Hypocrisy

Orangutan Hypocrisy: Blaming Syrian Chemical Attack on Obama

In 2013, Orangutan tweeted—repeatedly—that Obama should do nothing in Syria.

By DAVID CORN AND AJ VICENS

After a grisly chemical attack left dozens of people dead in Syria on Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Pussy Boy was quick to blame—of course—former President Barack Obama.

"Today's chemical attack in Syria against innocent people including women and children is reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilized world," Pussy Boy told reporters. "These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration's weakness and irresolution." Pussy Boy also said: "President Obama said in 2012 he would establish a red line against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing. The United States stands with our allies across the globe to condemn this intolerable act." (Later in the day, the White House issued a statement echoing Pussy Boy's remarks.)

It will come as no surprise at this point that the Orangutan White House's position was hypocritical. First, President Obama's red line at the time was a threat of US military action against Syria should it continue to use chemical weapons. When President Obama asked the GOP-led Congress to authorize the potential use of force against Syria, the Republicans, not wanting to take a firm stance, declined to hold a vote. Still, President Obama's move prompted Assad to agree to a Russian-brokered deal to give up his chemical weapons. To a degree, Obama's threat worked.

Whether or not President Obama's policy in 2013 was successful, this much is clear: at that point, Orangutan had an unambiguous position regarding Syria— do nothing. Throughout this episode, Orangutan tweeted up a storm about Syria. Repeatedly, he declared—occasionally in all-caps!—that President Obama should not be messing around in Syria. He said there was no reason to attack Syria or take any action there. Let the Arab League deal with the problem. He was asserting that President Obama should not respond to the chemical attacks—a policy certainly in sync with Assad (and his Russian patrons). Stay out of this, Orangutan demanded, and focus on domestic issues.

Now Orangutan is blaming President Obama for not adopting a more forceful stance against Assad, even though Orangutan back then repeatedly proclaimed that President Obama should ignore the conflict (and crimes against humanity) in Syria.

This is not the first time Orangutan has slammed President Obama in this manner. During the campaign, Orangutan absurdly claimed Obama and Hillary Clinton were each a "co-founder" of ISIS because they had overseen the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. (Neither were in office when ISIS was created, and the troop withdrawal agreement had been signed by President George W. Bush.) Yet in a 2006 interview, Orangutan had called on Bush to pull all US troops out of Iraq, even if that would lead to more violence and chaos. So as a candidate Orangutan was excoriating President Obama for a policy that Orangutan had actually called for at the time.

Orangutan's response to the horrific Syrian attack follows this pattern: castigate President Obama and hope people don't bother to review Orangutan's past positions. Such situational and brazen hypocrisy may be standard operating procedure for Orangutan. Yet it carries a greater sting when it concerns massacres and war crimes.