______________________________
After three days of non-stop phone calls from hundreds of Colorado constituents opposed to an American military strike on Syria, on Friday, US Representative Doug Lamborn (R-CO) announced Friday he was “leaning against” a resolution giving US President Barack Obama the authority to take limited action. Catherine Mortensen, Lamborn’s communications director, said that following the long Labour Day holiday weekend, “Tuesday is when the calls started, they’re still coming in, and I’d say fewer than two percent are people who want us to take action. People say things like, ‘We have problems at home we need to take care of’. What was surprising was how quickly people’s opinions gelled. They’re not lukewarm. Right off the bat on Tuesday it was, ‘We don’t need this’. It’s been overwhelming”. On Friday morning, whilst Lamborn was answering questions from listeners during a radio show, Mortensen said, “One man phoned in to say, ‘I’m in Afghanistan, and I don’t want this anymore’”. By the end of the show, Lamborn, a Republican, who previously said that he was gathering facts and hadn’t made up his mind yet, told listeners that he was inclined to vote against the resolution. Moreover, Lamborn’s office isn’t alone.
Other Congressional offices said that they’ve been bombarded with calls ever since last Saturday, when Obama said that he’d ask Congress to approve a “limited” strike against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack last month. Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD) said in a televised interview on MSNBC, “I can tell you, 99 percent of the calls coming to my office are against it”. US Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who lost the presidency to Obama in 2008, voted to support his old rival during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing this week, but took significant heat about it on Thursday from angry constituents at a town hall meeting in Arizona. One man in the crowd held up a bag of marshmallows, saying, “This is what I think of Congress. They’re a bunch of marshmallows… why aren’t you listening to the people and staying out of Syria? It’s not our fight”.
Some of those calls and comments to Congress appear to be having an effect. After days of discussions with voters, Representative Tom Cole (R-OK) announced late Thursday in a statement on his website that he’d vote against the president’s request, saying that the situation in Syria is a civil war, so, the USA shouldn’t intervene in it. He said, “This isn’t just my opinion. It’s the considered opinion of the people that I represent, expressed not at just one or two town halls, but literally at every public or private meeting and casual encounter that I’ve had since the president decided to put this issue before Congress last Saturday. I’ve heard their opposition loud and clear and I won’t vote in favour of military intervention in Syria”.
Upon hearing word about a chemical attack that killed men, women, and children, Representative Michael Grimm (R-NY) said that his initial reaction, as a USMC combat veteran, “was to stand by the Commander-in-Chief and support immediate targeted strikes”. On Thursday, Grimm announced that he, too, changed his mind. He said in a statement on his website, “I’ve heard from many constituents who strongly oppose unilateral action at a time when we have so many needs here at home. Thus, after much thought, deliberation, and prayer, I’m no longer convinced that an American strike on Syria would yield a benefit to the USA that wouldn’t be greatly outweighed by the extreme cost of the war”.
Representative Matt Salmon (R-AZ), in a statement on his website explaining his opposition to a strike, said that, thus far, the Obama Administration “failed to present a convincing argument that the events in Syria pose a clear threat to America, failed to list a strong coalition of nations willing to support military attacks, and failed to articulate a clear definition of victory”. Salmon told National Review Online that he’s had 500 calls to his office about the crisis in Syria, and only two were in favour of US intervention. He predicted Obama’s efforts in Congress “would fail by 20 votes”.
However, Obama is counting on members of Congress like Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, who’s viewed classified information about the chemical weapons attack and said on Thursday that she supports the strike on Syria, despite the lack of public support. According to the AP, she said, “There’s no question… what’s coming in is overwhelmingly negative, but you see, then, they don’t know what I know. They haven’t heard what I’ve heard”. On Friday, during a press conference in St Petersburg soon after the G20 summit wrapped up, Obama said that he’d address the nation about the crisis on Tuesday, telling reporters that he considers it part of his job to “make the case”. He told reporters, “It’s conceivable that, at the end of the day, I don’t persuade a majority of the American people that it’s the right thing to do”. However, he added that members of Congress would have to decide for themselves if they think a strike is the right thing for national and global security, saying, “Ultimately, you listen to your constituents, but you’ve got to make some decisions about what you believe is right for America”. Obama didn’t say whether he’d still order a strike even without Congressional approval.
6 September 2013
Maria Young
RIA-Novosti
Editor’s Note:
A Russian correspondent of mine (who lived in the USA for about five years) had an interesting thought:
What if this is just political kabuki to defang the right? Obama could call it all off if the House rejected it, and he’d put the onus on the Republicans. Maybe, he’s looking to confuse his opposition before more important votes. He’s not a stupid man. The American right-wing believes their fairy tales about him; they don’t look at him objectively.
That’s an interesting thought. However, there’s a lotta light from that there fire. I’d like to believe that my interlocutor’s correct. Yet… I’d need more evidence. Still, I want to see this put to bed with no war… and I’m not alone in wanting that.
BMD
Voices from Russia 
Feinstein Sez Sanctions Won’t Bite
Tags: Dianne Feinstein, diplomacy, diplomatic relations, EU, European Union, NBC, Novorossiya, political commentary, politics, Russia, Russian, sanctions, Ukraine, unilateral sanctions, United States, USA, Vladimir Putin
______________________________
US Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said in an interview with NBC that Western sanctions against Russia due to the situation in Novorossiya would be ineffective, saying, “People say, ‘Well, just wait till the sanctions bite and the economy slips’. I don’t think so. The Russians are very brave and very long-suffering, and they’d tough out any economic difficulty”. She said that Russians support President V V Putin, so the Western sanctions won’t affect popular attitudes towards government policy. Her solution for settling the crisis in Novorossiya would be direct talks with the Russian leadership. The relations between Russia and the West deteriorated due to the Ukrainian situation. In late July, the EU and the USA introduced sanctions against entire sectors of the Russian economy. In response, Russia restricted food imports from countries that imposed sanctions against it, namely, the USA, the EU, Canada, Australia, and Norway. The ban included beef, pork, poultry, sausages, fish, vegetables, fruits, dairy, and some other products.
1 September 2014
Rossiya Segodnya
http://en.ria.ru/politics/20140901/192513402/US-Senator-Says-Anti-Russian-Sanctions-Not-Going-to-Work.html