Quotes of the day

posted at 8:41 pm on September 6, 2013 by Allahpundit

If Congress votes this down and he does it anyway, don’t you think an impeachment move in the House is certain?

Howard, I am not going to speculate about it because I hope Congress will exercise its best judgment to prevent the worst elements in Syria from even growing stronger. I hope the Congress will decide not to let Assad believe he has impunity in the use of these weapons. I hope the Congress will believe that upholding the credibility of our nation in the conduct of foreign affairs is important. I hope the Congress believes that this is a message that Iran needs to understand as they proceed, conceivably, to be developing nuclear weapons. I hope that they will also agree to uphold it with respect to others in the world, like Kim Jong Un in North Korea, who needs to know that America stands by its word. And for all the people in the world who depend on America as a reliable partner, this is a critical message. I hope Congress will recognize that the plan is appropriately and unbelievably limited and tailored in its scope so that it is not going to war — it is a limited action to uphold the importance of degrading his capacity to use chemical weapons.

***

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the third-ranking member of the Senate Democratic leadership, announced Friday he will support a resolution authorizing military strikes against Syria…

Schumer announced his support two days after his colleague in the leadership, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), voted for the measure during the Foreign Relations markup.

“I hope that the message comes through from this committee meeting, and from the floor in the Senate and the House, that this Congress, Democrats and Republicans, are resolute when it comes to discouraging the spread of chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction,” Durbin said in a statement Wednesday.

***

Obama has gotten support from some former Bush officials, including former defense secretary Robert Gates, who also served Obama. Gates told Politico that he strongly urges Congress “to approve the president’s request for authorization to use force in Syria.”

And Stephen Hadley, Bush’s former national security adviser, told Bloomberg TV’s “Political Capital With Al Hunt” in an interview that will air Sunday that Republicans should endorse Obama’s use-of-force resolution even if they disagree with his foreign policy.

“I think there are some legitimate grounds for saying that we shouldn’t be where we are,” Hadley said. “But being where we are, there’s really no alternative but to authorize action in Syria.”

***

A limited military strike may be symbolic. But for Congress to block that strike would be more than symbolic. It would undermine a tangible element of American influence: the perception that the commander in chief is fully in command.

The refusal to authorize force would be taken as an ideological pivot point. Nations such as China, Russia and Iran would see this as the triumph of a political coalition between the peace party of the left and the rising isolationists of the right. And they would be correct. The strategic calculations of every American enemy and friend would be adjusted in ways that encourage challenge and instability. Prime Minister David Cameron’s recent loss of the vote authorizing military action — the first such repudiation since 1782 — has weakened Britain as an actor in the world. America should refuse to follow it down.

I would prefer to defend a form of internationalism less conflicted and hesitant than President Obama’s. But even so, it is better than the alternative of seriously compromising the credibility of the presidency itself. And those who claim that this credibility has already reached bottom are lacking in imagination.

***

Admittedly, it would have been much better to start arming and building up the moderate opposition two years ago. But we have no choice but to try now, otherwise the victor is either going to be the Iran-Hezbollah-Assad axis or al-Qaeda and its ilk. Neither one speaks for the majority of Syrians and there is still an opportunity–albeit an opportunity much smaller today than two years ago–to buttress the more moderate factions of the Free Syrian Army. But in order to do that the Obama administration will have to provide heavier weapons to vetted rebel factions, especially anti-tank missiles that can stop Assad’s armored vehicles.

The rebels also require anti-aircraft missiles to shoot down Assad’s aircraft. The administration is on more solid ground in refusing to grant this weapons request because of the danger that portable anti-aircraft systems such as the Stinger could fall into the wrong hands and wind up being used against civil aviation. As I have been arguing for a while, instead of providing anti-aircraft missiles to the rebels, the U.S. and its allies should simply use their air and naval forces to ground Assad’s aircraft. That could be achieved from stand-off range by cratering runways and blowing up aircraft on the ground. It would be achieved even more surely by imposing a no-fly zone backed up by airstrikes; Assad’s anemic air defenses, weakened by defections and two years of fighting, would be no match for an American-led air assault…

The alternative–of not granting the administration authorization to act–is too dangerous to contemplate: It would be a green light to WMD proliferators from North Korea to Iran who will now know that the U.S. will do nothing to stop them. Thus, congressional skeptics have no choice but to hold their noses and vote “aye,” all the while hoping that the administration’s use of force will be less anemic than widely advertised.

