If Romney were president right now, the White House would be surrounded by protesters and candlelight peace vigils night and day. Some would wave American flags, some would wave signs calling for impeachment, some would have pictures caricaturing the president as Hitler or an animal. They would chant “Not in our name!”, or “Bring them home!”, or “Hey ho, hey ho, Romney has got to go!”
If Romney were president, nightly news reports on CBS, NBC, and ABC would have regular features on war crimes, quagmires, and collateral damage. ...
If Romney were president, every political analyst left of Judge Napolitano would be fretting over the war-weary public turning the upcoming election into a referendum against the president and his party. ...
If Romney were president, MSNBC would be holding mock war crimes tribunals on Chris Hayes, explaining the ins and outs of the process with expert guests. ...
If Romney were president, Democrats in Congress would be calling for hearings and investigations for each transgression: the bombing, troop levels, and drone policy.
But Romney is not our president. Barack Obama is president.
Even as President Obama took the lead in wars, the Left has shrugged. Those communist-front "peace" protests (yes, if you looked at who organized them as opposed to who went to them, that's who was there) are still around, even showing up for the Occupy Wall Street open-air sewers.
It was disturbing how the media amplified their message by concealing their roots.
But no worries, the anti-war movement and the fawning media coverage will spring into action in November 2016 if a Republican wins the election.
And God forbid the outraged reaction on the Left if the new president has a homelessness emergency in his home state.
Tip to Instapundit.
UPDATE: And it isn't just some Americans who have suddenly discovered how cool war is if a Republican isn't in the White House (and never mind their party contributed to the Congressional bipartisan "declaration of war"). The Global Left that hated Bush for liberating Iraqis seems to have no problem with Putin protecting Assad the butcher:
Russia’s recent military intervention in Syria doesn’t seem to have provoked the same reaction worldwide as the one the US faced against Assad in retaliation to the chemical gas attacks in Syria in August 2013. While the demonstration against the US airstrikes brought together the left and the right in major world cities, Russia’s intervention hasn’t prompted a strong reaction even from those who are considered ‘friends of Syria.’ This is not the first time that the reactions of anti-war coalitions and peace movements differ on the Syrian conflict, based on the actors calling for them. Iranian support to the Assad regime, for instance, with armed militias, weaponry, money, military experts, etc., has also gone unnoticed.
You can be sure that no lefties in Europe are deluded enough to believe they should go to Syria to act as human shields against Putin's air force and artillery.
Because the human shields would die, of course.