Live Blog: President Obama's national address
September 10th, 2013
04:08 PM ET
1 year ago

Live Blog: President Obama's national address

Washington (CNN) - President Barack Obama addressed the nation Tuesday night on the crisis in Syria from the East Room of the White House. Below is reaction and reporting from Capitol Hill and the White House, providing analysis from our correspondents and contributors.

Read more about the president's speech here.

11:06 p.m. ET - Tonight the president "stopped some Democratic bleeding" of votes in Congress, Sen. Graham said. When asked if it would lead to enough votes, he said "maybe." Personally, Graham said he "likes the president," but also said he'll "continue to trash him."

11:04 p.m. ET - Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham on CNN said the president has "painted himself in a corner," adding that if diplomacy he will have to act militarily.


10:44 p.m. ET - House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers in a statement said he's "hopeful a diplomatic solution can be reached, however, I am skeptical of any proposal proffered by the Russians and doubt Assad’s motives for agreeing to this plan ... the President still urgently needs to develop and execute a coherent strategy to address all of those threats."

10:34 p.m. ET - 6 in 10 Americans who watched the president's speech tonight said they favor his approach, according to CNN's instant poll taken after Obama spoke. Sixty-one percent said they support the president's position in Syria and 37% said they oppose his response. The poll indicated that nearly two-thirds of those who watched the speech think the situation in Syria is likely to be resolved through diplomatic efforts, with 35% disagreeing. Speech-watchers were divided on whether Obama made a convincing case in his speech for U.S. military action in Syria, with 47% saying he did and 50% saying no. Read more here.

10:03 p.m. ET - Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain issued a joint statement saying, "We appreciate the President speaking directly to the American people about the conflict in Syria. We regret, however, that he did not speak more forcefully about the need to increase our military assistance to moderate opposition forces in Syria, such as the Free Syrian Army. We also regret that he did not lay out a clearer plan to test the seriousness of the Russian and Syrian proposal to transfer the Assad regime’s chemical weapons to international custody."

10:01 p.m. ET - Reacting to the speech, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, who met with Vice President Joe Biden yesterday and with the president today on Capitol Hill said, "I don't think the case for military action has been made ... I’m still leaning against the authorization for the use of force that’s been presented."

9:58 p.m. ET - Democratic Sen. Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, in a statement said "I believe Congress can best support the goal of a diplomatic solution by approving a resolution that authorizes the use of force if Syria refuses to give up its chemical weapons."

9:54 p.m. ET - Republican Sen. Rand Paul on CNN said he hopes the Russia/diplomatic option works because if we attack, Syria will be more unstable. Paul said the chance al Qaeda gains traction in the region increases if the United States attacks.

9:45 p.m. ET - The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a left-leaning advocacy group that has been opposed to military action in Syria, responded to the address saying "public pressure worked."

"The American people knew that diplomacy was a credible and strategic option, and this great news from President Obama will be better for America and his presidency than dropping bombs on Syria," the group said in a statement.

9:43 p.m. ET - Republicans National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus responded to the president's address by saying, “The administration’s handling of the U.S. response to Syria has been so haphazard it’s disappointed even the president’s most ardent supporters."

“This rudderless diplomacy has embarrassed America on the world stage. For a president who campaigned on building American credibility abroad, the lack of leadership coming from the Oval Office is astounding," Priebus added.

9:36 p.m. ET - Full transcript of the president's remarks here.

9:24 p.m. ET - Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, who is still undecided on a military strike, said the president made a "great moral argument," especially when he said U.S. troops could be gassed. But he still has to make it clear that this will not "mushroom into something else."

9:15 p.m. ET - "Sometimes resolutions and statements of condemnation are simply not enough," Obama said.

9:15 p.m. ET - Obama asks what kind of world we would live in if we watch a leader violate international law with poison gas and "look the other way."

9:14 p.m. ET - Obama said it's too early to tell if the latest diplomatic efforts will succeed, but there is now the possibility that Syria will be rid of chemical weapons "without force." As part of those efforts, he said he asked Congress to put off any votes on action and will send Kerry to meet with Lavrov this week.

9:13 p.m. ET - "It's true that some of Assad's opponents are extremists. But al Qaeda will only draw strength in a more chaotic Syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians from being gassed to death," Obama said.

9:12 p.m. ET - Obama said he agrees the US should not be the world's policeman and said he has a "deeply held preference for peaceful solutions." But the United States "does not do pinpriks."

