New York City's only Republican Congressman Michael Grimm today flip-flopped on his support for President Obama's plan to attack Syria for its use of chemical weapons that killed more than 1,400 people, including 426 children.
He did so today, via a five-paragraph statement, announcing his withdrawal of support the president.
The tough-guy Marine combat veteran explained that his initial reaction was to "stand by the commander-in-chief and support immediate targeted strikes." Sounds good.
He believed: "The reputation and credibility of the United States was on the line and that we had to send a strong message that the use of chemical weapons is reprehensible and will not be tolerated." Right on track.
Why the switcheroo? Grimm's fuzzy. He cites a Congressional dragged-on debate that weakened the president's credibility, the moving of Obama's red line to the world's red line, failure to win allied support and so on.
Grimm says Syria’s Assad "has seen our playbook and has been given enough time to prepare and safeguard potential targets."
C'mon, Mike. The Pentagon claims that Assad is creating more targets, moving stuff that we didn't know about. Grimm, a favorite of Sarah Palin, is just showing his Tea Party colors. He claims that he opposes "unilateral action at a time when we have so many needs here at home."
Grimm's only priorities are killing Obamacare, cutting taxes and revamping Medicaid.
He is big on fighting tolls on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, which connects Grimm's Staten Island Republican base to the narrow slice of Democratic Brooklyn that I live in.
With the initial support of Obama’s moral decision, the Congressman showed some guts, but he got a little ahead of himself.
He has now reverted back to his old political self.