I hope this does go down in a decisive defeat. If the President goes ahead after Congress has refused authorization, I'm actually one to believe he will have committed an impeachable offense (and I'm someone who voted to reelect and has otherwise supported this President). Without Congressional approval, the President does not have power to authorize an attack on Syria.
But why apply a different standard to Obama than other presidents? Clinton had no authorization for Kosovo or Iraq, HW had none for Panama, Reagan none for Libya or Grenada. I expect the House would probably impeach him if only to help their fundraising, but when the GOP tried against Clinton, the backlash led to the extremely rare case of president gaining House seats in his second midterm.
The difference is that Clinton's media team successfully portrayed it as being about Clinton's sex life and not his breaking the law by lying under oath.
It would be kind of hard for Obama's people to effect the same result in this circumstance. What I am sure of is that the Democrats would force their people to stay loyal through the fundraising and thereby kill it that way.
