According to Mr Obama, his credibility (yes, according to him, he has some.) is not on the line over the Syrian crisis, because he never said anything about a "Red Line". He seemed to think he had the authority to move on Libya without any congressional input, but this time he needs the cover congress can give him. Whose cred is on the line? Why, congress, of course. See, this "leading from behind" thing is great, you just have to know how to work it.
And he'll do whatever suits him politically anyway, regardless of what congress comes up with. Whatever he ends up doing, his primary focus is on getting out of the box he put himself when he interrupted Carney's presser to make the "Red Line" statement. Which of course, he never made. So he may act on the matter "tomorrow, or next week, or next month". And while he's dithering, Assad has all the notice he needs to make sure that his WMDs are out of harm's way. Besides, what could go wrong? He's got a plethora of people around him like John Kerry for backup. What is a plethora? El Guapo knows.
At the time of this posting, the House Committee has penned a draft resolution authorizing the use of force, with some time conditions. It still has to go to the House floor, and the Senate. Regardless of the final outcome from congress, Mr. Obama now has the built-in scapegoat he will need later. Whether Mr Assad stays or goes, and whether Al-Qaeda ends up in control of Syria, Mr. Obama's hubris will insure that either he gets the credit, or congress gets the blame, and as always, he will learn nothing.
*update....just a thought...isn't it interesting that Mr Obama knows exactly who did what to who with WMD's in Syria last week, and he knew that George Zimmerman was guilty of murder 5 minutes after Trayvon Martin died, but he still has no idea who murdered four American citizens at our Embassy in Benghazi almost a year ago?