Charles Krauthammer: Narcissistic President Trying To Shift Responsibility On Syria To Congress But Everyone Knows It’s About Him

On Fox News’ Special Report, tonight, Dr. K psychoanalyzed our narcissistic Commander in Chump who likes to claim ownership for everything he thinks will benefit him and is quick to shift the blame/responsibility onto others when it doesn’t.

“Now he wants to imply that it isn’t him who’s made this ultimatum essentially, it’s the Congress and they need to live up to its obligations, Krauthammer noted.  This is the way the president who narcissistically  always speaks about “me” and “my” –in fact a week ago he spoke about “my military” (an astonishing formulation) – who when it suits him, decides it’s not “me” or “my” but this is a responsibility that belongs to Congress… I don’t think it’s going to work – everybody understands it’s about him- he’ll be the one who’s damaged if it doesn’t pass in Congress.

(Oh, I wouldn’t underestimate the power of the MFM in protecting their SCOAMF.)



Oh, how I long for the days when liberals wailed that “the rest of the world” hated America, rather than now, when the rest of the world laughs at us.

With the vast majority of Americans opposing a strike against Syria, President Obama has requested that Congress vote on his powers as commander in chief under the Constitution. The president doesn’t need congressional approval to shoot a few missiles into Syria, nor — amazingly — has he said he’ll abide by such a vote, anyway.Why is Congress even having a vote? This is nothing but a fig leaf to cover Obama’s own idiotic “red line” ultimatum to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria on chemical weapons. The Nobel Peace Prize winner needs to get Congress on the record so that whatever happens, the media can blame Republicans.No Republican who thinks seriously about America’s national security interests — by which I mean to exclude John McCain and Lindsey Graham — can support Obama’s “plan” to shoot blindly into this hornet’s nest.It would be completely different if we knew with absolute certainty that Assad was responsible for chemical attacks on his own people. (I’m still waiting to see if it was a Syrian upset about a YouTube video.)
The Conversation: Andrew McCarthy Weighs In On Syria’s Chemical Weapons:

In response to Re: False Flags:

Another skeptic of the Obama administration’s “slam dunk” case on Syria has emerged.

Writing at PJ Media, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy details Al-Qaeda’s ceaseless endeavors over the years to acquire, manufacture, and eventually use chemical weapons, and links to a report in the Long War Journal about an al Qaeda chemical weapons cell recently broken up in Iraq.

He concludes:

I believe the concentration on chemical weapons, including President Obama’s credibility-crippling recklessness in labeling their use a “red line,” misses the point — at best. It diverts attention from the issue the interventionists do not want to discuss: the fact that al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood would be the chief beneficiaries of U.S. attacks against Assad’s regime, the fact that the toppling of Assad could very well be even worse for American national security than Assad himself has been.

But if we are going to make this a debate about chemical weapons, is it not worth factoring in that Assad’s opposition includes elements that have been seeking to use chemical weapons against the United States for more than two decades? That al-Qaeda recently and repeatedly used chemical weapons in Iraq? And that — as Bill Roggio notes — al Nusrah, an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria, is suspected of using chemical weapons in Syria just six months ago?

And he links to Bryan Preston’s piece, also penned at PJ Media yesterday: Yossef Bodansky: ‘Did the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack?’

Russian President Vladimir Putin didn’t mince words today at a meeting of his human rights council in the Kremlin regarding the use of US force against the Syrian regime.

Reuters reports that he declared “anything that is outside the U.N. Security Council is aggression, except self-defense. Now what Congress and the U.S. Senate are doing in essence is legitimizing aggression. This is inadmissible in principle.”

And he also accused US Secretary of State John Kerry of outright lying to Congress about al Qaeda’s role fighting on the rebel side of the Syrian civil war.

He said, “they lie beautifully, of course. I saw debates in Congress. A congressman asks Mr Kerry: ‘Is al Qaeda there?’ He says: ‘No, I am telling you responsibly that it is not,'”
“Al Qaeda units are the main military echelon, and they know this,” he said, referring to the United States. “It was unpleasant and surprising for me – we talk to them, we proceed from the assumption that they are decent people. But he is lying and knows he is lying. It’s sad.”
Video at link.

