@rich4eagle said:

I would get involved but over the years me having a clear vision and understanding vision is not part of todays America or better having America a vision to go backwards...........I will pass.......

good luck and use your brains........... make sure your thinking is outside the box.......right now America's box is about an 1/2 inch wide............which makes self destruction an absolute

***************************

You could get involved just a bit, Rich. You could get Shep to explain or admit he was totally wrong about ObaMao... that would be great. You could also use your

keen, profound insight, and explain why Valeria and Joe sleazeball eggsucking Plames... aren't saying anything about obamao's putting us into Libya.

They were SO against Iraq, you know. but NOW, with a DEMOCRATIC (socialist union thug sold out) president, whatever he does is fine.

Funny how that works. I don't get it. I'm sure that you could get Shep to explain it to me..... @@

@calfoxwc said:

Heck's reply about Biden's call for impeachment...

" ........................ Halliburton... mumble...........Romney.... mumble.......Newt............."cough"

I would get involved but over the years me having a clear vision and understanding vision is not part of todays America or better having America a vision to go backwards...........I will pass.......

good luck and use your brains........... make sure your thinking is outside the box.......right now America's box is about an 1/2 inch wide............which makes self destruction an absolute

" ........................ Halliburton... mumble...........Romney.... mumble.......Newt............."cough"

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Newt is going to give Mitt Romney a run for his money:

Here's Newt last week: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. … It’s also an ideological problem. The United States doesn’t need anybody’s permission. We don’t need to have NATO, who frankly, won’t bring much to the fight. We don’t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening."

Here's Newt today: "I think that two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a lot. I think that the problems we have in Pakistan, Egypt — go around the region. We could get engaged by this standard in all sorts of places. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces."

So Heck....

Ya like that better than the Biden call for impeachment?

(Let me guess ....)

WSS

*******************************************

That's an excellent suggestion, PE. Especially since Obamao dilly dallied around, and it took way too long to protect the rebellion members.

You don't know who will come into power within the ranks of the several factions of rebels. I think Obamao kept voting "PRESENT" until he was

given some serious criticism by the military and intel officials.

Most other admins, you could figure they tried your idea first, PE... but it wouldn't work.

THIS admin, like Carter's... don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Besides knee jerk attack or defense do any of you guys have a take on the potential mess we're facing?

It's beginning to look like a choice between an angry and psychotic Khadaffi and AQ or their allies.

What's the upside here?

Anybody?

WSS

Sorry about all the typos.

WSS

@heckofajobbrownie said:

I can't tell what you're saying. What is a weak attempt at political satire again?

Obama and Mother-In-Law getting away from the DC winters while our scud missles fly and our military personnel are in harms way.

@chicopee-john said:

Come on, Heck. This is an -admittadly weak - attempt at political satire. Not the quality of your team's guys like Mahar, Stewart et al. Give it up, already.

PS For obvious reasons, I'd expect Obama to be well versed in anything basketball.

I can't tell what you're saying. What is a weak attempt at political satire again?

Now that Dems are bitterly criticizing Obamao, it's hard to say that he isn't a disastrous choice for pres.

And Shep was "frightened" by the evil specter of Bush.

He surely is stone-cold terrified now, since the bark a good while ago, completely fell off the

ugly Obamao tree.

That tree is rightly plagued by woodpeckers on all sides.

It's too bad Shep didn't show up to bitterly bemoan the violent, "frightening" rhetoric of the left. That would have been consistent for once.

Obamao is now directly contradicting himself at every turn. Not good. How's that "Obamao will twang his magic twanger and bring us and the world all together" working for ya, liberals?

Liberal translation: " ........... ............................................. ............................"

@heckofajobbrownie said:

You can't bemoan the politics of it all while you repeat the political attacks, John. You might as well pick up the one about how he's spending all of his time on his NCAA bracket, too. And no, I don't think it's "bad symbolism" to announce the operation from the White House, and then leave to go on your scheduled trade mission to Brazil.

Come on, Heck. This is an -admittadly weak - attempt at political satire. Not the quality of your team's guys like Mahar, Stewart et al. Give it up, already.

PS For obvious reasons, I'd expect Obama to be well versed in anything basketball.

I agree with much of what Toop says but Drum too, despite his snarky "Leave Brittany alone" tone.

While "dithering" may make the US look weak and indecisive I think it's important to know who these rebels are. Even the state dept admits Al Queda is probably a part of the uprising, and honestly it sounds like one of their goals.

Can we trust them to play ball if we help them out? Did Iran?

If we thought we could trust them we shoulda gone all out.

If not........

And to go to congress so every member can grandstand? C'mon, that'd go on for months.

Khaddafi is a dirtball. Too bad somebody didn't just pick him off.

And no it's humanitarian. It really wasn't in Iraq. Lets stop pretending we don't care about our own interests.

However we're in it now.

We need to hope he falls and falls soon and that the new assholes appreciate who bailed them out. I doubt that.

