I've come to the conclusions that it would be a minor disaster if Congress fails to give Obama authorization to lob a couple of cruise missiles at Syria.
It's certainly true that we're in this predicament because President Says Stuff went off-teleprompter and drew a red line that White House aides furiously tried to erase moments after he stepped off the dais. Then, after lining up his cabinet to support a strike on Syria without Congressional approval (something Senator Obama would condemn) he changed course. Without support from the U.N. or Great Britain or the Arab League, Obama turned to Congress as a last resort to put a fig leaf of approval on this war. This wasn't Obama's finest moment.
But what we going to do? Kneecap our own commander-in-chief? Assad would laugh his ass off at such a feckless response and the Iranians would know they could pretty much build a nuclear bomb in the middle of Azadi Square with no repercussions. It seems to me that giving Obama authority to strike Syria is the best-worst option we have.
Extra - Elliott Abrams in Politico: "How not to run a foreign policy." "Despite this administration’s incompetence, the United States and our allies will be worse off, and our enemies emboldened, if Congress votes no. The time to reject Obama’s failures in foreign and domestic policy is on Election Day 2014, not in the Syria vote."
More - John McCain concurs. And so does Paul Mirengoff at Power Line.
And this - Byron York notes that Republicans may vote against authorization because they just can't trust Obama. The force authorization resolution will be significantly narrowed and limited.