The Washington Post called Senator Ron Johnson’s question about the Syrian rebels, and Kerry’s answer (which Vladimir Putin called a huge lie)  one of the 10 most interesting moments in Tuesday’s Senate hearing on Syria.

SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-Wis.): What — what do we know about the opposition? … It seems like, initially, the opposition was maybe more Western-leaning, more moderate, more democratic. You know, as time has gone by, it’s degraded, become more infiltrated by Al Qaida. …

KERRY: No, that is actually basically not true. It is basically incorrect. The opposition has increasingly become more defined by its moderation, more defined by the breadth of its membership and more defined by its adherence to some, you know, democratic process and to an all-inclusive, minority-protecting constitution, which will be broad-based and secular with respect to the future of Syria.

From what I’ve been hearing – contra what Kerry said – the Syrian opposition hasbecome increasingly defined by its extremism, which is why many conservatives have been lamenting that we didn’t help the rebels  years ago – before the foreign jihadis flowed in. What I hear is that they have infested most of the rebel groups – (7 out of the 9 largest according to Ted Cruz.)

Maybe the numbers seem distorted because stories about the moderate rebels just aren’t as sensational as ones about al Qaeda affiliated rebels (who do things like raid Christian villagesbehead all the passengers on a train including a mother and her baby, and cut out and eat the hearts out of Regime soldiers.)

So I’ve been doing a little research of my own to see if the reports of al Qaeda’s involvement in Syria have been overblown. From what I can see – they have not.

On Tuesday, The Guardian’s Middle East editor Ian Black answered readers’ questions about Syria.  Here is his answer (in part) to the following questions;  “how many different opposition parties exist in Syria? Which party is representing which interests, what goals do they have, and who are the supporting parties? To what extent are they infiltrated by al-Qaida or not?”

Nowadays the main political grouping is the Syrian National Coalition, set up in Qatar in 2012, again with Gulf backing. The main legal internal opposition is the Damascus-based National Co-ordination Body, which calls for a negotiated settlement with the Assad regime.

 There are now hundreds and perhaps thousands of armed rebel groups. More moderate outfits such as Liwa al-Tawhid answer to the Supreme Military Command, headed by Selim Idriss, a senior army defector. The SMC is used to channel Gulf, especially Saudi, funds and is thought to have received US and British training in Jordan.

Islamist groups have become stronger and tend to be better armed and financed than others. Two of the strongest are Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State in Iraq, both of them linked to al-Qaida. JAN insists on a future Syria becoming an Islamic state under sharia law, and has openly pledged its allegiance to the al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Another important group is Ahrar al-Sham. Sectarianism is also becoming more pronounced, with foreign Arab Shia fighters (including Lebanon’s powerful Hezbollah) arriving to fight Sunni extremists. Large numbers of liberal and secular opposition figures have left the country. Important work is still done on the ground by the Local Co-ordination Committees.

More at link…

Last year the AP reported the Syrian regime had threatened to use their chemical weapons if attacked by a foreign power:

The Syrian regime threatened Monday to use its chemical and biological weapons in case of a foreign attack, in its first ever acknowledgement that it possesses weapons of mass destruction.


“No chemical or biological weapons will ever be used, and I repeat, will never be used, during the crisis in Syria no matter what the developments inside Syria,” Makdissi said in news conference broadcast on Syrian state TV. “All of these types of weapons are in storage and under security and the direct supervision of the Syrian armed forces and will never be used unless Syria is exposed to external aggression.”

Peter Wehner, Commentary: In Stockholm, Obama Loses Touch with Reality:

…literally everyone else in the world is to blame except the president.

Mr. Obama appears to be suffering from a variation of what psychiatrists refer to as dissociation, which is characterized by everything from mild to severe detachment from reality and one’s immediate surroundings.

In this particular case, the president seems to have dissociative amnesia, apparently having forgotten that a year ago last month he did, in fact, draw a red line. (Note the use of the first-person pronouns by the president — “That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”) The president may have forgotten, too, that he promised that crossing this red line would be a “game changer” (it was not). That Assad had to go (Assad is still in power, stronger than before). That he promised to arm Syrian rebels (he hasn’t). That his “coalition of the willing” may include, if we’re lucky, one other country besides America. And that on the matter of the Use of Force Resolution he was against going to Congress before he was for going to Congress.

