Posted on 09/05/2013 7:05:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
If the House voted today on a resolution to attack Syria, President Barack Obama would lose — and lose big.
That’s the private assessment of House Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides who are closely involved in the process.
If the Senate passes a use-of-force resolution next week — which is no sure thing — the current dynamics suggest that the House would defeat it. That would represent a dramatic failure for Obama, and once again prove that his sway over Congress is extraordinarily limited. The loss would have serious reverberations throughout the next three months, when Obama faces off against Congress in a series of high-stakes fiscal battles.
Several Republican leadership aides, who are counting votes but not encouraging a position, say that there are roughly one to two dozen “yes” votes in favor of military action at this time. The stunningly low number is expected to grow a bit.
But senior aides say they expect, at most, between 50 and 60 Republicans to vote with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who support the president’s plan to bomb Syria to stop Bashar Assad from using chemical weapons on his people. That would amount to less than one-third of the House Republican Conference.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Hopes so.
Whenever Hussein wins — America loses.
FUJB!!
If Congress says no, and Obama acts on his own anyway, he will be the rogue War Criminal the left always claimed that Bush was. Quite ironic, eh?
That's a slightly new twist... not only does it presume that Assad used WMDs, but it also presumes that bombing him would stop his use.
Pretty much more likely, of course, is that Assad did NOT used WMDs, and bombing would NOT stop the rebels from using them more, especially if Syria was bombed to stop Assad.
A Representative would have to be a total fool to vote for this resolution. Americans do not want to get involved in Syria. We saw what happened to Libya.
This is EXACTLY the cover Obama now wants for NOT acting.
Obama is scared and incompetent.
He SHOULD have MOABed the stockpile LAST YEAR when both the Syrian Army AND the rebels accessed the storage facilities.
Now, Obama is AFRAID to act, but wants to blame Republicans for his lack of follow through.
good
Wow!
That is tuff.
I can just imagine how difficult it is going to be for Obama to call all those nations in the coalition and tell them the gig is off.
But Debbie Wasserman Schultz says dozens of countries support Obama’s Syria bombing 100%
She’s not lying too, right?
/s
Alll 10, er 9 of them you mean? IT’s a joke! Even the British AREN’T COMING!!!
“senior aides say they expect, at most, between 50 and 60 Republicans to vote with Speaker John Boehner”
Nope. If this vote fails, and it is looking increasingly likely, Cantor and Boehner will be finished. There will be nothing to fear from them. If the momentum continues to ebb away from Obama, the ‘moderates’ will peel to vote with the majority.
I doubt they’ll get 40 Republicans in the end.
Either way, the ignorant graduate of Ethnic Studies will blame the Republicans. It’s a win-win for him.
You are right, there’s some jokers in the media where we are also told this wasn’t the first time he used Chemical Weapons. That to me, isn’t proven either, it’s the old adage how does it go? The bigger the lie, the big lie syndrome.
Anyway, I’ve listen to Jason Lewis the last few nights, he seems to say Nasser used chemical weapons against Yemen. Of course, it’s wrong, I think the point Lewis was making was Sadat may have been involved in that whole incident too. History from some time ago. Maybe someone here knows.
And of course that fact will be completely ignored by most of the dishonest left and especially by the MSM who would crawl naked on glass to support him.
I’m willing to give Obama PLENTY of cover for not acting.
We should have “not acted” in Libya. We should supported Mubarak in Egypt. Everything we’ve touched in the ME has turned to crap. We need to stop adventuring and diplomacy there for a good long while.
Infowars has an article saying that Obama attacks anyway even if the House votes it down.
Sounds like Congress needs to be ready for what to do, not that I know what that necessarily is, if Obama attacks Syria after a House rejection of a Syria attack.
And the opposite: when Hussein loses, we win.
He was so anxious to start loosing missiles .... If he had been in charge on 12/7/41, he would have asked Congress for a declaration of war against Thailand.
(Who?)
The rest of the world is finally starting to figure out what we’ve been yelling about for years:
“Welcome to the party pal!” John McLane
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.