Posted on 09/03/2013 8:31:21 AM PDT by maggief
Edited on 09/03/2013 8:39:33 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Reuters Jeff Mason and Mark Felsenthal report: John Boehner, Republican speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, said on Tuesday he would support President Barack Obama's call for military action in Syria and urged his colleagues in Congress to do the same. Speaking to reporters after a meeting with Obama at the White House, Boehner said the United States had to respond to the use of chemical weapons in Syria and show allies that America would stand up when necessary.
Now Democrats can’t accuse Republicans of being racists and bigots, and of causing gridlock and partisan politics in Washington — Boehner, McCain, Graham, Cantor et. al. are standing in support of President Obama and the Syria strikes.
-----------------------------------------------
If there was a remaining doubt about what miserable waste of skin The Weeper is......
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/319933-the-hills-syria-whip-list
Last updated on 9/3/13 at 1:20 p.m.
YES/LEANING YES
Senate (14)
Bob Casey (D-Pa.) — Said Saturday that it’s in the U.S. interest to respond to most recent chemical attack.
Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) — Said Saturday a red line was crossed a long time ago and the U.S. “must respond.”
Chris Coons (D-Del.) — Said on MSNBC he’s “inclined” to support the president, but made clear that he is not a firm yes.
Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) — Said before Obama’s request for congressional authorization that world could not let heinous attack pass without meaningful response.
Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — Working closely with the White House on Syria.
Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) — Said chemical attack requires “a strong response that will prevent this from happening again.”
Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) — Isakson said he supports military action.
Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) — On Facebook, said he’d support “a narrow authorization for a missile strike targeting those responsible for using chemical weapons.”
Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) — Judiciary Committee chairman is revising the White House’s resolution.
John McCain (R-Ariz.) — Said it would be “catastrophic” if Congress rejects legislation.
Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) — Foreign Relations panel chairman is working on the measure.
Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) — Has called on the president to act before Congress votes.
Harry Reid (D-Nev.) — Senate majority leader backs the president.
Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) — The third-ranking Democrat in the Senate said he could support a limited strike.
YES/LEANING YES
House (14)
John Boehner (R-Ohio) — Speaker to support military action in big boost for Obama.
Eric Cantor (R-Va.) — Boehner’s second-in-command also backs strike.
Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) — Tweeted Monday that the evidence of a chemical attack is strong.
Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) — Said on Twitter that he stands behind Obama’s call for a “targeted and limited response.”
Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) — The top Dem on the Foreign Affairs Committee backs the president.
Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) — Second-ranking House Dem tweeted Friday that he agreed with White House that use of chemical weapons by Syria was unacceptable.
Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) — Backs limited strike.
Sandy Levin (D-Mich.) — Has publicly backed the president.
Luke Messer (R-Ind.) — Before attending a classified briefing on Sunday, Messer said on MSNBC “I could support a strike on Syria.”
Jim Moran (D-Va.) — In a release, Moran said, “Now it is up to one of the most divisive, least productive Congresses in history to authorize an intervention and protect the credibility and viability of a U.S. response to Assad’s horrific crimes against humanity.”
Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — House minority leader will be a key player on resolution.
Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) — Intelligence panel chairman predicts resolution will pass Congress.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) — Democatic National Committee chairwoman said on CNN tat the “world cannot let such a heinous attack pass without a meaningful response.”
Juan Vargas (D-Calif.) — Supports the president.
NO/LEANING NO
Senate (3)
Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) — Ranking member of the Armed Services Committee disagrees with McCain, says cannot support action because of budget cuts.
Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) — Said U.S. “cannot afford another conflict that taxes our resources without achieving goals that advance American interests.” Moran heads the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Rand Paul (R-Ky.) — 2016 possible White House candidate has been a critic of military intervention in Syria.
NO/LEANING NO
House (30)
Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) — Told 48 News he needs to be convinced there is a direct threat to the U.S., adding he doesn’t believe that now.