"Now, some members of Congress have said there's no point in simply doing a pinprick strike in Syria," Obama said. "Let me make something clear: The United States military doesn't do pinpricks. Even a limited strike will send a message to Assad that no other nation can deliver."

9:09 p.m. ET – Addressing criticism of a potential strike, including one veteran that wrote to the president saying "this nation is sick and tired of war," Obama said he will "not put American boots on the ground," "not pursue an open ended action" and "not pursue a prolonged air campaign." Instead, it would be a "targeted strike."

9:07 p.m. ET - Obama said he determined the US should respond militarily to Assad to deter future action, degrade his ability and make clear the US will not tolerate their use. "That's my judgment as commander of chief," he said. But as president of the world's oldest constitutional democracy, he also felt it was right to bring the decision to Congress.

9:05 p.m. ET - Obama outlined the evidence that led to the conclusion that Assad used chemical. "These things happened. The facts cannot be denied." Now he said, the question is what the US and the international community is "prepared to do about it."

9:02 p.m. ET - Obama said he resisted calls for military action in Syria "because we cannot solve someone else's civil war through force." But the situation "profoundly changed on August 21st." He said the images were "sickening."

9:01 p.m. ET - Obama, standing in the East Room, says he will talk about Syria tonight "why it matters and where we go from here." over the past 2 years.

8:40 p.m. ET - The White House said today the president met with “national security principles on our preparedness and security posture on the eve of the twelfth anniversary of September 11th.”

“The President’s National Security team is taking measures to prevent 9/11 related attacks and to ensure the protection of U.S. persons and facilities abroad. The President reiterated that protecting the American people, both at home and abroad, is the Administration’s top national security priority,” read a statement from the White House. "We remain committed to bringing the perpetrators of the Benghazi attacks to justice and to ensuring the safety of our brave personnel serving overseas."

8:19 p.m. ET - @killoughcnn with the @CrossfireCNN highlights: Santorum: The U.S. has no national security interest in Syria

8:05 p.m. ET - @JohnKingCNN reports the president will not lay out a timetable for diplomacy or potential military action in his address tonight, according to a senior administration official involved in the speech process. The administration believes it can't make those calculations until the Kerry-Lavrov meeting Thursday, the initial eye-to-eye test of whether Russia and the Syrians are serious. Any discussion of when to schedule votes, this official said, should wait until the Kerry-Lavrov meeting, "which will give us a sense of what those alternative resolutions should look like."

The president, in his meeting with lawmakers today, said they should not do anything to take the credible military threat off the table.

7:58 p.m. ET
- @JessicaYellin: Obama’s Syria address, a speechwriter’s tall order

7:45 p.m. ET - Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking at the National Constitution Center Tuesday night, said Assad's use of chemical weapons violates a universal norm at the heart of our global order that requires a "response from the international community led by the U.S."

"This debate is good for our Democracy," Clinton said in Philadelphia. "Fervent arguments are the lifeblood of self government."

7:38 p.m. ET - Sen. Manchin on @OutFrontCNN said there is less of a risk now from inaction than there would have been from a U.S. military strike on Syria. The moderate Democratic senator said he has always believed the U.S. should go down a "diplomatic course."

7:30 p.m. ET - @eliselabottcnn reports that when Secretary Kerry meets with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, he will begin to discuss a possible deal on Syria's chemical weapons, according to senior state department officials. Kerry will bring a team of experts with him for the talks, which begin Thursday and are expected to take place in several sessions over two days, the officials said. The officials cautioned the negotiations may not be concluded in Geneva during the first set of talks. The officials said a final deal, whenever it is reached, would then be taken to the United Nations to be enshrined in a Security Council resolution.

7:13 p.m ET - @barbarastarrcnn reports the Defense Department has not yet been involved in the turnover of chemical weapons by Syria, according to a senior US military official. However, military and civilian experts are informally looking at what they might do.

7:01 p.m. ET - Reports @JimAcostaCNN: In his speech tonight the president will address why the situation in Syria is in the US' national interests, why it is in the US' interests that Syrian President Assad be be held accountable for the use of chemical weapons, that the military response would be limited in duration and scope and that the White House sees a "diplomatic opportunity" in the recent Russian proposal for Syria to rid itself of its chemical weapons.

6:49 p.m. ET
- @RickSantorum on @CrossfireCNN said the US has no national security interests in Syria. "There's a big difference between action and military action," Santorum said. "I'm for action, I'm just not for a military strike."

