With respect to whether the people or the rulers are supreme in America, the presently newsworthy ‘Attack Syria’ decision foaming up in U.S. politics may be akin to applying a thermometer to a fevered patient. It seems noteworthy here that already, the Democrats have been handed a presidential candidate from a not only blank but actively hidden background, one who on the record, may or may not meet Constitutional eligibility requirements. The Republicans were just handed a 2012 candidate in a similar anointed-by-the-masters fashion to the point of GOP voters staying home on election day. These sorts of things elicit questions about who is master and who is servant in what has been assumed to be a democratic Republic with a limited government.
To those who reflexively wish to inquire from where my tinfoil hat originated, I will admit at once that I am hearing voices—the voices of the country’s Founders. Those are, if you have any familiarity with them, decidedly warning voices. And from reading their words, one gets a feeling that while gravely disappointed in our present government, none of them would be much surprised by it.
Fast forward to President Lincoln; would he see what we have made as “government of the people, by the people and for the people” in today’s Washington, D.C? For whom are the NSA, the Department of Homeland Security, our planet-wide military upon which we spend six times the amount spent by the next largest spender? For whom is Obamacare turning out to be? The decisions are yours.
The New York Times just announced that President Obama is: “Stymied in Attempt to Rally World Leaders in Bid for Syria Strike.” A joint Washington Post/ABC poll has found that: “Most in U.S. oppose Syrian Strike.” On the other hand, we have learned from USA Today that: “Boehner, Cantor back Obama force against Syria.” The oddsmakers seem to doubt that Congress, with lots of Congressfolk hearing from the folks at home, will Ok the attack. There is speculation that the House may not even vote, if the votes to attack seem lacking. The Prez has made somewhat of a fool of himself over this and clearly wants to kill some Syrians. The GOP top guns are right with him. The people apparently, aren’t. What’s your bet?
President Obama can’t run again per the Constitution so he needn’t worry about reelection. He has made it clear that he thinks he doesn’t need Congress to attack. So why is he going to Congress? There seem a couple of possibilities: One, he thinks he can pull the Congress, since he has the leadership of both parties at the start. Or two, he wants cover for not proceeding.
I rather doubt that an astute politician, surrounded by experts, would have failed to notice as he led the parade, that his followers had turned off at an earlier intersection, leaving him alone. The President is being threatened and taunted by Russia and Iran, publicly. His daughters have been threatened with rape and murder if he attacks. Britain and the rest of the world are pointedly absent. Our Prez, whatever he does, seems to need cover, someone to blame. Congress seems about the only such cover. President Obama has painted himself into a very amateurish corner under a glaring, world spotlight. He’s alone there; success has lots of friends but this sort of thing…doesn’t.
I don’t know what he will do; its’ a new position for him. My guess; he’ll stand off and blame Congress for his inaction. Specifically, the GOP, though enough Democrats are opposed too. Yeah, it’s weak; that’s the position our President has created for himself. He may yet, surprise us. That’s my bet; whats’ yours? If that’s how it works out, there’s a good side: the people remain in charge. For now.