(Digital image from the BBC)
September 9 2013
The Bradenton Herald
The run-up to the impending military action in Syria demonstrates the degree to which the Republican Party opposes President Obama.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq these same Republican hawks couldn’t endorse military action fast enough. In those heady days anyone who opposed military action in Iraq was branded as unpatriotic and a traitor if you didn’t want to enter a war based on now-proven lies. Bush overlooked the Constitution and did not consult with Congress (as required by the Constitution) before beginning his multi-billion dollar fiasco in Iraq.
Fast forward to 2013 and examine the current setting in Syria. There has been an accusation of the use of chemical weapons on Syrian people, just like Saddam Hussein was accused of using chemical weapons on his own Iraqi people. Only this time the President has followed the Constitution and consulted with Congress before bringing military action. Yet how does the Congress react? Temper tantrums are being thrown along with more invective slung at the President accusing him of being unpatriotic and violating the Constitution and failing to have a backbone and any of a million other things the Republicans have spewed since his first inauguration day.
Why the difference in outlook eleven years later? Some claim it’s because the Congress is weary of war. None of them have yet to come out and speak the truth – they oppose it because Obama proposed it. Obama could find a cure for cancer and the Republicans in Congress would oppose the cure. Many have suggested all manner of things that Obama is guilty of as President however there is only one crime he has committed - he is guilty of Governing While Black.
America and its Republican-controlled House of Representatives should be collectively ashamed of itself. I can only imagine how they will respond after the next election when a white woman is elected President. At least she won’t be guilty of Governing While Black.