I never cease to be amazed at the twisted and convoluted logic of the liberal mindset. Or maybe it’s just so simple, I can’t comprehend the facts. James Carville is now blaming George W. Bush for the lack of enthusiasm the American people are feeling for entering the war in Syria. The only question I have is why President Obama hasn’t used that logic? Given his propensity for blaming Bush for everything that goes wrong, I am surprised he has made that leap of faith.
The liberal supporters of President Obama are out in full force, accusing conservatives of being dishonest in their failure to support military action in Syria. They naturally start drawing comparisons between Syria and Iraq, asking why some of us supported going into Iraq, but refuse to do so in Syria. In all honesty, there are numerous differences between Syria and Iraq. In closing, I want to point you to a post from my friend Harrison. He explains those differences rather well.
Capitol Commentary – Obama fooled us twice… on Egypt where the average citizen hates Obama and in Libya where we gave money and weapons to rebels composed of al Qaeda forces. How can we be fooled again on Syria which hold a crucial place in the Middle East and in its relationships with Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq?
It is perfectly consistent for Republicans to oppose any U.S. based action in Syria until all the facts are known. Obama doesn’t want to wait for the truth to emerge because he only seeks to overthrown the established powers because he thinks any entrenched leadership is bad. But his track record is poor and so is his set-up.