[SoFloFreeper]

Everywhere, Wash Post. Everywhere.

[South40]

The Washington Post, which in the past editorialized that President Obama was “weak” on the issue

Weak on "the issue"?! On what issue isn't Obama weak?

[Ben Ficklin]

The problem seems to be that a lot of republicans and freepers are opposed to intervening in Syria. And they like the fact that Obama has been and is dragging his feet on intervening

Obviously, the NeoCon republicans like SoFloFreeper, South Forty, and John McCain are strong supporters of intervening. And they are willing to intervene unilaterally.

Some republicans and freepers are isolationists and side with Randy Paul and oppose intervening.

The Realist republicans are conflicted on the issue. Previously they were opposed to intervening but some have gradually changed their mind and now reluctantly support intervening. For example Corker(R) who has the GOP chair on the Senate Foreign Relations committee now supports intervening. But other Realists like Richard Lugar and Bob Gates oppose.

You have a similar situation in the dem party. The Liberal Interventionist dems want to intervene. The antiwar pacifist dems oppose intervening and the Realist dems are split on the issue.

You need to understand that Wash Post editorial board is controlled by NeoCon Republicans and Liberal Interventionist dems.