Maybe I’m missing something.
What exactly is showing weakness by having a congressional vote on an issue?
Isn’t the whole point of Congress that they vote on issues, pass legislation, etc?
Sometimes legislation is voted down. Sometimes resolutions do not pass. It’s all part of the process, isn’t it?
What am I missing?
It’s a good move because it shows a pattern of the right response.
No one says, no law states, that Congress need vote on anything the President proposes or requests. This President is playing pure politics and this move of shunning him, ignoring him, being indifferent drives liberals and socialists up the wall, because they think themselves so superior, so important that anyone that would ignore them must be crazy and it drives them crazy to see that.
So it’s a good move.
The author analyzes that it would be a weak move to vote. If they vote yes, Obama wins by saying it was Congress that approved the attack. If they vote no, Obama blames them for the loss of world influence. So if the House votes, then it would be seen that they are following Obama’s wishes. That would show weakness because they are not obliged to answer the President’s question.
But by not voting, Congress is showing Obama that he doesn’t matter in his political play games, that they don’t need to bow down to his will and vote, they are not obliged to vote. They can turn their backs on Obama and whistle in a symbolic way to say F You Obama!
They are doing the same on the immigration vote. Obama and Reid can say to their press lapdogs that the House is a do-nothing House but Americans largely don’t care about immigration or Syria. So it’s a win for Republicans in the House to ignore these issues and treat then like they don’t exist.
The House will pay attention to the budget and debt ceiling fight.