Justin Amash (R-Mich.) — Firm no.
Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) — Tweeted that she’s “adamantly opposed” to military action.
Michael Burgess (R-Texas) — Burgess says action is U.S. action in Syria would be very risky.
Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) — On Sept. 1, he told 41 Action News he would vote no if vote were that day.
Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) — Tweeted Saturday it was impreative that Obama explore alternatives.
Tom Cole (R-Okla.) — House deputy whip is leaning no.
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) — Said on MSNBC is leaning no.
Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) — Iraq war veteran is against military action in Syria.
Sam Farr (D-Calif.) — Recent remarks suggest he is leaning no.
Randy Forbes (R-Va.) — Said on Fox News on Sunday that taking mlitary action is not in nation’s best interests.
Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) — Says the president has not yet convinced the public.
Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.) — Iraq war veteran said on Facebook he urges a no vote.
Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) — Grayson is rallying support against the measure.
Janice Hahn (D-Calif.) — Leaning no.
Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) — Said on Facebook that he agrees with constituents and sees no evidence of U.S. interests in Syrian war.
Walter Jones (R-N.C.) — Critic of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a firm no.
Pete King (R-N.Y.) — Said on Fox News Sunday he is leaning no; he didn’t believe Congress needed to vote on Syria.
Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) — Senate candidate told WSAV-TV he is leaning no.
Tom Marino (R-Pa.) — Marino is “absolutely opposed to any intervention in Syria at this time.”
Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) — Wants answers to many questions.
Candice Miller (R-Mich.) — “...case has not been made.”
Rick Nolan (D-Minn.) — Nolan is strongly opposed to a military strike.
Richard Nugent (R-Fla.) — Sent letter to Obama on Friday opposing military intervention.
Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) — Reiterated his view that the mlitary draft must be reinstated before an attack on Syria.
Scott Rigell (R-Va.) — Leaning no.
Dana Rohrbacher (R-Calif.) — Said U.S. shouldn’t try to police Syria.
Dennis Ross (R-Fla.) — After attending Sunday’s briefing, said in a statement he doesn’t support military force at this time.
Carol Shea-Porter (D-N.H.) — Tweeted Monday that she doesn’t think intervention is the answer at the moment.
Michael Turner (R-Ohio) — He says he’s a no until sequestration is lifted.
Frank Wolf (R-Va.) — Leaning no. In a letter to the president, Wolf states he has deep reservations about military intervention
Kevin Yoder (R-Kan.) — Said on Facebook an attack is “not warranted at this time.”
UNDECIDED/NOT CLEAR
Senate (5)
Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) — Has called evidence “circumstantial.”
Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) — Says there are “so many unanswered questions” during Sept. 3 CNBC interview. But also says if U.S. doesn’t lead, world becomes a more dangerous place.
Carl Levin (D-Mich.) — Armed Services chairman said Obama made “strong case,” but hasn’t endorsed plan for military action.
Chris Murphy (D-Conn.)
UNDECIDED/NOT CLEAR
House (17)
Bruce Braley (D-Iowa) — Told ABC5 News: “I’m waiting for the president to make the case on the possible use of force and the aftermath.”
David Cicilline (D-R.I.) — Said on MSNBC he is “skeptical.”
Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.) — Has not made up his mind but told WKRN-TV he is “extremely leery.”
Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.)
Jim Himes (D-Conn.)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) — Believes that the international community must some take type of action against Syria. Her statement indicates she’s more likely a yes than a no.
Bob Johnson (R-Ohio)
Dale Kildee (D-Mich.)
Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) — Armed Services panel chairman is undecided.
Richard Neal (D-Mass.) — Noted in his statement that he voted against the Iraq war.
Bill Owens (D-N.Y.) — Wants details on what the mission will be.
Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) — Fourth-ranked GOP leader says she is skeptical.
Mike Quigley (D-Ill.)
Trey Radel (R-Fla.)