The cause of Mr. Obama’s dissociation appears to be the psychological trauma induced by his multi-year fiasco in Syria. And in order to cope, we are seeing signs of anger, petulance, and hero syndrome and, as is always the case with this president, blame shifting.

On a slightly more serious note, Mr. Obama’s presidency is being wrecked by reality. He’s being exposed at every turn, and in every crisis, as inept. He can’t handle that truth so he’s trying to distort it.

There’s something poignant and painful in watching Obama’s presidency collapse and seeing what it’s doing to the man who promised to repair the world and slow the rise of the oceans.

Hot Air: House whip count: 46 votes in favor of Syria attack right now — and 169 against:

The big caveat: Many of the yays and nays aren’t firm. TP’s trying to divine intent from casual statements made by House members about how they’re likely to vote, which is especially dicey in the case of Democrats who might be whipped by the White House and Pelosi later to come through for O in a pinch. If the tally’s right, though, then opponents of intervention are already within 50 votes of winning with more than 200 representatives (and nearly 100 Republicans) still undecided.

Time to panic in the West Wing?

As members of Congress consider President Obama’s request to authorize military force in Syria, following evidence that President Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons killed over 1,400 people, a ThinkProgress analysis of the public statements of 289 Representatives found that 169 lawmakers have either decisively ruled out supporting the measure or say they are unlikely to back it.

Just 46 of the 289 members of the House of Representatives said they will definitely or likely vote in favor or the resolution. Seventy-four are undecided.

Of the 169 nays, 124 come from the GOP and 45 come from liberal Democrats.


Bryan Preston, PJ Media: Obama’s Syria Hail Mary: Another Speech. By Bill Clinton.

Former (?) President Bill Clinton is set to deliver a speech in Little Rock, AR today. The topic was supposed to be another Obamacare sales pitch, but Syria erupted, so now former (?) President Clinton will pitch Barack Obama’s limited, mostly pointless military strike on Syria.

Bill “I loathe the military” Clinton will join John “Winter Soldier” Kerry in selling a war –sorry, kinetic activity — that Barack “I didn’t set no stinkin’ red line” Obama cannot sell himself. Bill “let’s launch missiles at tents and pharma factories” Clinton is Barack “really, it won’t be a war, I swear!” Obama’s go-to guy, his elder statesman, his fail safe. Bill “that woman” Clinton must now save Barack “it was a movie!” Obama.

Remember how W diminished our standing in the world, and everyone hated us? No, I don’t either. The left made all that up. All of the world’s bad actors hated (and feared) us, (that’s what we want) and sometimes effete Euroweenies groused about our “cowboy president”, but they didn’t abandon him in a pinch like they are President Pinprick. President Bush was sometimes resented, but always respected. Unlike the current teleprompter dependent chump. They’ve got his number. Most of them have figured out that Obama’s a weasel and chump.

Weasel Zippers: Al-Qaeda Promises To Slaughter Christians After Obama Helps Topple Assad…

Arabic news agency Al Hadath gives more information concerning this latest terror attack on Syria’s Christians, specifically how the al-Qaeda linked rebels “terrorized the Christians, threatening to avenge themselves on them after the triumph of the revolution.”

Keep reading…



Watcher’s Council Nominations – It All Depends On Whose Pulling The Trigger Edition


Via Joshua Pundit:

My,  how things have changed.

Once upon a time, there was a Ba’athist  Arab dictator in the Middle East who had  murdered thousands of his own people. He had even admittedly  used poison gas on people not belonging to his oewn ethnic group  on numerous occasions, and there was absolutely no doubt about it. There was intel  that he had other types of what were called weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear program, which was credible because he was known to have purchased uranium and at one time had even had a nuclear reactor before another country in the Middle East destroyed it.

When the president of the United States, a Republican, wanted to act on this intelligence and use our military to stop him, all hell broke loose. The Left in this country, aided by their friends in the media, mounted frenzied protests in many of America’s major cities. The president was called a warmonger, a traitor and worse.

