, and now Syria; she is a war monger by the left’s own standards. At least she is consistent.

Daemonocracy on September 3, 2013 at 9:14 PM

Gotta love Rubio’s “decision making based on future political aspirations”, style these days.

A man who was once thought of as a leader, and had a value system that made him a conservative, is now a “conservative” (quote/unquote)who’s decisions seem based on how he’d like to portray himself.

If Rubio’s only concern is squeezing into the space between Chris Christie and Rand Paul and hoping to look sensible, he is will end up looking even more phony.

His career is salvageable, i suppose, but he really needs to give up on/forget about 2016, before his transparent calculating destroys every ounce of integrity he has left. Otherwise he could seriously be in jeopardy of losing his Senate seat.

I wouldnt vote for him for dog catcher, but hey im one of the idiots who actually showed up for Romney. Im sure those who didnt will be much more enthusiastic for another two faced politician who is buds with Chuckie Schumer.

alecj on September 3, 2013 at 9:14 PM

Howard Dean, do you see that?

That is your opening, lad. Try not to blow it this time…

JohnGalt23 on September 3, 2013 at 9:14 PM

teacherman on September 3, 2013 at 9:12 PM

Some wall art for you. On the the house. ; )

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 9:15 PM

She tried to hide in a crowd once before in voting to invade Iraq and now she’s doing it again.

She tried to hide behind 4 dead Americans for a bit but found out that dog wouldn’t hunt so she threw up her hands and asked “what difference does it make, wingnutz??1!!”

ted c on September 3, 2013 at 9:15 PM

GarandFan on September 3, 2013 at 9:13 PM

So would at least half the GOP.

happytobehere on September 3, 2013 at 9:15 PM

We would achieve far more damage if we put Hillary in charge of protecting Assad.

trs on September 3, 2013 at 9:24 PM

McCain is a God D@mn Traitor!

teacherman on September 3, 2013 at 9:12 PM

He’s also…

Senator Senile Is A F*cking Moron. Allahu Akbar!

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Well, when we have a Muslim Brotherhood crony in the White House, what do you expect?

Even if someone wanted that $100,000 Breitbart reward for the Khalidi-Obama going away party tape, at this point what difference would it make?

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 3, 2013 at 9:33 PM

Shrillary’s still alive?

Not just alive … she’s overcharged!!

Peregruzka!!

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on September 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Ruh Ro, broke linky, no exist. ; )

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Hillary backs Obama on Syria

She’s the disgraced former Secretary of State of the Administration that painted itself into this miserable corner and which still can’t come up with an persuasive argument or plan on what to do, even with fresh blood and perspective in that Cabinet post, not to mention at the CIA, and the Department of Defense.

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Dusty on September 3, 2013 at 9:40 PM

Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist.

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 9:40 PM

Only if Syria turns into a prolonged clusterfark would she pay a price vis-a-vis Paul, and I doubt O will let that happen. He’s not going to bleed away what little is left of his legacy on an intervention he doesn’t want to undertake in the first place. He’ll order a round of strikes to do some damage to Assad, then hope the retaliation isn’t too vicious and declare victory. End of Syria saga. I think.

Of course Assad won’t counterattack, right?

slickwillie2001 on September 3, 2013 at 9:41 PM

What is Hillary’s role now, anyway? Oh yea, now I remember, she’s just the disgraced lame duck SOS whose fecklessness got 4 killed in Benghazi and has yet to tell the truth about what happened there and thinks it doesn’t matter anyway. Excuse me if I doubt she gives a damn about anything but her own political future, certainly not dead gassed Syrians or the millions of refugees over there.

scalleywag on September 3, 2013 at 9:41 PM

Political class, progressive foundation stock, attempting to save the party from the horrendous blunder Obama made in ‘drawing a red line’, declaring ‘the line has been crossed’ and then running for cover of congressional approval rather than ordering the strike he’d promised Assad.

This isn’t just a tremendous failure for Obama, it’s a tremendous failure of leadership by the democrats… period.

H.R. Clinton was Secretary of State when a U.S. ambassador and three other American citizens were slaughtered in Benghazi, due almost exclusively to her own failed leadership in the Department of State.

The democrats are scrambling, clutching at any straw, to try and present a semblance of considered leadership where, thus far, there has been proven beyond doubt to be a vacuum.

thatsafactjack on September 3, 2013 at 9:42 PM

Ruh Ro, broke linky, no exist. ; )

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Try this one: http://tinyurl.com/lxfzljq

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM

I’m impressed Hillary is so supportive of the President’s position that she personally had an aid report it to the public. That’s gonna be a game changer.

Dusty on September 3, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Rubio’s move to the dark side usually takes at least one full term in the Senate. Shame on him

Happy Nomad on September 3, 2013 at 9:48 PM

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM

Same thing.

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 9:50 PM

“If Rubio opposes intervention, he risks being lumped into the Paul-Cruz wing, which spooks many establishment Republicans who believe an anti-interventionist policy could hurt U.S. interests in the long-term.”

Yeah, Rubio should be wary of being lumped into the ’60% of the public’ camp.

Dusty on September 3, 2013 at 9:51 PM

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 9:50 PM

It works for me.

Just go here. It’s at the top.

