Freaking liar.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-i-didnt-set-red-line-syria_752712.html

President Obama said in Sweden today that he personally "didn't set a red line" on Syria:

"First of all, I didn't set a red line," said Obama. "The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are [inaudble] and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation entitled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things happening on the ground there need to be answered for. So, when I said in a press conference that my calculus about what's happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't something I just kind of made up. I didn't pluck it out of thin air. There's a reason for it."



and yet..a year ago:

Of course he said it. I am sure he wishes he hadn't. At the time I am sure it seemed easier, the sides clearer. But it's not and hopefully he'll back off. I don't care what it does to his reputation. If he has to say, "I didn't say red line" to get off the warpath, then say away IMHO.

I scoff at the posts on FB and everywhere saying, "see, look where Obama got us?" Like this wouldn't have happened to any president leading the country thought of as the policeman of the world? That still doesn't mean we/he can't still back off.

Nits picked: check.

By all means, pay no attention to what he was actually saying, just concentrate on the individual words ...

His red line is the international law, the world's red line. Obama didn't set the red line, the international legal standard, but he has always taken a stand to enforce it as Commander in Chief. He has doubled down on his statement that the red line is also a moral standard of human rights also set by international law.

But you and the Weekly Standard ( and FoxNews and Limbaugh and Hannity, blah blah blah) can feign ignorance of this and any normal comprehensive skills and call the President a freaking liar because of the unfiltered hatred of him and outright outrage that he is Commander in Chief. I accept your blind hatred. Good for you. During election season there's a term called "idiot wind" that describes this type of deliberate twisting and parsing of words to validate a "freaking liar" comment. You nailed it John.

I don't want to start a pissing war with you and I'm not going to post any more in this thread, and yes I am an ardent supporter of President Obama and I'm biased as all getout, but this nonsense is best left to the paid blowhards at the Weekly Standard and not the Soapbox where the troll bait leaves no room for dialog, only confrontational reponses like mine in taking your bait. No hard feelings, but you post sucks.

<bleh>


Edit: I completely misunderstood your post, my apologies. You were obviously calling the Weekly Standard's DANIEL HALPER a freaking liar.

I do not think that we should attack Syria. I like the Russian dodge of turning over the weapons to the UN. Absent that, I would vote (as if it mattered!) to bring the issue to the ICC, even though the US ignores the ICC and so is, in relation to international law, a scofflaw.

Nonetheless, Gary, you're right that the liar tag is dead wrong. If it makes you laugh: there's a clip making the rounds of Rove blowing up at Juan Williams because Williams says that there was no lying about Benghazi. Rove, mind you!

Question?

If the President makes a speech, should we consider that "U.S. policy"?

Dave

In the dim and distant days when politics stopped at the water's edge, maybe, Dave--although even then presidential speech making and official policy differed significantly. But nowadays? I believe the US has no official policy on anything because no one controls the government any more.

I think you're suffering from CMLHS (Chris Matthews Liberal Hysteria Syndrome).

Hey, my suggestion a week or so ago on how to handle this is actually working out.

Obama announced diplomacy was always his first option.
Obama makes Syria look down the barrel of his guns. In a way, Russian interests in the region too.
Obama met with Putin during the G20 and struck a deal.
International monitors to secure chemical weapons (I said it would be the UN)
Putin makes the deal and gets the credit.
Media ignores Obama's credit in forcing Russia's move to cooporate.
Blowhards call Obama a freaking liar, praise Putin, impeach Obama.

Media ignores Obama's credit in forcing Russia's move to cooporate.
Blowhards call Obama a freaking liar, praise Putin, impeach Obama.

That was my first thought when I saw the inspection news. I thought that I should have trusted our elected Commander in Chief to do things right and that all his detractors will find ways to make this a negative thing for him.