6:32 p.m. ET - Former Sen. Joe Lieberman on @CrossfireCNN said he wished the US "were not pausing" in Syria. He said the president made the right decision to draw the red line and was "disappointed when he decided to toss it to Congress."

6:28 p.m. ET - On @CNNSitRoom @jonfavs said Obama will be "firm" tonight in his remarks. "He'll make the case ... be passionate about what's at stake here."

6:25 p.m. ET @jonfavs, Obama's former speechwriter, told @wolfblitzercnn tonight's speech is "just about ready" and that the president often stays up "very late at night" making corrections himself.

6:23 p.m. ET - @LisaDCNN reports Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, on the Senate floor, said he’s canceling the planned the planned briefings for senators Wednesday. “There are too many things moving,” the Nevada Democrat said.

6:07 p.m. ET - @deirdrewalshcnn asked Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, if the president gave a timeline for the diplomatic efforts under consideration. "I don’t know he put a specified period on it. He thought it could be fairly short, that it would be obvious. Fairly short period of time where it would be clear whether Russia is going to come through as they said they would, and whether Syria was going to get rid of their chemical weapons." When asked about the timeline at a Google hangout earlier in the day, Secretary of State John Kerry said "it's up to the president."

“Well it’s up to the president to how long we wait, I mean the president makes that decision," Kerry said.

5:43 p.m. ET - @JimAcostaCNN reports on the president's meetings with Republican and Democratic senators today: "The President said his administration would spend the days ahead pursuing this diplomatic option with the Russians and our allies at the United Nations. In the meantime, the President said his administration would work with members of Congress on authorizing language," according to a White House official.

5:33 p.m. ET - Sen. Paul told @wolfblitzer "there's a potential" for these negotiations to have an impact on the chemical weapons in Syria, whereas military action would not.

5:29 p.m. ET - On @CNNSitRoom: Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul said one of the reasons diplomatic avenues are now being persued is because "people like me prevented the use of force."

5:05 p.m. ET - The latest from @JimAcostaCNN: Obama administration offers timeline for new Syria diplomacy

4:56 p.m. ET - Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, was one of the senators who met with the president today. Responding to reporters on Capitol Hill, Manchin, who opposes the president's plan, said Obama wants to "keep his finger on the pulse if you will and on the trigger if needed."

4:40 p.m. ET - On @TheLeadCNN: Obama's task tonight, according to @David_Gergen: "easy speech to write" and a "hard speech to sell."

4:39 p.m. ET - On @TheLeadCNN: Michael Gerson, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, said President Obama needs to "establish his resolve" with tonight's speech and "hold out the possibility that things can get better through negotiation."

4:31 p.m. ET - On @TheLeadCNN: Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii, who does not support the president's plan, said she supports the delay in the Senate vote and called today's diplomatic developments a "positive development."

4:29 p.m. ET - On @TheLeadCNN: Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a Republican from Illinois, who supports the president's plan for intervention in Syria, said there should be a timetable associated with diplomatic steps to ensure stall tactics are not being used.

4:18 p.m. ET - Eight additional countries signed on to the joint statement condemning the use of chemical weapons released during last week's G-20 conference in Russia, according to the White House. The addition of Georgia, Guatemala, Kuwait, Malta, Montenegro, Panama, Poland and Portugal brings the total to 33 countries. Read the full statement here.

4:10 p.m. ET
– Tonight will be President Obama's 9th address to the nation and the 4th delivered from the East Room. Previous East Room addresses: after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden (5/1/11), to address the draw down of forces in Afghanistan (6/22/11) and to speak about the national deficit and the debt limit (7/25/11).

3:58 p.m. ET - @eliselabottcnn: Secretary of State Kerry will travel to Geneva on Thursday to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov to discuss Syria, according to a senior State Department official.


Filed under: Congress • President Obama • Syria
soundoff (257 Responses)
  1. The Real Tom Paine

    -just saying

    Rudy NYC
    --
    "Our vital national security risk is clearly not at play," Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor.
    -––
    Our word and reputation to make good on it is at risk and McConnell knows it
    -––

    just because obama spoke rashly and stupidly does not mean we have to go to war, risk american lives, kill people and waste billions of dollars, all for nothing concrete to be accomplished. the money would be better spent getting obama some training in how not to shoot his mouth off and act more presidential.
    *********************************
    Well, we've had plenty of experience with all of those thing,s courtesy of the man you credit for keeping the peace in the Middle East, George W ( Bring it on!) Bush. I would laugh at your version of history, which traces all the evil in the world to either January 2009 or any point where someone who was not conservative was in charge. Yet another tidbit from the the leading Rightie Intellectual Pez Dispenser.

