Democrats seem to be trying their hardest to provide cover for President Obama’s decision to launch a military strike against Syria. From Howard Dean saying the American people should just trust President Obama on Syria to D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton saying her support for striking Syria was only out of loyalty to President Obama, Democrats seem to be flailing to justify attacking Syria.
The latest attempt by the Democrats to justify Syria comes from the mouthpiece of Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who claimed that “there are dozens of countries who are going to stand with the United States” on military action in Syria but she’s “not at liberty to say” which countries they would happen to be.
In her interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, the DNC chair made it a point of saying these “dozens of countries” would be providing not just political support but military support. Given that President Obama has not explicitly said whether or not he would go through with a military strike regardless of congressional approval, Blitzer seemed hesitant to believe Schultz’ claim that the U.S. won’t be involved unilaterally in a military strike.
Nearly 60 percent of Americans oppose attacking Syria with even 54 percent of Democrats opposing military action.
While Schultz may not be at “liberty to say” which nations will militarily support the U.S. in Syria, such vagueness seems odd given the difficulty Democrats are having selling this strike. But don’t worry, just like Howard Dean said, we should just trust President Obama and now apparently Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to get behind Syrian intervention, regardless of what the American people want to do.