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 9:58 PM

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 9:58 PM

Odd, I dumped cache just to be sure. I can send ya a screen snap. This one worked fine. Its a different url than the other two.

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 10:01 PM

She’s the disgraced former Secretary of State of the Administration that painted itself into this miserable corner and which still can’t come up with an persuasive argument or plan on what to do, even with fresh blood and perspective in that Cabinet post, not to mention at the CIA, and the Department of Defense.

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Dusty on September 3, 2013 at 9:40 PM

What? She talked really, really loud and got all defensive and emotional…oh, and she wore glasses and stuff that made her look awesomely smart.

What’s wrong with you cons?

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 3, 2013 at 10:04 PM

Odd, I dumped cache just to be sure. I can send ya a screen snap. This one worked fine. Its a different url than the other two.

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 10:01 PM

I believe you. The third url is the one to my blog, as a whole.

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 10:09 PM

Billy exits helicopter in front of the White House….

he had a piglet under each arm.

Marine snapped to attention, salutes, and said: ”Nice pigs, sir.”

Billy replied, ”These ain’t pigs, they are authentic Arkansas Razorback Hogs. I got one for Hillary, and one for Chelsea.”

Marine again snapped to attention, saluted, and replied, ”Nice trade, sir.”

roflmmfao

donabernathy on September 3, 2013 at 10:09 PM

Resist We Much on September 3, 2013 at 10:09 PM

Odd.

Bmore on September 3, 2013 at 10:10 PM

donabernathy on September 3, 2013 at 10:09 PM

LOL. That was great!

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on September 3, 2013 at 10:22 PM

That’s the safe move, actually, despite Democratic voters’ opposition to intervention. If she comes out against the attack and then, against all odds, it somehow succeeds, she looks like an opportunistic chump while Biden, her presumptive rival for the nomination, looks smart and resolute for backing it. If she backs it herself and things go to hell, well, whatever — so did Joe, so did Pelosi, so did Boehner and Cantor, and so will many congressional Democrats and Republicans. She tried to hide in a crowd once before in voting to invade Iraq and now she’s doing it again. Plus, chances are good that the GOP will nominate someone in 2016 who’s at least moderately hawkish himself, in which case this statement won’t matter. Only if Rand Paul’s the nominee will there be a strong contrast on foreign policy, and in that case Hillary can count on some Republican superhawks like McCain to cross the aisle and support her in antipathy to him. Only if Syria turns into a prolonged clusterfark would she pay a price vis-a-vis Paul, and I doubt O will let that happen. He’s not going to bleed away what little is left of his legacy on an intervention he doesn’t want to undertake in the first place. He’ll order a round of strikes to do some damage to Assad, then hope the retaliation isn’t too vicious and declare victory. End of Syria saga. I think.

I can’t begin to tell you how sick to f*cking death I am of the overt politicization of every-f*cking-thing nowadays.

People can’t simply do what they think is right or best, it must be coldly calculated for the best possible political angle.

Midas on September 3, 2013 at 10:26 PM

I’m impressed Hillary is so supportive of the President’s position that she personally had an aid report it to the public. That’s gonna be a game changer.

Dusty on September 3, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Took her sweet calculating time to do it, too.

Midas on September 3, 2013 at 10:28 PM

AP, you sly dog. That last line is a reference to Buck v. Bell — 3 generations of imbeciles are enough. Well done!

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on September 3, 2013 at 11:04 PM

Anything for Huma.

steebo77 on September 3, 2013 at 11:09 PM

Using Hillary to validate your foreign policy credentials is like using the Coyote to validate a Road Runner catcher.

landlines on September 3, 2013 at 11:14 PM

Damn Darl’n that’s quite a reset button ya got there.

The men who destroyed so many thousands on 9/11 will then be fighting alongside the very nation whose innocents they so cruelly murdered almost exactly 12 years ago. Quite an achievement for Obama, Cameron, Hollande and the rest of the miniature warlords.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/does-obama-know-hes-fighting-on-alqaidas-side-8786680.html

roflmmfao

donabernathy on September 4, 2013 at 1:08 AM

Of course Mrs. ‘What Difference Does It Make’ supports Obama and taking military action against Assad and helping terrorists in Syria. After all, HER State Department hired Al Qaeda-associated militia to protect Ambassador Stevens & other Americans in Benghazi, refused to provide adequate security after 2 previous terrorist attacks, knew about the CIA-to-Jihadists gun running in Syria, and abandoned Americans to die there in order to try to keep that operation secret.

easyt65 on September 4, 2013 at 7:55 AM

She’s late to the party, but chimes in with a simple one liner anyway, not even from her, just her camp. That’s some distance. This whole mess has shades of the former Yugoslavia, proving once again that history does repeat.

Kissmygrits on September 4, 2013 at 9:44 AM

Hillary backs Obama on Syria

This is absolute proof that Obama’s Syria policy will be a TOTAL DISASTER!!

Hillary always poisons everything she touches.

landlines on September 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM

On the record: Hillary backs Obama on Syria

Watch out Obama, Hillary backed going into Iraq as well, at least until we got into Iraq. She then turned solidly against it and pretended that she never voted to use force in Iraq.

RJL on September 4, 2013 at 7:56 PM