Charles Krauthammer Slams Obama … “It’s Amateur Hour” … “Obama Boxed Himself into a Corner and Now He’s Looking for a Out

Barack Obama, the Amateur in Chief …

Charles Krauthammer ripped President Barack Obama a new one in his analysis following Obama’s Rose Garden presser this after noon where he said he would wait until Congress comes back from vacation on September 9th and ask for approval to strike Syria. Krauthammer called it “AMATEUR HOUR” in the White House. Well, it’s been that for 5 years and counting.  Krauthammer was most astonished by the speech was the “lack of any urgency” Obama and his minions have been railing that the attack on Syria had to be immediate, even before any one was sure who actually was responsible for the gas attack.

“But the idea that you make the case, you leak the details, you tell the world that this has to be done and then you say, Well, I will take my time. I’ll go to Congress and we’ll see. This should be done in three days.”

Looks like the UK Telegraph agrees with Charles Krauthammer: Barack Obama is proving an embarrassing amateur on the world stage compared to George W. Bush.

From The Daily Caller:

Krauthammer criticized Obama for the way he has handled the unfolding of events surrounding the crisis in Syria.

“[T]he most astonishing thing is the lack of any urgency,” Krauthammer said. “As you say, Congress will be back in a week. He says, ‘I can strike in a day or a week or a month,’ as if he is a judge handing down a sentence and the execution can be any time in the future. There is a war going on. Do you think everybody is going to hold their breath, hold their arms, step aside until Obama decides when he wants to go to Congress?

“Look, I think he should go to Congress,” he continued. “I think it is absolutely necessary. But he has done no preparation. What they should have done — I mean, this is sort of amateur hour. When there were the first attacks six months ago or if you like, when we had the current attacks, he should have immediately have called in the Congress the way the prime minister of Britain had called in the parliament, had a debate and got a resolution and then went out and told the world we are going do x or we are not going to do x.”

Barack Obama Hears the Cries of Hypocrisy and Reads the Polls … Obama Says He Will Wait for Vote and Ask for Congress’s Approval to Take Military Action Against Syria … What Happened to the Urgency to Attack?

UM, WHAT HAPPENED TO OBAMA’S URGENCY TO ATTACK SYRIA … LIKE PASSING OBAMACARE?

Talk about your 180′s? This afternoon in a 35 minute delayed Rose Garden White House presser, President Barack Obama stated that he had has decided to use military force against Syria, but will ask Congress for approval to do so. So what made Obama change his mind on going it alone without any approval, could it have been the cries of HYPOCRISY were so loud that even the Obamamessiah could not ignore?  So Obama will wait until Congress comes back on September 9 to debate and vote on approval to use military force. HUH? What happened to the immediacy of having to attack Syria? Obama and Kerry had stated we had to do this sooner rather than later. Now Obama is willing to wait at last another 9 or 10 days, maybe two weeks?  That line in the sand appears to have been washed away by the ocean waves. Or was it the vote by the British Parliament and the fact that Americans want no part of another war in the Middle East? However, one thing is certain, Obama has handled this entire thing so poorly, he looks like a weak, rank amateur.

I am still not sure how Assad gassing his people is a risk to the United States national security. Sorry, by Syria using chemical weapons against its people, whether they be men, women or children is hideous. But Syria did not use them against us or are they planning to.  Also, does it really matter how a dictator kills his own people? Is it more outrageous is a dictator kills 500 people with chemical weapons or a firing squad?

President Obama said Saturday that the United States has decided to use military force against Syria, calling last week’s alleged chemical weapons attack there “an attack on human dignity,” but said he would seek congressional authorization for an attack.

The announcement puts off an imminent cruise missile strike, a prospect that had put the region on edge and stoked intense debate in the United States, where many dread getting dragged into a new war. It is not clear what the Obama administration would do if Congress declines to authorize a military operation.

“We cannot and must not turn a blind eye to what happened in Damascus,” Obama said during an address at the Rose Garden. “This has implications beyond chemical warfare.”

Congress is in recess until Sept. 9, and it was not immediately clear whether lawmakers would try to convene earlier for an emergency vote. Leading lawmakers who had called on the administration to seek congressional approval were pleased by Obama’s announcement.

The Hill: Rep. Peter King: Obama ‘abdicating responsibility as commander in chief’.

In a scathing statement that differed sharply from the reaction of House GOP leaders, King said Obama was making a mistake that would undermine future presidents.

“President Obama is abdicating his responsibility as commander-in-chief and undermining the authority of future presidents,” said King, a former Homeland Security Committee chairman who has flirted with running for president in 2016.

“The president does not need Congress to authorize a strike on Syria. If Assad’s use of chemical weapons against civilians deserves a military response, and I believe it does, and if the president is seeking congressional approval, then he should call Congress back into a special session at the earliest date,” King said.

