Hello everyone, and let me once again welcome you to another edition of your Sunday Morning Liveblog, starring John Kerry, Full Ginsburging about Syria, which is today's central topic of gum flapping.


My name is Jason. Should you have been living your lives yesterday, as normal human Americans, you might have missed the recent twist in our "Who's Up For Doing Something That Will Not Materially Contribute Anything But Will Look Cool Because ESSPLOSIONS ZOOM BOOM AWESOME HAVING A WAR HARDON PAYOFF, Etc." story. And the twist is, after careful consideration, President Barack Obama is going to see what the most gutless two bodies in the history of organized democracy -- The U.S. House Of Representatives and the U.S. Senate -- has to say about going to "war" in Syria.


And that's awesome, because it technically is their effing job to decide that stuff, a practice we've gotten away from, and which has greatly benefitted Congress, who rarely have to nut up and do anything anymore. But since society frowns on us just dropping the lot of them on Syria, they get to take a vote on it. Especially all those BIG TALKERS who claimed to want to take a vote, most of whom were lying when they said this.


I love it! I have basically been LOLing, since Obama decided that the legislature would join him in hell, on this decision. May as well! Do nothing, and Congress complains. Do something half-assed and Congress complains. Do something that by some stroke of luck deposes Assad and turns all of Syria into a Dairy Queen, and Congress complains that you didn't do that a year ago. Can't win with those idiots, so you may as well cut them in on the deal, too.


This will be the most nutting up Congress has had to do in a long, long time, too. Unless they figure out a way to form a "supercommittee," which is what they did the last time they chickened out of taking responsibility. (This would be bad, because they'd find a way to take their incompetence and irresponsibility and punish you for it.) Also, I keep thinking the sorts of pundits who I just know are going to complain that Obama did this and I'm so glad that they are upset. You might as well relish it too, because we can't do anything for anyone in Syria and that sucks -- this, today, is as good as this unhappy story in human existence is going to get, I'm afraid.


Nevertheless, LOL Congress. In the meantime, let's get surreal and weird right now. As usual, you may feel free to chat in the comments, drop me a line if you must, follow me on Twitter if you are feeling silly, check out my Rebel Mouse page for this week's Sunday Reads.


For everyone who's been struggling lately to read this on their mobile devices, we're going to try taking another run at solving the problem in the coming weeks. Hopefully we crack this nut.


FOX NEWS SUNDAY


I'm sensing a little apoplexy on the part of our show's producers, who term the thought of a Congressional vote on the matter an "about face." There are a lot of people coming on to sort this out. John Kerry, who is on all shows today, Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.), and Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) -- here pulling double duty as both "The Republican Booked To Make The GOP Look Bad" and "The Guy Who Scares You Because You Are Reminded That Jim Inhofe Is In Charge Of Life Or Death Matters."


Also there will be a particularly terrible panel. But first, "President Obama shocked Washington and the world yesterday," Wallace says, referring to the correct application of Constitutionally-mandated "how to go to war in America" processes. Ed Henry says that a "top Syrian official" says that Obama is showing "hesitation." Can't hesitate to get in way over our heads in Syria, say some random Syrian dude.


Henry points out that this is a "big delay because Congress doesn't return until September 9" -- what, do they not know how to use Orbitz? Congress can actually return any old time they want to. So, there's your delay. Henry also frets that Obama "could lose the vote." Meaning that Congress could vote against the limited airstrike that won't remove Assad or prevent him from killing lots of people.


Even if Obama "wins," Henry says, Obama "could lose a lot of political capital," which I gather is the real precious commodity, to the Sunday show goons. (You think these people are sincerely concerned with the lives of Syrians? It's always about who is winning and losing the opaque games of Beltway brinksmanship.)


There are all kinds of shots of Congressman Mike Rogers approaching various lecterns, filled with microphones. The man looks HUNTED...terrified. That's the face of a guy who wanted to swing his member around, grandstanding, who now knows he's got to put his name on a dotted line.


Finally, John Kerry is here. "TO DISCUSS THIS STUNNING TURNAROUND."


Wallace wants to know why we are going to wait for Congress to return. Kerry says that the case they have to make about doing a Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves is stronger today than it was yesterday and only getting stronger. But he says that the President thinks that any future decision will be stronger with Congress having a vote, and the American people reflecting their will through Congress.