***

2. What kind of world we want to live in. The abolition of all dangerous tyrants and oppressive regimes is, of course, a silly dream. But the idea of moving toward a world with fewer and fewer of them is completely possible. In fact, it’s been happening ever since the U.S. took the lead in ensuring global security after WWII. The world is a freer place than it was and this is not only good in the moral sense. It is also good because free countries are less likely to go to war with one another and more likely to trade with one another.

The problem is this doesn’t happen on its own. Peace doesn’t keep itself, as some have put it. Although there are many downsides to America’s policing the world, a) the benefit of a more peaceful order is invaluable and b) the U.S. is the only country that can do it. Without American intervention, imperfect as it is, for humanitarian (and pragmatic) reasons, a power vacuum emerges and the global order spirals out of control. That’s how we got into the current crisis to begin with. Many of the sinister developments mentioned in the first point might have been prevented or curbed if we had spent the last five years continuing to act as the strong and self-assured defender of a (relatively) free and peaceful global order. Staying away creates chaos. This very chaos, if left to grow, will manifest on a larger scale and ultimately cause us great harm—even, perhaps, on our own soil. Rising bad actors like to challenge America to affirm that their rise is real, official, and inevitable.

***

[W]ho could benefit from the U.S. not taking action here? Assad, the dictator with the blood of 100,000 on his hands. Iran, one of the world’s most reactionary regimes. Hezbollah, a terrorist force that crushes the democratic aspirations of the Lebanese people. And al Qaeda, the extremist fanatics behind 9/11. Are those the kinds of people liberals want to help? I’m sure liberal members of Congress who’ve announced they’re voting no—Raúl Grijalva, Alan Grayson, Charlie Rangel, Barbara Lee, and about 17 others—have spent a heck of a lot of time thinking about what could go wrong if we do strike. I bet they haven’t given a moment’s thought to what could go wrong if we don’t.

I say that’s worth thinking about. Also worth thinking about is the fact that many liberal-minded people from the region, and certainly many or virtually all of the nonextremist rebels, want the United States to act. From their point of view, without the United States’ engagement, the region is buried in slaughter, theocracy, and darkness. I would expect American liberals at least to stop and think about that.

Again, no one is talking about 130,000 ground troops. That was a qualitatively different thing, and I opposed it from the start. Yes, an American attack might escalate matters. But it also might not. We got in and out of Libya. It’s not clear what that one accomplished yet, although we did presumably prevent a slaughter of many thousands in Benghazi. It is clear what we accomplished in Kosovo, where another murderer was removed from office and hauled to the Hague (without one American life lost). So it doesn’t always end badly. And it isn’t always immoral. This is one of those cases where, if the scale of the action is appropriate and if it works, a military incursion can actually serve liberal ends. No, that’s not for sure. But it is for sure that doing nothing helps the reactionaries.

***

The fact is that Obama is the only president we have. We can’t abdicate our position in the world for the next three years. So Republicans will have to resist the temptation to weaken him when the cost is weakening the country. A party that for at least two generations has held high the banner of American leadership and strength should not cast a vote that obviously risks a damaging erosion of this country’s stature and credibility abroad…

A Yes vote is in fact the easy vote. It’s actually close to risk-free. After all, it’s President Obama who is seeking the authorization to use force and who will order and preside over the use of force. It’s fundamentally his policy. Lots of Democrats voted in 2002 to authorize the Iraq war. When that war ran into trouble, it was President Bush and Republicans who paid the price. If the Syria effort goes badly, the public will blame President Obama, who dithered for two years, and who seems inclined to a halfhearted execution of any military campaign. If it goes well, Republicans can take credit for pushing him to act decisively, and for casting a tough vote supporting him when he asked for authorization to act…