    September 10, 2013 04:15 pm at 4:15 pm |
  2. kirk

    I won't watch it, I trust that I won't be hearing anything new, I don't think we should strike but I will stand behind the decision he makes.at least he has the intelligence to take his time and explore all options.I'm sure he told Putin that if he forces the issue he will find out if he's bluffing

    September 10, 2013 04:18 pm at 4:18 pm |
  3. just saying

    why is he still having this address? hasn't he done himself and this country enough damage with his idle threats and talk of war? seriously obama, you just don't know when to stfu. he hasn't learned anything in 5 years on the job. if he ran a private company, he would have been fired years ago for incompetence and lack of results.

    September 10, 2013 04:23 pm at 4:23 pm |
  4. Tampa Tim

    33 countries have signed on to condemning Syria's chemical use. Mitch McConnell has decided to make Obama a one term president. No wonder the world is laughing at republicans.

    September 10, 2013 04:26 pm at 4:26 pm |
  5. The Elephant in The Room

    It's clear that the President didn't have a comprehensive strategy on Syria. It would seem that someone in the State Department and the DOD would be tasked with following this country and briefing senior leaders QUARTERLY on a course of action. This would have been sufficient to have a plan that considered Chemical weapons since they have been rumored to have been used for about a year. Even with that, we might luck up and gain a significant victory if our threat of military action can get Assad to put his Chemical stockpile on some large container ships in the next couple of weeks and force him to sign the Chemiccal weapons ban "treaty".

    I hope that the President has State and DOD contingency plans focal points for North Korea, Iran, Venuzula, Cuba, China, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Russia, Ecuador. I further hope these plans are being updated quarterly and briefed / reviewed at an executive level so that we can take it off the shilf in the event things move. Clearly this was not the case in Syria and it should have been . . . certainly 12 months after talk of "RED LINES" began.

    Oh, and I LIKE the president. Obama 332 / Romney 206

    September 10, 2013 04:32 pm at 4:32 pm |
  6. Tampa Tim

    Just – This must really hurt, the president is on the verge of yet another foreign policy victory and Putin caved in. It looks like the GOP will have to look to some other foreigner in 2016 to represent them. The world is laughing at right wingnuts.

    September 10, 2013 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
  7. O'drama ya Mama

    just saying

    why is he still having this address? hasn't he done himself and this country enough damage with his idle threats and talk of war? seriously obama, you just don't know when to stfu. he hasn't learned anything in 5 years on the job. if he ran a private company, he would have been fired years ago for incompetence and lack of results.
    September 10, 2013 04:23 pm at 4:23 pm |
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    If Obama ran a private company he would have fired all of the obstructionist and hire those that want results.

    September 10, 2013 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
  8. freedom

    Who's running our foreign policy – Putin??

    September 10, 2013 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  9. A True Conservative

    Where are all of the anti-war Hollywood types now that it's a democrat trying to get us into a war? Guess it really was just Bush derangement syndrome!!

    September 10, 2013 04:44 pm at 4:44 pm |
  10. The Real Tom Paine

    -just saying

    why is he still having this address? hasn't he done himself and this country enough damage with his idle threats and talk of war? seriously obama, you just don't know when to stfu. he hasn't learned anything in 5 years on the job. if he ran a private company, he would have been fired years ago for incompetence and lack of results.
    **************************
    He's explaining himself to the American people: yet another example of your ignorance on display. Since you ( once again) have nothing of value to say, STFU. As far competance is concerned, only a complete imbecile like yourself could keep the hate speech and lies flying day after day and ignore the reality that this country is rebuilding itself without any help from those who claim they love it the most. Pathetic losers who cannot accept reality will always resort to blind, reflexive hate.

    September 10, 2013 04:45 pm at 4:45 pm |
  11. Sniffit

    "why is he still having this address? hasn't he done himself and this country enough damage with his idle threats and talk of war? seriously obama, you just don't know when to stfu. he hasn't learned anything in 5 years on the job. if he ran a private company, he would have been fired years ago for incompetence and lack of results."

    Oh yawny yawn yawn. If he canceled this address you'd be flinging your poop at that, screeching like a macaque that had been lit on fire and complaining that he owes the 'Murkin people an explanation etc. And if Obama ran a private company, the entire Board of Directors that kept obstructing everything and kept the entire company in limbo just to force him to fail and then blame it on him would have been strangled in a back alley by the shareholders by now. This being politics, however, the shareholders are split into two factions and half of them like the Board of Directors ruining the company just to ruin the CEO.

