« Paul the Appalling Movie | Main | Obama Snubs Congress on Libya »

Monday, March 21, 2011


larry kurtz

President Obama's measured, thoughtful response is hardly dithering. Dithering is what South Dakota's ruling party has done to cement hopelessness, suicide, and despair in its own population.

Stick to solutions, Doc; it's what you do best.


OK, just for balance, a critique of FOX news coverage of the whole thing.

from NewsCorpse.com

For much of the past week Fox News has been complaining that President Obama has not done enough for the people of Libya. Most of these stories castigated the President as a weak leader who was ignoring massive suffering on the part of people who are fighting for their freedom against a brutal tyrant. As the story unfolded Fox Nation posted items with headlines that constructed a dramatic story of incompetence and neglect.

The Fox Nationalists painted a picture of a “President Gone AWOL” who “Bows the the UN” that “Authorizes No-Fly Zone” so that allies “Declare Military Action” while “Obama Outsources the War to the French.” So obviously the story climaxes with…

“Serious Doubts Raised About Obama’s War In Libya.”

That’s right – it’s now Obama’s war. A military action that Obama was supposedly to indecisive to start, and too much a follower to lead, is now declared to be a full-fledged war that belongs solely to Obama. When did Obama return from being AWOL? When did he assume ownership from the French? When did it become a war?

In truth, there are legitimate reasons to raise doubts about this affair. While the Libyans are certainly in dire need, and the action was supported by the UN as well as the Arab League, the United States is not particularly well situated for sinking into another potential mid-east quagmire. But that’s exactly why this action should not be led by the U.S. Ceding a more prominent role to the French, the British, and regional players not only prevents the U.S. from bearing the bulk of the military and financial responsibility, it weakens the inevitable accusation that this is just another imperialistic adventure on the part of the United States.

However, for Fox to mischaracterize the course of events so deceitfully is – well, actually it’s just the way Fox operates. Before the military action Obama was indecisive and compassionless. In the formative stages he was weak and lacked leadership. Now, during the assault, when we and our troops are at the most risk, Fox chooses to focus on doubts expressed by the President’s political opponents.

It’s safe to predict that after the action is completed and Qaddafi is awaiting trial in the Hague for crimes against humanity, Fox will lead with “Obama Bows to the Netherlands in Qaddafi prosecution.” Or maybe “Kenyan President of U.S. Hands Libyan Dictator Over to Dutch Dope Smokers.”

George Mason

Dave; The headlines you posted appear quite accurate. While Libya burned Obama went on vacation. When the President of France has bigger cajones than the President of the U.S. that's a problem. And Dave maybe you should try watching Fox News instead of complaining about it in an attempt to draw criticism away from the incompetence of the Obama administration.

larry kurtz

W after 9/11: "Watch this drive."

Donald Pay

No leadership. You guys are crazy, but then I never assume that righty crazyness will ever be consistent. The right likes to jump up and down, like the tipsy student section during "Jump Around" at Badger games. It's cute, but it's no reason to take you seriously.

The right is beside itself that Obama took leadership in Libya after they had jumped up and down calling for him to take leadership in Libya, although they themselves couldn't be bothered to hold any hearings on the situation in Libya(gutting NPR, after all, is far more important). Now the right jumping up and down because they don't like this or that aspect of his leaderhip. Jump Around, guys, and have another beer. Next the right will be jumping up and down because Obama didn't consult with the Republicans. Jump Around and Hoist Another One. Then it will be something else. Jump Around.

This is being handled fairly well by Obama. The bloodbath has been averted. The US has neutralized the anti-aircraft batteries. The French and Brits and others will patrol the no fly zone. The Arab League is on board.

There should have been more Congressional input, but the Republicans aren't interested in being a responsible party. Too busy with important items like holding emergency hearings on NPR funding.



"now declared to be a full-fledged war that belongs solely to Obama"

When you beg to be the leader of the free world you assume the responsiblity of the actions made by the Free World....It's What Leadership is all about! It's also what being a Super Power is all about!



"W after 9/11: "Watch this drive."

You meant August 4th, 2002 didn't you? Never ceases to amaze me when people point to bad behavior to justify their own bad behavior.



"The bloodbath has been averted"

Human Rights Watch put the Death Toll at over 6,000 Dead, twice as many wounded on March 3rd....which was the first day Obama publically commented on the subject after waiting 17 days from February 15th when the protests began to ramp up.

Now that's real IDGAF Leadership IYKWIMAITYD!

"but the Republicans aren't interested"

Democrats control the Executive Branch and the Senate!

larry kurtz

The globe is littered with W dog poop. Quadddafffi will be scooped up and disposed of in a slightly soiled little UN bag. It's all good.

Ken Blanchard

It is nice to see my spirited interlocutors stoutly defending the leadership of the Hyde Park Hamlet. Dave thinks that only Fox News deceit can be responsible for the view that the President's policy is confused. Unfortunately, the New York Times is as confused as I am. Larry thinks that the President's policy is measured, and Donald thinks it's going well. Why then does the Administration continue to contradict itself? Are we going to make sure that Gaddafi is gone or are we not? Yes and no, according to different spokespersons at different times.

The President tried to explain. What we are doing now is defending defenseless people. That's all. Ok. But it's our policy that Gaddafi should go. Ok. But policy requires not only an objective but a plan for achieving that objective. How can we have a policy when we scrupulously avoid anything that actually aims at that objective? The President is incoherent.

Three weeks ago Gaddafi could have been blown over by a whistle. By the time the President acted, or was acted upon by the wind, Gaddafi is in control of most of Libya. This is nuts.

Donald Pay

If it would have been so easy to blow over Gaddafi, you didn't we see the House of Representatives, controlled by Republicans, voting on a declaration of war, rather than funding to NPR. The right likes this macho talk, but when it comes down to actually combat, you guys run and hide.


Donald: look at yourself. You're accusing the other side of cowardice because they didn't declare war on a nation that represents little threat to the U.S. You have become the people you have contempt for.

Your comment is completely divorced from reality.

Mark Anderson

Ken, see the following link. 1999, NATO bombing of Yugoslavia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
Republicans didn't like that either.


"Six years ago, I opposed this war because I said that not only did we not know how much it was going to cost, what our exit strategy might be, how it would affect our relationships around the world, & whether our intelligence was sound."-Obama 2008

The comments to this entry are closed.