A Yes vote seems to be statesmanlike. (Actually, it happens also to be statesmanlike, but we’re now talking politics.) Establishment foreign policy voices, including conservative ones, may not move voters—but they do have some pull in the media and with influentials across the country. Casting a “tough” political vote is a way for members of Congress to appear to be rising above mere party politics. In fact, many voters do like to think they’re voting for someone who has at least a touch of statesmanship, and so casting what appears superficially to be a politically perilous vote could well help the stature of Republicans with many of their constituents back home.

It’s true that a Yes vote will be temporarily unpopular with the base. To support Obama now may seem to invite primary opposition from challengers who would be more in tune with popular sentiment to stay out of the Syrian civil war. For a few weeks after the vote, Republicans will hear such rumblings. But at the end of the day, Republican primary voters are a pretty hawkish bunch.

***

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also said Congress is not likely to authorize a strike, predicting a close vote in the Senate where the resolution is likely to come up next week and a larger margin in the House where the timing is less certain.

“God has blessed us,” he said Thursday. “It is inconvenient, it is hard, it is complicated, and it can be wearying. But there is no substitute for American leadership.”…

He told chamber members he doesn’t know why leaders such as Adolf Hitler or Osama bin Laden embrace extreme ideology.

“I cannot tell you why, other than there is good and evil in the world,” Graham said. “And every time good people ignore evil, we wind up regretting it.”

***

“I’m not drawing an analogy to World War II, other than to say, you know, when London was getting bombed, it was profoundly unpopular both in Congress and around the country to help the British.”

***

Via the Corner.


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5

Democrats: Victims of Their Own Success

42 reasons.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:43 PM

yo!

Murphy9 on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Oh, and ‘BIIIIISSSSSSSSHHHHBOP’!

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Caption that pic, I’ll start:

“Say, is that Irish Spring I smell on you?”

“Yeah…let’s meet in the coatroom in 10 minutes.”

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

‘BIIIIISSSSSSSSHHHHBOP’!

FIFM. lol

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

We are truly in the times of prophecy, America is better than to serve as the mercenary air force for al qaeda because the bought off politicians in both parties are too stupid or compromised to just say no to WW3.

abobo on September 6, 2013 at 8:45 PM

Bishbop?

Now you die.

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:45 PM

_♥__♥_____♥__♥___
_♥_____♥_♥_____♥__
_♥______♥______♥__
__♥_____/______♥__
___♥____\_____♥___
____♥___/___♥_____
______♥_\_♥_______
________♥_________

Murphy9 on September 6, 2013 at 8:46 PM

Welp, thats all you RWM.

Have at it B.

Murphy9 on September 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM

Bishbop?

Now you die.

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:45 PM

Snicker.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM

Murphy9 on September 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM

TYVM!


  + 。☆・ +
・゜☆・ + 。☆ °
+ ☆。☆ 。+ ☆
 ゚ |。・/☆ 。+
 r⌒|ヽ゚/。/・☆  
|丶| /`/。☆  
|==`-/∠_〉。+  
|======/  
|====/  
|==/  
|/

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:50 PM

FIFM. lol

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Thanks for the clarification. For a minute there, I thought “Bishbop” was a new dance craze. ;)

predator on September 6, 2013 at 8:52 PM

A Yes vote is in fact the easy vote. It’s actually close to risk-free. After all, it’s President Obama who is seeking the authorization to use force and who will order and preside over the use of force. It’s fundamentally his policy.

Somebody put a sock in that idiot Bill Kristol’s mouth.

jimver on September 6, 2013 at 8:52 PM

I once knew a senator from Nantucket…

Whose head was as big as a bucket…

He’s also an azshole.

(I’ve never been good at poetry)

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:53 PM

They’re protesting the Syrian War outside the ranch in Crawford, TX already !!!