    September 10, 2013 04:46 pm at 4:46 pm |
  12. Sniffit

    "why is he still having this address? hasn't he done himself and this country enough damage with his idle threats and talk of war? seriously obama, you just don't know when to stfu. he hasn't learned anything in 5 years on the job. if he ran a private company, he would have been fired years ago for incompetence and lack of results."

    Oh yawny yawn yawn. If he canceled this address you'd be flinging your poop at that, screeching like a macaque dipped in napalm, complaining that he owes the 'Murkin people an explanation etc. And if Obama ran a private company, the entire Board of Directors that kept obstructing everything and kept the entire company in limbo just to force him to fail and then blame it on him would have been strangled in a back alley by the shareholders by now. This being politics, however, the shareholders are split into two factions and half of them like the Board of Directors ruining the company just to ruin the CEO.

    September 10, 2013 04:47 pm at 4:47 pm |
  13. The Real Tom Paine

    -A True Conservative

    Where are all of the anti-war Hollywood types now that it's a democrat trying to get us into a war? Guess it really was just Bush derangement syndrome!!
    ************************
    No, we have a problem with being lied to. And no, not all the " anti-war Hollywood types" were silent. Guess your own Obama derangment syndrome makes it impossible for you to face reality.

    September 10, 2013 04:52 pm at 4:52 pm |
  14. A Kickin' Donkey

    If people on this board and in Congress were Americans they would look to fix the pblem and not the blame. Fixing the problem would mean

    1.) If we take military action, it would serve our allies {Jordan, Turkey, Israel, and Saudia Arabia's} needs at the expense of Syria.
    2.) The bigger problem to be solved is to REDUCE the chance that the US would have to fight over Syria. If terrorists can't get Syria's Chemical weapons and use them against US troops or civilians, wouldn't that be a HUGE victory that is in our NATIONAL INTEREST? If Isreal doesn't have to face the prospect of rockets loaded with Chemical weapons and the chance that we could get drawn into a fight over them goes down, isn't that in our National Interest?

    Congress needs to approve a simple, non-contricting resolution that authorizes the President to strike. That will keep the heat on Syria / Russia and allow the world to benefit from this crisis. It will truly improve US National security because we would have eliminated Hezbollah's or al Queda's POTENTIAL access to these WMDs. We would have eliminated any neo-con arguments that we HAVE to strike Iran or Syria over some future terrorist attack involving stolen Syrian Chemical munitions.

    American leaders need to get behind this kind of thinking. Congressmen, are you listening? T

    September 10, 2013 04:55 pm at 4:55 pm |
  15. Joan

    Now it is going to be really interesting to see how the Republicans are going to try and blackball this possible peaceful solution to the chemical weapons issue. That won't look good for them if it is successful and President Obama comes out looking like the statesman he really is. Heaven forbid, they can't have that. They must be in a tizzy just thinking about it. Ditto the press who were blindsided by this whole new revelation. All their hand wringing and naïve comments were just a waste of time while the real work was going on behind the scenes. Gotta love it!

    September 10, 2013 04:59 pm at 4:59 pm |
  16. Data Driven

    @Sniffit,

    "Screeching like a macaque dipped in napalm"

    Piquant Simile of the Week. BOOM

    September 10, 2013 05:12 pm at 5:12 pm |
  17. Marie MD

    @ just saying, it's called diplomacy and NOT shoot first and ask questions later or just plain lie to the country and the world and pretend that the mission was accomplished.
    Our president took time to try to avoid bombing another country. I wonder what the teatrolls will say now because all thy want is to make our President look bad.
    Let's see how Russia can help without any more bloodshed.

    September 10, 2013 05:14 pm at 5:14 pm |
  18. Minnie Mouse

    As a country there are more than five questions that needs to be answered and addressed in order for our government to strike into Syria.

    1. What day will the Syrian strike take effect, providing that we do launch an attack?

    2. What day, month or year will the strikes end?

    3. How many of our US military troops will be involved?

    4. How many lives will be lost?

    5. What will the total dollar amount be for the cost of intervening into another country?

    6. How do we know that if we launch a strike that it's going to resolve anything?

    7. How do we know that if we launch a strike that it's not going to make matters worst and cause chaos in other countries?

    8. What cuts are going to be made, (to pay for an intervention if we were to) in order to pay for the new debts that our government has created?

