This may be better.
Obama's deputy national security adviser, Tony Blinken, picked up the sales pitch for the absent president Thursday, appearing on several morning news shows.
In an appearance on MSNBC, Blinken said he believes the American people will be more supportive of Obama's request once they see the Syrian situation as a separate and distinct problem as opposed to viewing it "in the prism of the last decade" of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"This is not open-ended. This is not boots on the ground. This is not Afghanistan. This is not Iraq. This is not even Libya," Blinken said.
He said that if the United States does not stand up to Assad and against the use of chemical weapons, some world figures will believe "it's OK to use them with impunity."
Secretary of State John Kerry, testifying for the second consecutive day before Congress,
insisted that the U.S. military response would be restricted as Americans fatigued by more than a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan show little inclination to get involved in Syria.
"
I don't believe we're going to war, I just don't believe that," Kerry told the House Foreign Affairs Committee, citing the ground troops and long-term commitment that he said wars entail. "
That's not what we're doing here. The president is asking for permission to take a limited military action, yes, but one that does not put Americans in the middle of the battle."
Paul, a Kentucky conservative with strong tea party ties,
has threatened a filibuster, although he acknowledged that proponents have the votes to prevail in the Senate,
and he pinned his hopes on the House.
The notion of a contained operation has failed to sway many Republicans and Democrats in the House, who question why the U.S. should get involved now in a Syrian civil war that has killed an estimated 100,000, displaced millions and is in its third year. While House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., have expressed support for military action,
but rank-and-file Republicans remain reluctant or outright opposed.
Speaking in Sweden on Wednesday,
Obama left open the possibility he would order retaliation for the deadly chemical weapons attack even if Congress withheld its approval.
"
I always preserve the right and responsibility to act on behalf of America's national security," he told a news conference. In a challenge to lawmakers back home,
he said Congress' credibility was on the line,
not his own,
despite saying a year ago that the use of chemical weapons would cross a "red line."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a proponent of aggressive U.S. military action in Syria, joined forces with Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware to add a provision calling for "decisive changes to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria.".....snip~
Divided vote foreshadows Obama challenge on Syria
Funny Guy that Johnny Quest McCain......we need some decisive changes here at home too. Like Johnny B Good here.....being told, that's it you're done. Time to meet up with that Cow Goomi. See that Pasture. That's your new home.
To Bad Obama can't fall back on National Security for this one.....interests yes. National Security.....not even close. Moreover nothing but a false excuse and one where Direct Confrontation Needs to be brought to bare. As the American people are tired of that Lame ass excuse.
See what we have here is Obama thinking he can put the Blame on Congress now. His hope and way out. At least in his mind.