Oh, wait !!!

viking01 on September 6, 2013 at 8:54 PM

There once was a senator from Nantucket,

Whose head was as big as a bucket.

When the war he proposed,

Was by the nation opposed.

He promptly told said nation to sucket.

*You’re welcome, Bish.*

predator on September 6, 2013 at 8:56 PM

You Vogon.

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:57 PM

I once knew a senator from Nantucket…

Whose head was as big as a bucket…

He’s also an azshole.

(I’ve never been good at poetry)

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:53 PM

… he drank like a fish then murdered some dish

his only regret he didn’t **** it.

viking01 on September 6, 2013 at 8:59 PM

“I’m not drawing an analogy to World War II, other than to say, you know, when London was getting bombed, it was profoundly unpopular both in Congress and around the country to help the British.”

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/09/06/obama-dont-know-much-about-history/

According to the Free Beacon, Obama got his history entirely wrong.

A Gallup poll in 1940, when the German bombing campaign in Britain took place, showed 60 percent of Americans felt it was more important to help England win, even at risk of going to war, than to stay out.

Additionally, 68 percent of Americans believed the future safety of the United States depended on England winning the war, and 85 percent felt England would lose if Americans stopped sending war materials to help.

INC on September 6, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Our political class has long thought the American taxpayer is an infinite money tree and that, no matter what they do, their actions have no consequences. Now they are beginning to think our military is invincible, no matter what it is called upon to do. The opposition in Congress is partly partisan, and partly anti-war, but none of the elites seem to think the US itself is vulnerable in any way. Maybe this time. And the next. Maybe.

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Caption that pic, I’ll start:

“Say, is that Irish Spring I smell on you?”

“Yeah…let’s meet in the coatroom in 10 minutes.”

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Heh.

“I don’t know about napalm, but I do love the smell of Barry’s a$$ in the morning … How ’bout you?”

ShainS on September 6, 2013 at 9:01 PM

There is also a possibility that the Senate will vote yes on Syria strikes and the House simply does not vote at all… According to John Fund at National Review top aide to Republican House leadership said that the House might not vote on Syria strike resolution if it is certain to be rejected….

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357794/house-might-not-vote-obamas-syria-resolution-john-fund

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 9:05 PM

Caption that pic, I’ll start:

“Say, is that Irish Spring I smell on you?”

“Yeah…let’s meet in the coatroom in 10 minutes.”

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Heh.

“I don’t know about napalm, but I do love the smell of Barry’s a$$ in the morning … How ’bout you?”

ShainS on September 6, 2013 at 9:01 PM

I should have been President -and you’re not qualified to hold my balls while I shower!

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:06 PM

Without American intervention, imperfect as it is, for humanitarian (and pragmatic) reasons, a power vacuum emerges and the global order spirals out of control. That’s how we got into the current crisis to begin with. Many of the sinister developments mentioned in the first point might have been prevented or curbed if we had spent the last five years continuing to act as the strong and self-assured defender of a (relatively) free and peaceful global order.

In order to have “spent the last five years continuing to act as the strong and self-assured defender of a (relatively) free and peaceful global order,” we would have needed a president who believed in American exceptionalism. A president who understood the unique role America has played in the world for the past two centuries. A president who was proud and appreciative of the tremendous sacrifices this nation has made, in both blood and treasure, to preserve global order.

Instead, we had a president who called himself not an American but a “citizen of the world,” arrogantly denied American exceptionalism, and made a point of being photographed with Zakaria’s book “A Post-American World.” A president who, in his first months in office, went on a worldwide apology tour, bowing and scraping like a demented serf before a motley collection of petty dictators and thugs, while lamenting America’s sins, real and imagined.

You Obama voters and crotch-sniffers wanted your “post-American” world, ruled over by your “citizen of the world” president. Well, now you’ve got it.

Enjoy.

AZCoyote on September 6, 2013 at 9:06 PM

jackie?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:10 PM

I should have been President -and you’re not qualified to hold my balls while I shower!