He suggests that people should be celebrating that Obama is "not acting unilaterally." All of the right people ARE celebrating this.


"We do not lose anything," Kerry says, "We actually gain and what we gain is the legitimacy of the full-throated response of the Congress and the United States working together."


Wallace is REALLY unhappy about all of this "America working precisely as it is supposed to work." "Mr. Kerry, this isn't CSI," he says, for some reason? Maybe they flout Constitutional norms at Las Vegas crime labs? "This isn't a civics lesson, lives are at stake," he says. He is really struggling with the concept of Obama having an opinion on what should be done, and yet asking Congress to grant him approval. This is all VERY funny to watch. "This is not a civics lesson," whines Wallace, who'd actually like to chuck everything that's known about civics in this instance.


Wallace wants to know what kind of message we are sending to our enemies, and the Syrian rebels. Kerry says that North Korea and Iran should take note that America is a confident democracy. "The President believes we are stronger when the Congress of the United States joins with us."


And the first brickbat of the day from Kerry, "Congress can't have it both ways." That is, Congress can't sit around mewling and whining about not having a say, and then sit around mewling and whining when they get their wish.


But this is the important takeaway here. Remember, very few people in Congress wanted a stake in this. They didn't want their skin in this game. But they wanted to reserve the right to complain and second-guess and imply that the process should have included them. Well, now it's including them, and you can sense a bit of a panic setting in. I don't know if Congress actually has the votes for the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves, but I am overjoyed that for once, no one on Capitol Hill is getting away cleanly.


Wallace is just freaking out, trying to interrupt. He points out all the presidents who didn't seek Congressional approval, Kerry is all "IDGAF." "I'm amazed that you are arguing against Congress weighing in," says Kerry. He points out that if the Assad regime is stupid enough to try any thing in the meantime, the President maintains that right to act without Congress. Assad will also just be making a stronger case to pass the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves.


Wallace asks what happens if Congress refuses to vote for the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves. Kerry says that this won't happen, and then lays a major guilt trip on Congress: "I can't believe that Congress would turn its back on Syria."


Wallace says that Kerry was making a "powerful call for quick action." Kerry says that he never called for action that went around a Congressional debate. Wallace complains that Obama didn't take Kerry's advice, and Kerry says that the President followed it to the letter.


Finally, Wallace is reduced to, "But nothing's going to happen for ten days!" WAAAAH, me wanty my Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves.


Kerry, cold as ice, "Well, Chris, it will happen with the consent of the United States." And, "The President is not trying to create an imperial presidency."


Wallace is really like a six year old who's had his new toy taken away. "But this is not the plan!" Kerry disagrees, and says that he and POTUS talked on the phone about this and he hadn't made up his mind about anything. That is to say, there was no "this is the plan" moment, that got reversed when he opted to put Congress on the hook.


"I think we can create a unity of purpose here that makes America stronger and create a unity of purpose that is much more damaging and much more problematic for Assad," Kerry says. It feels wrong to waste this sort of rhetoric on the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves, sure. But this is still pretty glorious in the way it upsets so many hypocritical people.


Wallace, now reduced to approvingly citing pro-Assad propaganda coming out of Syria, asks Kerry if he's given Assad a temporary victory. Kerry, obviously, scoffs at this. "That is in the hands of the Congress of the United States," he says.


Of course, America no matter what Congress eventually votes to do, remember that this is only going to result in the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves.


There is a report from a Fox correspondent which relies heavily on quoting pro-Assad propaganda approvingly, and also reports that officials in Israel are in a full hyaena-whine over the fact that we have this Constitution thing that kind of precludes them from getting everything they want -- in this case the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves -- as immediately as they might want it.


Let's talk to some of the Congresscritters that now have to plead with one or more of their testicles to finally drop. Peter King is sort of the loudest member of the Coward brigade, calling the President's decision to involve Peter King in the decision-making process an "abdication of his responsibility." Hey, I've been against this whole "involving Peter King in most important state decisions" thing, too, but up until now Peter King has been pretty insistent that he has some sort of role to play in the civic life of our nation.


Clutch pearls! King offers up a monologue about how Obama is failing to lead by recognizing Congress' Constitutional authority. "How can we expect to stop Iran on a red line if we can't do it in Syria?" he whines. That's King's problem, now.