Martha Roby (R-Ala.)
Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) — “The president has some work to do to recover from his grave missteps in Syria. He needs to clearly demonstrate that the use of military force would strengthen America’s security.”
Tim Ryan (D-Ohio)
Bobby Scott (D-Va.) — Expressed concern about precedent the U.S. would be setting by approving an attack.
They won't release the pictures.
That’s the answer I got! FULL.. FULL ... FULL OF......
Obama Yanks Boehner’s Leash
Handy list, Thanks
and of the NO/LEANING NO - UNDECIDED/NOT CLEAR, how many of those are holding out for bribes/pork?
They’re waiting for the checks from Riyadh to clear.
It’s a little creepy that some of the democrats seem to be leaning more on the side of caution than our own representatives. That alone gives me pause.....
Boehner is in a supposedly unassailable, protected seat. There has to be some means of removing him from office. He, along with McCain, is better than gold to Obama and the rest of the leftists ruining the US.
John Bolton: I’d ‘vote no’ on Syria strike
By LUCY MCCALMONT | 9/3/13 10:08 AM EDT Updated: 9/3/13 11:31 AM EDT
If former Ambassador to the UN John Bolton were a member of Congress, he said Tuesday that he’d vote against a plan to use military strikes in Syria.
“I think if I were a member of Congress, I would vote against an authorization to use force here. I don’t think it is in America’s interest. I don’t think we should in effect take sides in the Syrian conflict,” Bolton said on “Fox and Friends.”
Bolton, who said he “would not have referred the matter to Congress,” added there isn’t enough to convince him that a strike would made an impact in the region.
“There’s very little to recommend either side to me, and I think the notion that a limited strike, which is what the president seems to be pursuing, will not create a deterrent effect with respect to either to Syria’s use of chemical weapons or, more seriously, Iran’s nuclear weapons program. So all in all, since I don’t see any utility to, to the use of military force in Syria in this context, I would vote no.”
(snip)
While he does think some form of authorization will eventually be approved and “the administration will win,” Bolton added there will be one winner in the meantime: Democratic members of Congress.
“I think the White House candy store is open. I think the ideal job to have today is to be a Democratic member of Congress. What do you need for your district or state? A post office? A new military facility? What do you want? I think anything you want you’re going to get because the White House is going to do whatever it takes to get a majority.”
“I think the White House candy store is open. I think the ideal job to have today is to be a Democratic member of Congress. What do you need for your district or state? A post office? A new military facility? What do you want? I think anything you want you’re going to get because the White House is going to do whatever it takes to get a majority.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL. It’s so obvious, I forbid myself from saying GMTA.
Geesh....what a goober.
I think it’s more ideal to be a Republican Member of Congress, you get all the perks with none of the responsibility, you can just whine and bitch the whole time.
It will be interesting to see how far the public polls are pushed.
91% opposed a strike on Syria.
Then...the poll question got shifted to something like “Should Obama consult Congress.”
Unless there is a popular uprising of demonstrations, this is a done deal.
Hello Nathan...
I also thought possible Boehner was “appraised of intelligence during classified briefing” ..and likely many others there who are now in the know that no doubt the public is not. I do believe they have their reasons for supporting this strike and not at all surprised we’re seeing them jump on board.
All one had to do was see the build up going on over these past weeks and months.....ships moving about from all sides of the equation.....we are going to war..... and I do not believe for a minute it will end with a “Surgical strike”....too many nations have a lot of irons in this fire now.
Are we really surprised? I don’t think so, but we have certainly had great hopes this could be avoided...despite the buildup.
Final Straw!!! If I should live to see another election, my Republican voting days are over. Hope the Tea party has a good Candidate. I am way to Conservative to align myself any longer with the Republican party. DONE DEAL.
Where do I sign up for the coming Civil War (should we survive WW III)?
That’s what I’m sayin’, too! Something fishy about this whole deal, don’t you think?
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.