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:06 PM

Which one got in the first “Jinx!”?

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:10 PM

ken?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:10 PM

evening all :)

Esh I am watching Hannity’s special program with College Students…half Ds and half Rs.

Wondering if they are all the Ds are OFA plants as they are spitting out the D talking points over and over.

I really feel sad for our country.

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:11 PM

AZCoyote on September 6, 2013 at 9:06 PM

Ha! Like they give a fcvk…

* SPIT *

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:11 PM

b9?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:13 PM

“Constitutionally, every president, Republican and Democrat alike, has always reserved to the presidency, to the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the right to make a decision with respect to American security,” Kerry said

‘THE CONSTITUTION VESTS THE POWER OF DECLARING WAR IN CONGRESS; THEREFORE NO OFFENCIVE EXPEDITION OF IMPORTANCE CAN BE UNDERTAKEN UNTIL AFTER THEY SHALL HAVE DELIBERATED UPON THE SUBJECT AND AUTHORISED SUCH A MEASURE.’

- President George Washington, 1793

‘The Constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.’

- James Madison in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, 1789

‘The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is FULLY AND EXCLUSIVELY vested in the legislature . . . the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.’

- Thomas Jefferson, 1793

‘This system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress; for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large: this declaration must be made with the concurrence of the House of Representatives: from this circumstance we may draw a certain conclusion that nothing but our interest can draw us into war.’

- James Wilson to the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention

#NoWar2SaveFace

‘In most of these particulars, the power of the President will resemble equally that of the king of Great Britain and of the governor of New York. The most material points of difference are these: — First. The President will have only the occasional command of such part of the militia of the nation as by legislative provision may be called into the actual service of the Union. The king of Great Britain and the governor of New York have at all times the entire command of all the militia within their several jurisdictions. In this article, therefore, the power of the President would be inferior to that of either the monarch or the governor. Second. The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces…while that of the British king extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies — ALL WHICH, BY THE CONSTITUTION UNDER CONSIDERATION, WOULD APPERTAIN TO THE LEGISLATURE. The governor of New York, on the other hand, is by the constitution of the State vested only with the command of its militia and navy. But the constitutions of several of the States expressly declare their governors to be commanders-in-chief, as well of the army as navy; and it may well be a question, whether those of New Hampshire and Massachusetts, in particular, do not, in this instance, confer larger powers upon their respective governors, than could be claimed by a President of the United States.’

- Alexander Hamilton, a proponent of the centralisation of power in the Federal government, a supporter of a very strong Executive, and a Nationalist, if there ever was one, Federalist #69

Hell, even Abraham Lincoln wrote…

‘To allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose — and you allow him to make war at pleasure…. Study to see if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, after you have given him so much as you propose. If, to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, ‘I see no probability of the British invading us’ but he will say to you ‘be silent; I see it, if you don’t.

The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making power to Congress, was dictated, as I understand it, by the following reasons. Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us. But your view destroys the whole matter, and places our President where kings have always stood.’

- President Abraham Lincoln

Declaring War Is One Power That The President Absolutely Does Not Have

And, no, the War Powers Resolution Act doesn’t apply either, Lurch. Read it.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:13 PM

Bmore?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:13 PM

Which one got in the first “Jinx!”?

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:10 PM

Old school:

“Coke’s on you!”

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:14 PM

Democrats: Victims of Their Own Success

42 reasons.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Outstanding!

herm2416 on September 6, 2013 at 9:15 PM

evening all :)

Esh I am watching Hannity’s special program with College Students…half Ds and half Rs.

Wondering if they are all the Ds are OFA plants as they are spitting out the D talking points over and over.

I really feel sad for our country.

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:11 PM

I watched the beginning of it too. Had to stop. Even the GOP students didn’t seem that bright, and they all have an annoying way of speaking.

Everything they say ends up sounding like a question? There were very few “definitive” statements from any of them.