Reed, for his part, is fine with the responsibility of debating and deciding, and thinks that having Congress in the mix is the right decision.


Wallace turns to Inhofe and asks him if Congress approve the authorization. Inhofe says that Congress won't approve it, and besides that the military is "so degraded" by POTUS that we can't afford to get into new conflicts.


Wallace is really concerned that the country is totally war weary and won't be able to get behind the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves, which could lead to Congress voting in such a way that the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves never happens. King says that he intends to vote for the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves, but he thinks that maybe a lot of other people won't.


But how will House Republicans vote? King says that "if the vote was held today, it would be a 'no' vote." LOL.


Wallace asks Inhofe if the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves is an idea that even makes sense. Inhofe says that this is all "salesmanship" and that "we all know that isn't going to be the case" -- in for a penny, in for a quagmire.


Wallace moves on to asking Reed about the central conundrum here -- why are we taking a strong stand on Assad killing people with gas, and not taking a strong stand on Assad killing people any other way. Reed notes that there are international laws and what not, but as far as I can recall, Syria is not a signatory to those treaties and laws. So the real answer here is that none of what we may do in Syria is intended to make sense, or be logical, or be strategic. It's just a thin measure of making us feel better about ourselves.


Inhofe says that the mistake was to draw a red line about the use of chemical weapons. Maybe so! It's called "bluffing." And when the only thing you can maybe do to keep chemical weapons from being used is "bluffing," then you bluff. In due time, we may have the luxury of finding out just how useless bombs are at deterring the use of chemical weapons.


And now it's time to panel our way to oblivion with Joe Lieberman and Jack Keane and Jennifer Rubin and the lump of clear, feather-light cellophane doing business as Charles Lane. This is a double dose from the Worst Opinion Section In America. I promise not to drag this out.


Keane seems to think that there is a pattern, where Obama delays action militarily, and so cluck-cluck, tsk-tsk. Of course, we know this isn't true. Dude has a kill list. He has an itchy drone trigger finger. He's got a surveillance state that can't-wait-won't-wait to get their spy on -- peek first and ask for warrants later, if at all. So, ha, no. This is actually an amazing BREAK in the pattern.


Lieberman, naturally, doesn't think it's right for the President to come to Congress, because he's been long inured to simply ceding his power to the Executive Branch. In fact, ol' Vinegar Joe was once a pioneer, on the cutting edge, of degrading the Congress' firewall between themselves and the Executive Branch.


"Any advantage of a surprise attack we had in Syria," Leiberman says, is over now. The good news is that there was never going to be a surprise ANYTHING in Syria.


Rubin says that the Congressional leadership offices don't have any idea how Congress will vote, and so it's "lunacy" for Obama to have left it to them. Again, I am pretty much LOLing at this. It was wrong of Obama to point out how useless Congress is! Part of his job is to coddle them, even as they puke about how much they hate him.


Lane is the only person who slightly sticks up for Obama here, but he thinks that Congress now has Obama over a barrel. Is that the barrel filled with fish that Congress is too afraid to shoot at?


Keane supports the United States doing something terrifically half-assed, but we should have done something terrifically half-assed much faster. Also, the "good" rebels should get weapons.


Lieberman, desperately trying to win the tallest hobbit contest here, says that despite the fact that he is shocked and affronted by the fact that Obama has insisted that Congress needlessly perform their Constitutional function, would vote to give the President the authority to act. Ha, yes. "I STRONGLY SUPPORT WE GIVE THIS GUY I THINK IS IRRESPONSIBLE CARTE BLANCHE TO BOMB STUFF."


Rubin is against the Missile Strike That Won't Save Lives But Make Us Feel Good About Ourselves, and she is for...some other stuff. Getting rid of Assad, which would, I guess, allow a different group of thugs slaughtering a different group of people.


Lane and Rubin briefly argue, it's like watching two fruit roll-ups try to play checkers.


Lieberman says that he is sure that out enemies are cheering right now. They probably are! Congress is a funny-ass farce of an institution.


THE McLAUGHLIN GROUP


Gonna dial in to the nuthatch right now, as a brief intermission from war whining. Though I imagine there may still be some of that!


[There is more liveblog coming in a few minutes. In the meanwhile feel free to check out my Rebel Mouse page for interesting reads from around the web this week.]