Question 1: What happens if Congress does not give Congressional approval to attack Syria, much like the British Parliament denied UK Prime Minister Cameron? Obama has to sell his war against Syria and to date has not done so. Lobbing a couple of cruise missiles is hardly worth the headache. Obama has said that an attack would not be for regime change. So then what would it be for? Any attach against Assad will be in support of the opposition backed by Al-Qaeda.

Question 2: What happens if what Obama does creates regime change in Syria and we replace a dictator with Al-Qaeda?

Remember When Joe Biden Said in 2007 that George W. Bush Should Be Impeached for What Barack Obama is About to Do?

Oh the hypocrisy from the LEFT …

Remember when Senator Joe Biden wanted Bush impeached for the very thing that Barack Obama is about to do? So what is different, oh it’s Barack Obama. So what is the difference? Oh that’s right, the current president is not a Republican.  So if Obama attacks Syria without Congressional approval, will Biden be the first to file articles of impeachment against Barack Obama?

In 2007, Senator Joe Biden repeatedly threatened to lead an effort to impeach President George W. Bush in the House should he attack Iran without congressional authorization. Senator Obama agreed that Bush did not have the power to order a strike on Iran. This was not mindless, partisan saber rattling: Vice President Dick Cheney and the neoconservative establishment were actively pushing Bush to take military action against Iran.

On Hardball, Biden emphatically and passionately told Chris Matthews that Bush had “no constitutional authority … to take this nation to war against a county of 70 million people unless we’re attacked or unless there is proof we are about to be attacked. And if he does, if he does, I would move to impeach him.” Biden was absolutely correct to point out the illegality of Bush’s intentions and threaten him with impeachment.

From The Atlantic:

It turns out that his Democratic primary opponent and eventual running mate, then-Senator Joe Biden, had even stronger views about presidents attacking other nations without Congress’s permission:

Chris Matthews: You said that if the United States had launched at attack on Iran without Congressional approval, that would’ve been an impeachable offense. Do you want to review that comment you made?

Joe Biden: Absolutely. I want to stand by that comment I made. The reason I made the comment was as a warning. I don’t say those things lightly, Chris. you’ve known me for a long time. I was Chairman of the Judiciary Committee for 17 years. I teach separation of powers in Constitutional law. This is something I know. So I brought a group of Constitutional scholars together to write a piece that I’m going to deliver to the whole United States Senate pointing out that the president HAS NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to take this country to war against a country of 70 million people unless we’re attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to be attacked. And if he does, I would move to impeach him. The House obviously has to do that, but I would lead an effort to impeach him. The reason for my doing that — and I don’t say it lightly, I don’t say it lightly.

This is a striking statement.

What a joke, GWB’s three biggest critics when it came to his foreign policy were Sens. Barack Obama, Joe Biden and John Kerry. Now suddenly they are all hawks!

Col. Ralph Peters Blasts John Kerry on his Syria Speech … “Melodrama is Not a Substitute for Strategy” and His Stunning Hypocrisy

Once again Col. Ralph Peters calls it like it is … Melodrama and Hypocrisy!

Col. Ralph Peters blasted Secretary of State John Kerry for his speech on Syria. Peters said that, “Melodrama is Not a Substitute for Strategy.” Kerry never explained why there was a clear and present danger to the United States to get involved with attacking Syria. Peters also went on to call out Obama and Kerry for their hypocrisy. Kerry called Assad a thug and a murderer who had gassed 1000′s of his own people with poison gas, yet where was Kerry and Obama when it came to Saddam Hussein in Iraq? Hussein killed over one million people. Where was John Kerry and Barack Obama then?

Liberal Dennis Kucinich Says Barack Obama Risks Impeachment If He Acts Against Syria Without Congressional Approval

At least there is some consistency on the LEFT to the Imperial Presidents actions.

Former Ohio Congressman and self-avowed Lib Dennis Kucinich warned that President Barack Obama faces impeachment if he takes military action against Syria without congressional approval because as there was no no “imminent or actual threat” to America. Kucinich also takes issue with how Obama phrased his statement earlier today; however, I am not sure how this is an epiphany to anyone that Obama cares little about the US Constitution and following it.

On Hannity Friday night, guest host Tucker Carlson had Kucinich on the show to discuss the following tweet, which links to a Washington Post article about how the administration is insisting that President Obama “has both the authority and determination to make his own decision on a military strike against Syria.”

Not so, says Kucinich, and the president risks impeachment if he does. “There is no imminent or actual threat to the United States of America. If there was, then people expect the president to defend us. But in this case the president is going on his own,” Kucinich explains.

“It’s not ‘I the President,’ it’s ‘We the People of the United States,’ Kucinich says after quoting the president saying earlier on Friday: “I meant what I said, I have not made a final decision.” Kucinich points to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which says only Congress has the power to take America to war. “That’s a fundamental principle and if the president throws that away, disregards that I think there will be consequences for him,” he said.

VIDEO – The Right Scoop