*I wonder if they even know what a “definitive statement is?”*

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:16 PM

Koolaid2?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:17 PM

twerpy?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:18 PM

herm2416 on September 6, 2013 at 9:15 PM

TYVVM!

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:18 PM

Pic of the Day: The Red Lines Obama Ignored

Share it! It’s important.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:19 PM

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:11 PM

So good to see you. You have been missed :)

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:20 PM

Caption that pic,

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Kerry: “John, you’ve got to do better or those photos get leaked”

McCain: “Look, you rat bastard, I’ve welcomed the illegal immigrants, whipped for ObamaCare, and I’m pushing hard to get this war started…you threaten me again with that crap you got from the NSA and the world learns about you and Dick Cavett”

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:22 PM

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:16 PM

I guess I am a glutton for punishment. I’m answering for Hannity as I have had better comebacks than he has LOL.

____________________

Good Stuff RWM thanks. I hope you don’t me using some of it in my arguments :)

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:22 PM

Which one got in the first “Jinx!”?

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:10 PM

Old school:

“Coke’s on you!”

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:14 PM

I’m not sure what that means but I can think of a couple things that would probably get me banned.

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Pic of the Day: The Red Lines Obama Ignored

Share it! It’s important.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:19 PM

You should have your own damn show.

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:11 PM

Scrumpiliciousness! Howdy!

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:20 PM

It’s good to be back!! Thanks!! :)

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:25 PM

Share it! It’s important.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:19 PM

Saved and soon to be shared. Thank you, your Muchness!

*bows*

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:25 PM

“I’m not drawing an analogy to World War II, other than to say, you know, when London was getting bombed, it was profoundly unpopular both in Congress and around the country to help the British.”

*tilted stare*

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:25 PM

Democrats: Victims of Their Own Success

42 reasons.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Damn good job,RMW!

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM

And, no, the War Powers Resolution Act doesn’t apply either, Lurch. Read it.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:13 PM

Wonderful article!! Thank you for all the time and effort it took to present this timely piece… Thank you :)

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM

Damn good job,RMW!

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM

I knew you’d show up sooner or later. Can I buy you a drink, doll?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:19 PM

IT IS IMPORTANT!! Thanks again :)

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Bishbop?

rotf

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Good Stuff RWM thanks. I hope you don’t me using some of it in my arguments :)

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:22 PM

Not at all, but which? The quotes or the piece that I wrote on Democrats and their ‘success’?

You should have your own damn show.

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM

You’re very kind. (Don’t tell Axe, but make sure you let Sparky know that I thanked you very much. He’s still pizzed off that he doesn’t get Twitchy-d and thinks that I should forget about the time that he stole my eyeball. lolz).

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Prime Minister David Cameron’s recent loss of the vote authorizing military action — the first such repudiation since 1782 — has weakened Britain as an actor in the world.

Didn’t that happen in 1947 when the British Socialists left India?

Myron Falwell on September 6, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Bishbop?

rotf

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

It’s the latest thing. Straight off of the runways at Fashion Week.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Scrumpy iliciousness! Howdy!

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Howdy back at’cha!! :) (just Scrumpy ok) Thanks

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Poison – Unskinny (Bish)Bop

Yes, it is, Scrumpadoodles.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:30 PM

It’s true that a Yes vote will be temporarily unpopular with the base. To support Obama now may seem to invite primary opposition from challengers who would be more in tune with popular sentiment to stay out of the Syrian civil war. For a few weeks after the vote, Republicans will hear such rumblings. But at the end of the day, Republican primary voters are a pretty hawkish bunch.

Dumbest quote of the day from a pretty dumb magazine that has only succeeded in helping to destroy the GOPe. Just perfect.

Myron Falwell on September 6, 2013 at 9:30 PM

RWM………..lol I think I’ve used all of it at some time or another…Quotes, pieces you wrote, the Detroit mess and the cartoons!!

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:31 PM

I’m not sure what that means but I can think of a couple things that would probably get me banned.

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Back in the day, when two of us said the same thing/same time, we’d scream “Coke’s on you!” Meant that whoever didn’t yell it out had to buy the other party a Coke, later.

