海角大神

As President Obama makes his case to Congress and the American people for allowing military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, he might consider a lobbying effort closer to home. It seems first lady Michelle Obama is 鈥渨ary鈥� of strikes, the president said on NBC鈥檚 鈥淭oday.鈥�

鈥淚 am taking this vote in Congress and what the American people are saying very seriously, because if you ask somebody, you know, I read polls like everybody else. And if you ask somebody, if you ask Michelle, 鈥楧o we want to be involved in another war?鈥� the answer is no,鈥� Mr. Obama said Monday

鈥淵ou know, if you 鈥� if you talk to my own family members, or Michelle鈥檚,鈥� Obama added, 鈥測ou know, they鈥檙e very wary and suspicious of any action.鈥�

The first lady, often the president鈥檚 most effective and beloved surrogate, has not commented publicly about Syria. The administration has trotted her out previously to pitch everything from health-care reform to, well, Obama鈥檚 reelection. She has enviable approval ratings, by the standards of anyone holding elected office.

The reticence she is apparently feeling echoes the sentiments of many across the political spectrum. A vast (and growing) majority of Americans surveyed are against military involvement.

And perhaps, as her adopted title of mom-in-chief suggests, her hesitation similarly reflects that of families across the country who, after a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, have grown tired of sending America鈥檚 young people into harm鈥檚 way. Many express an eagerness for renewed focus on the issues, pocketbook and otherwise, affecting citizens here at home.

The first lady is not alone among strong Obama loyalists hoping for another solution, perhaps via diplomacy, as is being discussed Tuesday with greater interest and intensity. Sen. Edward Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who won Secretary of State John Kerry鈥檚 old seat, said Tuesday he could not back military action in Syria, despite the apparent use of chemical weapons by Mr. Assad鈥檚 regime.

Senator Markey, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was the lone 鈥減resent鈥� vote on the resolution narrowly supporting limited military engagement. He took heat for apparently taking a pass on a tough decision. But Tuesday he described the resolution as 鈥渢oo broad鈥� and suggested he would not back it when the full Senate considers the measure.

鈥淭he effects of a strike are too unpredictable,鈥� , adding that he wants to 鈥済ive diplomatic measures that could avoid military action a chance to work.鈥�

Meanwhile, Sen. Ben Cardin (D) of Maryland聽 is rethinking his decision last week to support the president in committee.

"I voted yes in the committee but I have concerns about action, right now we need to deal with #Syria via diplomacy if possible," Mr. Cardin said on Twitter.

Just a few days ago, Minnesota Sen. Al Franken (D) was leaning toward an endorsement of a resolution giving the president the power to act. He, too, expressed his concern Tuesday that the resolution in the Senate pipeline is too sweeping. He said he worries that while Obama isn鈥檛 pushing for boots on the ground now, an initial engagement could expand into a broader conflict.

"I want to know more about the details of that response and its scope before I decide whether to support or oppose this or any resolution in the US Senate," Senator Franken said, .

Franken said that when the president addresses the nation Tuesday night he should explain how 鈥渢he United States will deal with the risks and unintended consequences of a possible attack.鈥�

These three members are solid progressives from left-leaning states. If they鈥檙e taking a pass on the resolution or are on the fence anew, the Obama administration must consider the prospect of a failed vote 鈥� in the Democrat-controlled Senate as well as the GOP-controlled House.聽

So then it鈥檚 no surprise that as hopes for a diplomatic strategy strengthened Tuesday 鈥� with the US weighing a Russian proposal to force Syria to give up its chemical weapons 鈥� the Senate delayed tomorrow鈥檚 scheduled vote on the use of force.

These seeming defections, along with the swirling questions about what the US stands to gain from what Secretary Kerry described as 鈥渦nbelievably small鈥� action against Assad, could mark a tide-turning moment in this conversation. It's one that gives the president a viable out from his prior commitment to act if Assad crossed a red line and used chemical weapons. When his loyalists are not just asking but many seemingly demanding that he find another way, Obama must consider their caution strongly.

And if these liberals aren鈥檛 enough to shift the president off his initial stance, perhaps his wife鈥檚 posture might do the trick.