Apparently, disproportionate liberal criticism of the President is automatically not racist.
When Republicans seem to reject everything the man says, we see it for what it is. Birth certificates, etc. But when liberals aren't happy even if they were happy before, then it can't possibly be.
Obama is not suggesting an invasion of Syria, not suggesting doing so on fraudulent terms, and not suggesting we occupy the place but all you can do is compare it to Iraq when the most apt comparison is the former Yugoslavia, something that people supported.
And you can claim that the public doesn't support the attack, fine. But how robust is that polling? If Assad continues to use chemical weapons to kill people, what are the polls going to say about that?
Just like Cambodia. We made a huge mistake and burned our credibility in Vietnam, and so no one was there to stop the Khmer Rouge. Bush destroyed the political and diplomatic will for anyone to do anything about something like this, and now the Syrians are paying the price.
So, it's OK for Bush and Clinton to launch a missile here or there, but when Obama does it, well, that's a no no--we totebaggers are still scared by a black guy with guns. We got him the Nobel Peace Prize to show everyone he wasn't an angry black.
And also the totally non-racist left, the same non-racist left defending Miley Cyrus's virtual blackface performance because whitesplain, is also showing its contempt for Arab life too. Yugoslavia, worth saving. Even Sudan, worth saving. Syrians? Meh.