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

F it all. I no longer care.

Lets Pray, hope, sacrifice whatever your religion for the well being of those on the sharp edge of the sword. And the soft targets out there.

I figured this would be the QOTD and was mellowing out to these:

It doesn’t get any better than this one.

I know you are supposed to leave the best for last. But that’s not how I roll. The adult beverages may put an end to this at any time.

cozmo on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:26 PM

TYVVM & mon plaisir. :-)

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

I knew you’d show up sooner or later. Can I buy you a drink, doll?

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM

Did ya now?
Hey sweetness. :]
Sure thing-I’ll take a black and tan.

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:30 PM

“Bottoms Up Wot!! Huzzahhhhh! Lmao ;)

Cheers and * clink *

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM

RWM………..lol I think I’ve used all of it at some time or another…Quotes, pieces you wrote, the Detroit mess and the cartoons!!

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:31 PM

lolz. I’m particularly pleased with the Victims of Their Own Success & Declaring War….

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM

Back in the day, when two of us said the same thing/same time, we’d scream “Coke’s on you!” Meant that whoever didn’t yell it out had to buy the other party a Coke, later.

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

Wow. We just punched each other. First punch won. It was a tough neighborhood.

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

Poison – Unskinny (Bish)Bop

Yes, it is, Scrumpadoodles.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:30 PM

LOL..good save.

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

cozmo on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

Right on Coz!! :)

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

It’s the latest thing. Straight off of the runways at Fashion Week.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:29 PM

Well, I mean — You know I have to die in your place, right? And you know I can’t say that out loud because you aren’t the kind of woman that’ll put up with that crap, you can die for yourself thank you very much. So now I have to get up in the middle of the night and sneak out so Bishop can kill me in a freak “snowmobiling accident” before you get up at the crack of brunch — It’s just –

lol … “bishbop.”

damn it.

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

She bish-bopped.

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:35 PM

lol … “bishbop.”

damn it.

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

Lmao, sooooo funny Axe :D

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:36 PM

Did ya now?
Hey sweetness. :]
Sure thing-I’ll take a black and tan.

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM

Yes I did. I had faith.

Barkeep! Black and tan for the lady!

Oh hell, get one for the house as well! TGIF!

*even though I have to work tomorrow*

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:36 PM

This administration are bad animals.

These Animals are really good though.

cozmo on September 6, 2013 at 9:36 PM

RWM doin’ the She Bop.

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:36 PM

Cheers and * clink * :)

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:37 PM

Lmao, sooooo funny Axe :D

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:36 PM

Nice to see you, Scrumpy. :) Hope things are rockin?

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:38 PM

*even though I have to work tomorrow*

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:36 PM

Booooo…Hisssss

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:38 PM

Well, I mean — You know I have to die in your place, right? And you know I can’t say that out loud because you aren’t the kind of woman that’ll put up with that crap, you can die for yourself thank you very much. So now I have to get up in the middle of the night and sneak out so Bishop can kill me in a freak “snowmobiling accident” before you get up at the crack of brunch — It’s just –

lol … “bishbop.”

damn it.

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

Snort.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Russian and Chinese talkin’ about defending Syria.

This might really be the apocalypse.

cozmo on September 6, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Predator……….Hannity is pissing me off! LOL I can’t believe I didn’t turn the channel.

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:38 PM

Yeah, things be kewl :)

I be rockin’ :D

Good to see you too! (:

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:40 PM

Can’t wait for Tuesday night. Maybe we’ll see McLame standing next to the Won while he gives the speech. No fool like an old fool.

Kissmygrits on September 6, 2013 at 9:40 PM

Snort.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:39 PM

The PROPER way to snort with DIGNITY!! (;

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:41 PM

The PROPER way to snort with DIGNITY!! (;

Scrumpy on September 6, 2013 at 9:41 PM

**going to stand in corner**

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:41 PM

Back in the day, when two of us said the same thing/same time, we’d scream “Coke’s on you!” Meant that whoever didn’t yell it out had to buy the other party a Coke, later.

