Posted on 09/03/2013 10:33:31 AM PDT by NotYourAverageDhimmi
The District of Columbia’s non-voting delegate to Congress says that because of her uncertainty about striking Syria, the only reason she would see herself voting to authorize military action would be out of “loyalty” to a fellow Democrat in President Obama.
Speaking with Bill Press this morning, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) explained her belief that a response to Syria’s use of chemical weapons is necessary; however, she is unsure whether that needs to be done militarily. “I can’t believe that the only way to address it is a slight bombing which will somehow punish somebody or deter somebody,” she said.
Asked whether the president would be justified in taking action even after Congress potentially votes down his proposals, Norton said: “No, oh boy, no. I think it’ll be like the red line trap. He said if the red line you cross it. I think once you say, ‘I’m going to Congress,’ you can’t say, ‘Okay, I’m going to do it anyway.’”
As D.C.’s delegate to Congress, Holmes is unable to actually cast a vote in the debate, but she told Press: “If [Obama] gets saved at all, I think it’ll be because, it’ll be because of loyalty of Democrats. They just don’t want to see him shamed and humiliated on the national stage.”
She elaborated: “At the moment, that’s the only reason I would vote for it if I could vote on it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
Translation: “I would kill women and children if my dear leader told me to. I wouldn’t need more of a reason than that.”
Unbelievable.... yet strangely believable.
eleanor bones moron.
Anyone who had any doubts about the ignorance and racism of this woman should now be satisfied thatthey were right.
She is a total and complete fool.
And with a goofy looking haircut too.
Boehner said the same thing
“They just don’t want to see him shamed and humiliated on the national stage.”
I think that toothpaste is already out of the tube.
Loyalty to Obama more important than loyalty to the nation, or the voters.
Isn’t that so very nice to know?
well, that’s the best reason they’ve offered for launching a war against Syria.
as a practical matter we have already launched this war.
you can’t send over a billion dollars of fancy military equipment to islamicist revolutionaries....plus provide them training and intelligence and logistics support...
and
not say you have created a war against another country.
so, maybe all this bruhaha in WashDC this week is just a sideshow (since it won’t create a new war, nor end the one we have started there).....
a sideshow to divert our gaze from some other things perhaps?
just musing
“NO, to any US military action in Syria.”
FROM COLONEL ALLEN WEST TODAY
“Watched Senators McCain and Graham’s press conference after their meeting with President Obama on the subject of Syria. It seems the tagline to be used is ‘degrade Assad and upgrade the resistance.’ I hate to be the one to ruin the party, but this administration did exactly that in Libya and never considered the unintended consequences. Now in Libya we have a proliferation of Islamist forces who are training terrorist insurgents to head to Syria, supported by the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda, as well as a consulate attack resulting in the death of four Americans, one being an Ambassador. In Egypt we ‘deposed’ Mubarak and enabled the Muslim Brotherhood and the unintended consequences are a civil war in Egypt and increased persecution of the Coptic Christians. So here we go again with the Obama administration, and useful tools from Congress, embarking America on a nebulous endeavor in the Middle East without consideration of the untended consequences. The opposition in Syria are Islamists supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and Al Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The Obama administration has not supported the Free Syrian Army under COL Riad. NO, to any US military action in Syria. The Obama administration has a confused Middle East policy and has shown ineptness in understanding the second and third order effects”
More or less.
Mr. niteowl77
Yeah, it’s not like you should worry about what your constituents want.
Isn’t this level of ‘loyalty’ sub-human, especially when it may result in killing people?
wow
With all this improperly aimed loyalty, this would be a good time for 0’ to jump off a cliff... with his loyal followers
My loyalty on this issue is to Charlie Rangle, and opposed to 0’, ‘rats, gopE, McPain, Linda, Cantor, Boehner, McConnell...
Same reasons Boehner, Cantor, McCain and Cornyn are voting for it obviously.
but, to hell with the country in favor of the muslim the dems have invested so heavily in. If the obozo goes down, so do the democrats so once again as for the dems, to hell with the United States.
Like the Lansing Michigan judge who tried to block the Bankruptcy filing of Detroit because it would dishonor Obama.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.