Because of the political unrest, the president went to congress to get a resolution passed to use military force.The majority of Democrats, after hearing the intel quietly voted for it, including our current secretary of state, then a senator from Massachusetts,  his predecessor, then a senator from New York and the current vice president, then a senator from Delaware. The Left’s antics delayed our deploying troops to Iraq for almost 15 months, by which time a great deal of  the materials known as ‘weapons of mass destruction’ had been sold, destroyed or moved elsewhere. Although the dictator’s stash of yellow cake uranium was eventually found, something that wasn’t as good a headline as ‘Bush Lied’.

However, when problems developed with the occupation and something obvious like a pile of nuclear warheads wasn’t found immediately, the Left again went insane, this time aided and abetted not just by the media but by the very same Democrats who had voted to go into Iraq in the first place. Once they got control of congress in 2006, the Democrats  did their very best to sabotage the  war effort  while our troops were in the field.When President Bush and the commander confirmed by the senate, General David Petraeus came up with a new startegy called ‘the surge’ designed to deal with the insurgency in Iraq, Democrats in the house and senate consistently mounted efforts to see to it that it failed. Majority  Leader Harry Reid famously remarked that ‘the war is lost’, games were played with funding, and President Bush was called a liar on the senate floor by none other than Senator Ted Kennedy.

The media emphasized every difficulty and problem with the war they could while going out of their way to downplay and successes. The New York Times gave the Leftist group MoveOn a prime ad at a deep discount calling General Petraeus a traitor, and every  Democrat Presidential candidate, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and the junior Senator from Illinois, one Barack Hussein  Obama refused to disavow the ad in any way, all of them effectively endorsing it by insulting General Petraeus openly when he appeared before the senate.

The eventual winner of that contest, Barack Obama,  later took credit for the surge and for ending the war in Iraq, even though he did his cast votes designed  to sabotage the strategy that enabled the U.S. to withdraw and even though the Disposition of Forces Agreement that set the date for our troops to leave was signed by President Bush before President Obama took office.

Scroll forward about a decade. We have a Ba’athist Arab dictator in the Middle East who has  murdered thousands of his own people. Unlike the first dictator, this one, in spite of the many killings, his connections to terrorist groups like Hezbollah and his involvement in operating what was essentially a way station for jihadists en route to kill our troops in Iraq  had always had a cozy relationship with certain Democrats like NancyPelosi   and  John Kerry among others. They liked him just fine, urged us to engage with Assad and give him aid and Kerry in particular was vociferous about pressuring Israel to give Syria back the strategic Golan Heights. Until just a couple of weeks ago.assad Pelosi

assad Kerry

This particular dictator is also now alleged to have used poison gas against his own people.. although the evidence is murky as to which side in an ongoing civil war (in fact, there’s significant evidence it might have been the rebels). But that apparently doesn’t matter. President Obama, Rep. Pelosi, Harry Reid and of course Secretary Kerry have become full on war hawks and want to have our military attack Basher Assad and Syrianow.

Nor does it apparently matter that the anti-Assad insurgents they now want to use the U.S. military to aid are predominantly Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda.Or that every poll I’ve seen shows that the American people overwhelmingly oppose this.

Almost all of the Democrats (and a few Republicans of John McCain’s ilk) are howling for war, the supposedly anti-war Left is mostly silent, and the New York Times is running editorials calling for President Obama to bomb Syria anyway, even if it’s illegal and congress doesn’t go along.Even ‘mother’ Cindy Sheehan isn’t being heard from, having worn out her usefullness.

‘Anti-war’ seems to be a pretty flexible attitude for a lot of these people who were so vociferous about Iraq and the ones who voted for Barack Obama because he wasn’t going to be as interventionist as the despised Cowboy Bush. They’re pretty quiet now, most of them. I guess it all depends on whose pulling the trigger..and the domestic partisan political benefit to be had.

-The Watcher –

Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday, although this week’s results will be posted this Saturday evening, so watch for them then.

Council News:

This weekThe Independent Sentinel,Ask Marion and The Pirate’s Cove took advantage of my generous offer of link whorage and earned honorable mention status with some great pieces.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

Simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address ( which won’t be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor  by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out Wednesday morning.

Simple, no?

It’s a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members. while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

All of us at the Watcher’s Council would like to wish those of  you celebrating Rosh Hashanah a hearty  L’Shana Tovah Tiketevu. May you be inscribed…


So, without further ado, let’s see what we have this week….

Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions

Non-Council Submissions

Enjoy! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that!