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

Wow. We just punched each other. First punch won. It was a tough neighborhood.

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

Obviously I’ve led a sheltered life.

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 9:43 PM

Booooo…Hisssss

bazil9 on September 6, 2013 at 9:38 PM

Yep. One Saturday a month. It is an evening gig on Saturday, so I don’t have to get up with the chickens.

Well, OK, maybe the drunk chickens…

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:44 PM

‘We Must Attack Syria, ‘Cuz, Like, Um, Ya Know, Because…’

Holy cow. That’s Allidunce’s feature pic. :) bayum’s hit bottom. Or top — depends on which way round one sees it.

- Axe

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Predator……….Hannity is pissing me off! LOL I can’t believe I didn’t turn the channel.

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:39 PM

I thought it started poorly, and I couldn’t see anything of value coming from it, so…bye, bye.

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:45 PM

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:45 PM

I keep hoping. Now they are doing social issues OIVEY

CoffeeLover on September 6, 2013 at 9:47 PM

Back in the day, when two of us said the same thing/same time, we’d scream “Coke’s on you!” Meant that whoever didn’t yell it out had to buy the other party a Coke, later.

massrighty on September 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM

Wow. We just punched each other. First punch won. It was a tough neighborhood.

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:34 PM

We did the punch thing too. And when you got your chicken pox vaccine? You never wore the bandage they put on it to school. That thing was a target. You’d get hammered in the sore arm all day.

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:47 PM

i don’t know if this has been mentioned yet…but AP has hit the Twitchy lottery big time.

something about Sam Power and schmucktastic

http://twitchy.com/2013/09/06/smart-power-obamas-team-thought-us-might-win-irans-support-against-syria/

truly scary people in charge…and AP did a truly beautiful job on them

r keller on September 6, 2013 at 9:47 PM

In a sharply-worded intervention in the debate on the Syrian conflict, Pope Francis also accused world leaders of having stood by and allowed a “senseless massacre” to unfold in the country.

The Pope, who is a Jesuit, has been backed in his criticism of a military strike on Syria by the head of the Jesuits, Father Adolfo Nicolas.

The Pope’s push for a peaceful solution in Syria includes a four-hour vigil to be held in St Peter’s Square on Saturday evening. The Vatican will station 50 confessors around the square. Bishops’ conferences around the world have announced local vigils.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10290110/Syria-Pope-warns-Barack-Obama-that-military-strike-would-be-futile.html

I appreciate that Pope Francis has come out to address this. Hopefully his stand and efforts and call for prayer vigils will cause a stop to this action by the U.S.

Prayers for the Christians in Syria and Egypt and elsewhere that seem to bear the brunt of this evil.

bluefox on September 6, 2013 at 9:48 PM

“I hope that the message comes through from this committee meeting, and from the floor in the Senate and the House, that this Congress, Democrats and Republicans, are resolute when it comes to discouraging the spread of chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction,” Durbin said in a statement Wednesday.

Then why don’t you jump on wonderboys ass and ask him why he hasn’t been blowing up known stockpiles of WMDs all over the world, eh?

Why haven’t you said a word about Assads illegal stash of gas?

Cause you’re just a prick, thats why.

BobMbx on September 6, 2013 at 9:48 PM

i don’t know if this has been mentioned yet…but AP has hit the Twitchy lottery big time.

r keller on September 6, 2013 at 9:47 PM

SPARK

Axe on September 6, 2013 at 9:49 PM

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 9:19 PM

Thanks Sophie! I shared!

KCB on September 6, 2013 at 9:50 PM

I thought it started poorly, and I couldn’t see anything of value coming from it, so…bye, bye.

predator on September 6, 2013 at 9:45 PM

I heard him mention it on his radio show and my first thot was that it would be boring. Glad I didn’t turn it on. Listening to Savage on the radio:-)

bluefox on September 6, 2013 at 9:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 5