I happen to believe that the world and, yes, the United States should punish Assad for his chemical attacks on his people ... as opposed to the opinion of the vast majority of the American people. And I have just witnessed the President's press conference in St. Petersburg wherein it seems clear that, even if Congress does not endorse our bombing of Syria, Obama is inclined (at least rhetorically) to go ahead anyway (see:
Mediaite Story).
The question then presents itself ... if I were a member of the U.S. legislature, why would I then go against the will of my constituents and back Obama when it may not make one iota of difference in what eventually happens? What's the purpose of all this legislative theater anyway? Is it just to delay things? Is it to provide Obama some rationalisation for his past inaction ... and justification for his previously ill-chosen words? Maybe it is just to change the subject from the myriad of Obama's domestic problems?
What is Obama's real rationale? What
is the point?
