If YOU were in Congress, what possible incentive would there be to attack Syria? *

[99th_Monkey]

1) POTUS and Kerry have both made it abundently clear that with or without Congress,
they are going to bomb the shit out of Syria ANYWAY,

and

2) The Public is ademently and overwhelmingly opposed to attacking Syria.

If I were sitting in Congress and had ANY concerns about re-election, I wouldn't touch
a "Yes" vote with a 10-foot pole.



* footnote: "Of course, there are incentives and then there are in$intive$" <--MIC speaks

[NightWatcher]

1. you seriously think he'll do it anyway?

[99th_Monkey]

5. I take O & Kerry at their word, yes.

So if I think they are lying, why would I take them at their word?

Good question.

[global1]

6. I Asking The Same Question - But.....

with the strong rhetoric from the President & Kerry about having to stand up to 'chemical weapons' use - how do they neatly say that doesn't matter - because Congress did not back them? Especially when they have said that they really don't need the approval of Congress to begin with.

Then does the President really look weak then? How would that effect the rest of his years in office?

[wandy]

12. This might be an oddball way of looking at this, but here goes.........

Obama did the right thing by bringing this before congress.
That's a good thing.
If the answer is no and Obama stands down he will have done a great thing.

The power of the 'Imperial President" will begin to diminish.

Not to mention that it will confound the republicans and fan the flames of their own civil war.

[DJ13]

2. A rosy future working for a defense contractor at 5X the pay

[99th_Monkey]

3. I think you are warm. nt

[phleshdef]

4. If I voted yes, it would be for humanitarian reasons.

If there was a convincing argument presented that strikes could wipe or significantly dampen Assad's abilities to deploy fighter planes and missiles or anything else that enables the Assad regime to successfully continue to massacre innocent civilians, then that could be an incentive to vote yes.

But if it can not be convincingly illustrated that such a thing could be pulled off, then I would vote no.

[99th_Monkey]

10. Given the USA's track record for "surgical strikes" ending up killing and maiming many innocents,

that should be a no-brainer.

[kentuck]

7. You may as well be a puppet...

Stay home and call in your vote...

[eissa]

8. 10 minutes alone with George Clooney

Ok, no, as tempting as that offer would be, I would never vote for something so incredibly stupid and wrong.

[DJ13]

11. Okay, a full half an hour

But thats our final offer!

[eissa]

13. LOL, you guys are good! This might make me change my mind

Actually, no it doesn't

[wandy]

9. The picture is worth a thousand words........

If anyone thought that the NRA could buy the government they wanted, well, meet the big dogs.
Bought and paid for.

[Scuba]

14. There's this ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017143288

[99th_Monkey]

15. My! What a striking coincidence!

I rec-ed it too.

[Scuba]

16. No one could have predicted that.

[Egalitarian Thug]

19. "Today's political campaign finance laws are little more than legalized bribery" - Bill Moyers

[Autumn]

17. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Who else you gonna vote for. That other guy fucking sucks.

[99th_Monkey]

18. $$$$$ <THAT'S THE BUZZ>$$$$$$$

Senators Authorizing Syria Strike Got (WAY) More Defense Cash Than Lawmakers Voting No
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023601455