Democrats Shouldn’t Resort to Name-calling

I wrote the other day that the House Republicans are to blame for the shutdown. To me, this couldn’t be more obvious. However, Senator Reid should be doing a much better job of addressing the crisis to the American people. At a press conference today, Reid referred to Speaker Boehner as a coward. This might be true, but it’s for the blogs and the Daily Show to refer to Boehner as a coward, not for the Senate Majority Leader.

Reid needs to put the shutdown in objective terms, explaining to the people that the ACA was passed into law, was upheld by the Supreme Court, and has survived forty something attempts by the GOP in the House to repeal it. Reid should emphasize that he understands why those with different political viewpoints might disagree with aspects of the ACA or all of it. In addition, he could say something like this, “As the law continues to be rolled out, we welcome debate over it provided the opposition brings to the table concrete concerns backed up by proven data.” At the moment, Reid is not saying those things and the GOP is not responding in a constructive manner either. And I am not hopeful, yet, that either side will change their behavior any time soon.

Meanwhile, this guy (Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)), who is one of those people directly responsible for shutting down the government, made a fool of himself yesterday as he shouted down a park ranger, saying that she should be ashamed of herself for the shutdown. It’s truly a crazy video. Expletives come to mind. Just watch…

The embed code isn’t working properly. Just click here to watch the video. Scroll down once you’re on the page.

<script type=”text/javascript”>var nbcLP={};nbcLP.aRandomNumber=Math.floor(Math.random()*10000);nbcLP.currentPageLoc=encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);nbcLP.currentSiteLoc=encodeURIComponent(window.location.host);nbcLP.defaultWidth=652;nbcLP.defaultHeight=367;nbcLP.cmsID=”226192661″;nbcLP.vidPid=”Bch7jT9IrcRo”;nbcLP.vidSec=”news”;nbcLP.vidSubSec=”local”;nbcLP.vidFrame=document.getElementById(“nbcLP226192661″);nbcLP.vidFrame.style.border=”none”;nbcLP.vidFrame.width=nbcLP.defaultWidth;nbcLP.vidFrame.height=nbcLP.defaultHeight;nbcLP.vidFrame.scrolling=”no”;nbcLP.vidFrame.src=”http://stage.www.nbcwashington.com/templates/nbc_partner_player?cmsID=”+nbcLP.cmsID+”&videoID=”+nbcLP.vidPid+”&width=”+nbcLP.defaultWidth+”&height=”+nbcLP.defaultHeight+”&sec=”+nbcLP.vidSec+”&subsec=”+nbcLP.vidSubSec+”&turl=”+nbcLP.currentSiteLoc+”&ourl=”+nbcLP.currentPageLoc+”&rand=”+nbcLP.aRandomNumber;</script&gt;

Syria Links

There is so much developing today concerning the possibility of an American intervention in Syria. From reading Andrew Sullivan’s take on things after he returned from vacation to hearing the news about House Speaker John Boehner’s support of strikes on Syria, there is a lot to be covered.

First, as a blog I regularly read, it’s always a little tough when there are major developments in international affairs or politics when Sullivan is not at the helm of The Dish. His team did do a great job while he was gone, but I enjoyed reading his take on the Syrian situation this morning. I believe Sullivan is right to ask for/demand foolproof evidence that Assad is 100% to blame for the most recent, and very deadly, chemical attack. And Sullivan brings up a point, one I’ve been thinking about as well, what happens if the US Congress does not agree with Obama on a Syria strike? For now, it absolutely looks like they will. I find this incredibly disappointing. However, Obama should be praised for going to Congress at all and he should be doubly praised if they go against his expressed desire and he concedes to them.

Second, this Q and A with Ian Black, the Guardian’s Middle East editor, is really helpful for understanding some basics about the Syrian Civil War, knowing possible scenarios in the aftermath of a US strike, and whether or not rebel groups in Syria have used sarin gas.

Third, the news from TPM about Boehner supporting a strike (of some sorts) on Syria (with accompanying creepy-smile Obama). This does not bode well for the ABC poll released today that says 60% of Americans are opposed to a US-only strike on Syria. With Boehner on Obama’s side, it is nearly certain that there will not be a strong-enough contingent of men and women within Congress who can build a majority to go against Obama’s intentions.

And lastly, I am reminded of the January 2013 discovery of 79 bodies in a river in Aleppo. Though, not even a tenth of the number allegedly killed in the chemical weapons attack in Syria, this was still a gruesome attack, which exhibited ruthless killing of men and boys. These 79 deaths were just a small portion of all deaths (over 100,000) in the Syrian Civil War before the much-publicized chemical attack, though not one of these 100,000 deaths provoked any seriously considered American military action against Syria. The 100,000 deaths by traditional weapons were not enough to get the US into this mess, but a thousand deaths from a chemical attack might be.

It is a convoluted world we live in that requires world powers to do something about the Syrian Civil War now, just because Assad allegedly decided to use a weapon, which kills more people and does so without consideration of sex, age, and affiliation. I am not in favor of the offensive options on Obama’s table right now. And it all seems like a rush to judgment by American politicians who, despite having no 100%-concrete evidence that it was Assad who ordered this strike, are hurtling toward another conflict in the Middle East.

If I had to select one reason why I worked for and voted for Obama in 2008, and again in 2012, it would be this: I felt like Obama would take a step back from the Bush administration’s tendency to shoot first and plan later. If Obama moves forward now, with or without congressional approval, he betrays the promise of his 2008 and 2012 campaigns, which both strongly featured tough talk about ending war/s, bringing the troops home, and focusing on what is broken and hurting in this country first, instead of policing the world and making half-assed attempts at establishing democracies in the region of the world most inclined to reject them.