Patterico's Pontifications

9/1/2013

Borowitz Report: Obama Says Syrian Attack to Have No Purpose

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:39 pm



I read it on a satirical blog, so it must be true:

Attempting to quell criticism of his proposal for a limited military mission in Syria, President Obama floated a more modest strategy today, saying that any U.S. action in Syria would have “no objective whatsoever.”

“Let me be clear,” he said in an interview on CNN. “Our goal will not be to effect régime change, or alter the balance of power in Syria, or bring the civil war there to an end. We will simply do something random there for one or two days and then leave.”

“I want to reassure our allies and the people of Syria that what we are about to undertake, if we undertake it at all, will have no purpose or goal,” he said. “This is consistent with U.S. foreign policy of the past.”

Oh, sure there’s a purpose. To keep Our Leader from looking like a schmuck when he ad-libs something.

21 Responses to “Borowitz Report: Obama Says Syrian Attack to Have No Purpose”

  1. I have a great idea. If Congress can’t agree on what action to take they should form a bipartisan super committee of John McCain, Rand Paul, Bernie Sanders, and Harry Reid. If they can’t agree to anything in one month we should automatically bomb the rebels instead of Assad.

    CK (ae4bf1)

  2. What’s both scary and pathetic is that I at first fell for the words posted by that columnist in his webpage parody. IOW, Obama can be so ridiculous, foolish and irresponsible that he on occasion is worse than a parody. That his whole background and administration have been a case of life imitating art (eg, a corny movie about a Banana-republic-ized White House).

    If a clairvoyant a few decades ago had accurately described to me what this country’s presidency would be like in 2013, I wouldn’t have believed it realistic or likely. I wouldn’t have thought it possible that the US would sink so low.

    Mark (fd91da)

  3. Funny…and so true. I still can’t get over my shock at the whole théâtre comique.

    Patricia (be0117)

  4. Of course there is a purpose.

    The uproar about Syria is to distract us from Benghazi, the IRS scandal, the NSA scandal, unrestricted drone strikes, the economy (whatever happened to his laser-like focus on jobs?), the national debt, etc.

    JohnG (65db1e)

  5. Yesterday, upon the stair,
    I met a man who wasn’t there
    He wasn’t there again today
    I wish, I wish he’d go away…

    Last night I saw upon the stair
    A little man who wasn’t there
    He wasn’t there again today
    Oh, how I wish he’d go away

    Hailetsada (a2ddc3)

  6. Last night I saw upon a chair,
    A little man who wasn’t there.

    Hailetsada (a2ddc3)

  7. No, it has a purpose. We are going to bomb Syria until the Syrians stop bombing Syria.

    Kevin M (bf8ad7)

  8. I am looking forward to the day when I never, ever, have to hear the phrases “Let me be clear,” and “middle class” from any President of the United States.

    If there had been an Internet in the early ’70s, I would have said the same thing.

    We will bomb Syria as soon as President Jarrett says OK because of poll numbers.

    Did I type Jarrett? Sorry, I meant Obama.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  9. Is this the Seinfeld Presidency?

    askeptic (2bb434)

  10. That was last week.

    I’m not sure he’s still holding to that.

    But the resolution he submitted to Congress still calls for there to be a negotiated solution to the civil ar, according to what I heard in a question on Face the Nation.

    A newspaper story also reported that the Saudis claimed that the United states had asked them not to supply too many weapopns to the rebels near Damascus and that that was why they had slowed down, but who knows what the truth is there.

    Sammy Finkelman (67ff63)

  11. One thing: one plan I heard about 0 maybe even after that – included attacking the Ministry of defense.

    So the last paragraph in a newspaper story was about rebel sources said papers were being moved out.

    And anotehr story somewhere said prisoners were being moved into government buildings.

    So, if that wa s(or is) the “tougher” plan, it’s good that it was called off for the time being.

