« | »

NYT: GOP May Force Obama To Accept Putin Plan

From the New York Times:

Russian Proposal Catches Obama Between Putin and House Republicans

By PETER BAKER |September 9, 2013

WASHINGTON — President Obama woke up Monday facing a Congressional defeat that many in both parties believed could hobble his presidency. And by the end of the day, he found himself in the odd position of relying on his Russian counterpart, Vladimir V. Putin, of all people, to bail him out.

The surprise Russian proposal to defuse the American confrontation with Syria made a tenuous situation even more volatile for a president struggling to convince a deeply skeptical public of the need for the United States to respond militarily in yet another Middle Eastern country, this time in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons. It could make the situation even more precarious. Or it could give Mr. Obama an escape from a predicament partly of his own making.

In effect, Mr. Obama is now caught between trying to work out a deal with Mr. Putin, with whom he has been feuding lately, or trying to win over Republicans in the House who have made it their mission to block his agenda.

Even if he does not trust Mr. Putin, Mr. Obama will have to decide whether to treat the Russian proposal seriously or assume it is merely a means of obstructing an American military strike.

This is a classic New York Times attempt to help Obama with his ‘War on the House Republicans. Which is the only war Obama really wants to fight, anyway.

Here The Times is desperately trying to find a way to blame this latest development on the House Republicans. But the NYT is still feeling its way, so this is still a work in progress.

They are suggesting that by refusing to give Obama approval to use force the House Republicans are forcing him to accept Putin’s plan, even though Obama doesn’t really trust Putin. And this gets Obama off the hook once again.

If Syria does implement the Putin plan and there is another chemical attack, Obama will be able to blame it on the House GOP for blocking his use of force. Solvey-solvey.

The Republicans are forcing Obama to have to trust Putin.

“Putin knows that everyone wants an out, so he’s providing one,” said Fiona Hill, a former national intelligence officer and co-author of “Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin.” “It seems like a bold idea that will get everyone, including Obama, out of a bind that they don’t want to be in.”

But, she said, it may be an idea that derails a strike for now without solving the underlying problem. Indeed, the Senate quickly postponed plans for a vote authorizing an attack…

The only problem is saving Obama’s face. Syria’s killing of 100,000 of its citizens, the use of chemical weapons — those are simply details. Bumps in the road.

All of which had White House speechwriters revising their drafts before Mr. Obama addresses the nation Tuesday night in what is shaping up as one of the most challenging moments of his presidency. He hoped to explain why it was necessary to retaliate for a chemical weapons attack that, according to United States intelligence, killed more than 1,400 in Syria, but also reassure Americans the result would not be another Iraq war…

If Obama runs true to form, he will do neither. Instead, he will take credit for this bold diplomatic stroke, made possible by his resolute threat of force, and declare victory. 

And the fawning news media and future historians will say the Syria crisis was just like the Cuban Missile Crisis, where a tough JFK made the Russkies back down. Only different.

The twists and turns in the Syria debate have whipsawed the nation’s capital and by some accounts imperiled Mr. Obama’s presidency. Democrats are mystified and in some cases livid with Mr. Obama for asking Congress to decide the matter instead of simply ordering one or two days of strikes and getting it over with.

Oh, our sides. Congressional Democrats are livid at having some say in this.

By most estimates, the Republican-controlled House would reject authorizing such an attack if the vote were held now, and it is not clear whether the Democrat-led Senate would approve it. Few presidents have lost such a major vote on war and peace in the almost century since the Senate rejected Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations.

No President has ever been rejected when requesting a use of force. (Which the League Of Nations was not.) That is how racist the Republicans are.

In their private moments, Mr. Obama’s allies said even the argument that his presidency would for all intents and purposes be over did not sway some unsympathetic Democrats, frustrated over how few victories there have been to hang on to in Mr. Obama’s fifth year in office…

These miserable ingrates wanted to put their own political careers first? We need names!

Some Democrats argue that their colleagues worry too much. Even if Mr. Obama lost the vote, they argue, this would not be the decisive moment many anticipate. “Yes, it’ll take some wind out of his sails temporarily,” said Matt Bennett, a former aide to Mr. Clinton. “But our sense is it’s not going to be long lived.” …

Besides, they can blame the Republicans. With the New York Times leading the charge.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, September 10th, 2013. Comments are currently closed.

One Response to “NYT: GOP May Force Obama To Accept Putin Plan”

  1. GetBackJack says:

    NYT back to smoking bath salts. The former Republican Party couldn’t force water to roll downhill …

« Front Page | To Top
« | »