    9. Who's going to take full responsibility for our actions if a civil war were to erupt?

    10. Why are all of these unanswered questions to our government and the people of the United States of America?

    11. Why does America feel that it's ok to kill someone with a gun and do anything about, when we all know that it is 100% wrong. The people who commit these violent acts get to live, keep all of their rights by living in a prison cell while all the family members have to grieve everyday wondering why?? On top of all of that, we all have to pay the price financially as well.

    !2. Why does America feel that it's ok to go into another country that kills innocent people with chemical weapons, when we can't take care of our own country to make sure that we have a safe place to live? We have gun violence everyday. It's more than chemical weapon attacks. There are American men, woman and children dying all the time.

    13. What is the real reason for wanting to get the US involved?

    Everyone knows that we will never be able to remove all of the chemical weapons in Syria, if this were one of the results used as a resolution. The costs are to much. All of the financial costs, the thousands of troops, numerous countries involved, needs of specialty people trained in chemical weapons, vehicles, lengths in time to find all of these weapons if even that will even be possible and then how and where to dispose of and the number of lives lost in the process ect........ The process could take months, could take years.

    No one knows concrete answers to any of these questions. This is the exact reason that our country should not be put at risk, by launching an attack that you have no clue what the end result is going to be and in the meantime while your doing what you think is right your putting the lives of our military men and women on the line to do it.

    America needs to stand down.

    September 10, 2013 05:18 pm at 5:18 pm |
  19. Data Driven

    @A Kicking Donkey,

    Thoughtful comment. I could get on board with a Congress-approved strike option. I'm just concerned that the President would use it when it's not needed. At the same time, I'm impressed with his insistence on taking this to Congress. Every time I doubt him and get on his case, I find he has outmaneuvered my thinking. Beltway's thinking too, which doubtless irritates them.

    11th-dimension chess, anyone?

    September 10, 2013 05:21 pm at 5:21 pm |
  20. Silence DoGood

    " I'm just concerned that the President would use it when it's not needed."

    People are talking like Obama has never bombed anyone. He bombed Libya and many people died. He bombed Pakistan villages and at least 100's of innocent people died. AND we were told that NO innocent people were killed.

    Bush lied. People died.
    People died. Obama lied.

    I guess that was the Change. I am tired of War Presidents.

    September 10, 2013 05:43 pm at 5:43 pm |
  21. tom l

    So this whole deal is predicated on trusting Russia. Ok. Are all of those on the left, especially the ones that have accused Putin of not liking President Obama because he is black (right, Sniffit?), ok with this?

    Wow...

    September 10, 2013 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  22. What's in that tea anyway?

    @A Kickin' Donkey and Data D,

    I too must say; learning to trust this president to make the right moves. Like you "Kickin'" I said, "Why did he do that?" Geesh...how do I support him in this mistake?" Then it turns out he planned a different outcome all together i.e. playin' chess while others are playin' checkers / mostly the knuckle draggin' Tea Trolls. I just can't get over how this president can continue to out think even his most strident supporters.....we need to learn to accept what we always believed, This Guy is the Best President of this Generation....and who knows if he will be remembered as the best ever.

    September 10, 2013 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  23. tom l

    One week ago, President Obama said that the goal of cruise-missile strikes would be to punish Assad’s military for using chemical weapons. So how does this deal with Russia satisfy that goal?

    September 10, 2013 06:09 pm at 6:09 pm |
  24. Sniffit

    "I find he has outmaneuvered my thinking. Beltway's thinking too, which doubtless irritates them."

    Indeed. Which is why it's been a hilarious day of watching the GOP/Teatrolls flounder around stepping all over their previous talking points and positions in a desperate effort to manufacture a new narrative that paints this all as horrible and makes it all Obama's fault. I mean, they do it every day anyway, but it's especially amusing when they get thrown a curve ball and whiff at it like a dizzy blindfolded 4 year old swinging mindlessly at a piñata.

    September 10, 2013 06:10 pm at 6:10 pm |
  25. tsummers

    With the Obama administration’s constant and heavy emphasis on the heinous murders of 429 Syrian children by ricin gas and the gruesome footage of that act, I suggest the United States should start putting its aborted babies on display. The aborted babies should be wrapped in shrouds and lined up on, let's see we'll need a pretty big area, perhaps on football fields for the whole world to see the heinous murders of abortionists. At the tune of approximately 4,000 aborted babies each day we'll need a whole lot of football fields. Maybe then those who are so appalled at 429 Syrian children in shrouds would see the irony of their misguided thinking and lead this country back to morality. Talk about a holocaust!

    September 10, 2013 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11