    Sammy Finkelman (67ff63)

  12. Comment by Mark (fd91da) — 9/1/2013 @ 6:33 pm

    2.What’s both scary and pathetic is that I at first fell for the words posted by that columnist in his webpage parody.

    It was quite accurate as to Obamas policy (before Saturday) except that Obama was not quite that clear.

    Sometimes parodies are really, really, on the mark, and what’s being parodied lends itself to parody..

    Sammy Finkelman (67ff63)

  13. To keep Our Leader from looking like a schmuck when he ad-libs something despite the fact that he so evidently is one.

    You appear to have made an error, I fixed it for you…

    “Schmuck” in the … original Yiddish meaning of the term, btw…

    Smock Puppet, Gadfy, Racist-Sexist Thug, and Bon Vivant All In One Package (afdedb)

  14. I was going to say that the SCOAMF was closer to a schlemiel but this article convinced me — Obama is a schmuck: http://forward.com/articles/127941/etiquette-for-schmucks-schlemiels-schlimazels-and/

    If you don’t want to read the whole article (it’s wordy but worth it), set your “Find Word” function for “quintessential narcissist”.

    nk (875f57)

  15. 14. Don’t forget putz.

    gary gulrud (dd7d4e)

  16. 14. Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/2/2013 @ 4:42 am

    If you don’t want to read the whole article (it’s wordy but worth it),

    If you read that article, you see that, according to that article, there’s hope, because that would mean that Obama, in his conduct of foreign policy is:

    someone who lacks not intelligence, but all insight into what is humanly appropriate and what is not. This makes his condition remediable. A schlemiel, a schlimazel and a schmendrik are irredeemably what they are.

    I had thought, the way it is used, it is considered a permanent condition, but Philologos says

    He can acquire, through a painful process of self-examination, the moral and social understanding that he has been missing.

    Perhaps calling off that meaningless air strike, and now consulting with John McCain, is the beginning of that.

    And then maybe even he could apply that new, practical, realistic way of thinking, that avooids trying to strike compromises with math and with reality, to Obamacare and other domestic political issues.

    Sammy Finkelman (67ff63)

  17. 7. Comment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 9/1/2013 @ 8:57 pm

    No, it has a purpose. We are going to bomb Syria until the Syrians stop bombing Syria.

    That wasn’t his idea ta all. It was only to stop Syria from bombing parts of Syria with nerve gas and other chemical weapons.

    In the hopes of deterring Iran.

    He needs Congress because Congress doesn’t bluff.

    Sammy Finkelman (67ff63)

  18. He as much as said that He needs Congress because Congress </b doesn’t bluff.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/president-pulls-lawmakers-into-box-he-made.html?pagewanted=all

    President Obama’s aides were stunned at what their boss had to say when he summoned them to the Oval Office on Friday at 7 p.m., on the eve of what they believed could be a weekend when American missiles streaked again across the Middle East.

    In a two-hour meeting of passionate, sharp debate in the Oval Office, he told them that after a frantic week in which he seemed to be rushing toward a military attack on Syria, he wanted to pull back and seek Congressional approval first.

    He had several reasons, he told them, including a sense of isolation after the terrible setback in the British Parliament. But the most compelling one may have been that acting alone would undercut him if in the next three years he needed Congressional authority for his next military confrontation in the Middle East, perhaps with Iran.

    In other words, Iran would conclude that he does bluff.

    Why he would need Comgressional authority in the future if he actually doesn’t need it now. Only in order to threaten to do something.

    Sammy Finkelman (67ff63)

  19. This is what Smart Diplomacy looks like.

    AZ Bob (c99389)

  20. nothing could keep our SCOAMF from looking like a schmuck. between his DNA & his upbringing, he can never be anything else.

    well, a schmuck AND an abject failure… 😎

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  21. If I remember my Leo Rosten correctly, at the formal dress dinner the schmuck bumps the schlemiel who spills his soup on the schlimazel’s lap.

    nk (875f57)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0873 secs.