And I think we all know what kind of infighting and bickering goes on among white hose staff.

Lets hope the winner guessed right.

WSS

@chicopee-john said:

LOL, it is bad symbolism - at the very least - Heck. Why is his mother in law traveling with them?

As David Gurgen said last night, Obama has to return home and explain things to the American public.

Do you agree with that?

I said days ago that he's got to do a better job explaining a number of things, and this is the biggest one right now. But the idea that going on his planned trip to Brazil was a "vacation" is just nonsense. You can't bemoan the politics of it all while you repeat the political attacks, John. You might as well pick up the one about how he's spending all of his time on his NCAA bracket, too.

And no, I don't think it's "bad symbolism" to announce the operation from the White House, and then leave to go on your scheduled trade mission to Brazil.

Here's Newt last week: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. … It’s also an ideological problem. The United States doesn’t need anybody’s permission. We don’t need to have NATO, who frankly, won’t bring much to the fight. We don’t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening."

Here's Newt today: "I think that two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is a lot. I think that the problems we have in Pakistan, Egypt — go around the region. We could get engaged by this standard in all sorts of places. I would not have intervened. I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Qaddafi. I think there are a lot of other allies in the region we could have worked with. I would not have used American and European forces."

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Kevin Drum, because he's almost always right:

"I'm not likely to blog very much about Libya, but I have to say there's an air of unreality surrounding a lot of the commentary that's starting to get on my nerves. Criticizing Obama for not consulting Congress is one thing. It's not as if this is some kind of unprecedented break with past practice or anything, but still. I get it.

But the "dithering" complaint? Give me a break. When did it suddenly become a personality defect to decline to intervene in a foreign rebellion the instant it broke out? Isn't there anyone left who appreciates the fact that Obama still retains a few shreds of anti-interventionist instinct and moves in a deliberate fashion?

Then there's the "why did he change his mind?" nonsense. Answer: because when events on the ground are moving fast, presidents change their minds. How? Usually by first holding a meeting and getting lots of input. Obama changed his mind last Tuesday in exactly the same way that every president since George Washington has changed his mind.

And then the "following, not leading" complaint. Look: if the only thing you actually care about is showing just how manly the United States can be, this makes sense. But that's a pretty stupid justification. There's just no reason why America should be required to take the leadership role in every military action around the globe.

Finally, there's all the handwringing over why we're intervening in Libya but not Bahrain or the Congo or Yemen. Please. Muammar Qaddafi is a terrorist and thug who's been on practically everyone's shit list around the world for decades. He has no allies, no friends, and not much firepower. Getting rid of him looks like a doable mission, and there's no one really opposed. Other places either don't look very doable or else their autocrats happen to be U.S. allies. Maybe that's not the most honorable reason in the world for leaving them alone, but it's a reason followed by pretty much every national leader since the first nomad planted a wheat field in Ur and settled down. We shouldn't act quite so wide-eyed and shocked that the United States does too.

Look: I'm not really happy about the intervention in Libya. Like a lot of people, I'd like to know what our actual goals are. What's more, I'm not sure it'll be the cakewalk that Hillary Clinton and Nicolas Sarkozy seem to think, and I believe that for a variety of reasons the United States is best served by not giving anyone an excuse for thinking that the current round of rebellions in the Middle East are backed by American power and interests. It's better for us to keep a pretty low profile right now.

But an awful lot of the criticism is just so unremittingly juvenile that I can hardly stand listening to it anymore. Time to grow up, people."

On "dithering"... there is a very real timing issue here: by the time we committed to Libya, the rebellion was all but put down. We missed whatever window might have ever existed for getting in and bringing about a swift end to the conflict and Qaddafi. Now we are supporting weak and splintered rebels against a government blanketed in human shields. So while I'm glad that Obama has a few shreds of anti-interventionist instinct (if he does), the delay might have resulted in us heading over there at a time when the mission is considerably more challenging and unclear.

On changing his mind... my impression is that this is mostly a creation of the Obama PR team. I suppose it's possible that he did change his mind, but it's just as possible that he didnt. What we do know is that that's the story the White House is telling and plans to stick by. I can't muster much feeling about this, since I dont have any confidence that I know what happened. Of course, there are others who think that he has changed his mind on the issue of intervention altogether, which, while more tenuous, is something that would be quite upsetting to a strong supporter.

On following not leading... the problem here is that we are going to be the ones doing all the dirty work regardless. All but one of those ships on the first night were ours, so what's the argument for us not having command? It seems like political positioning, allowing Obama to frame this as more of an international effort, "we arent even taking the lead. we just supporting other countries..." when in fact, we are of course the ones spending the most money, risking the most lives, and doing the most work.

On choosing Libya over other countries... if Obama had spent more time making the case for Libya being a uniquely tough problem that is uniquely tough to solve, then he wouldnt be facing this criticism. But he didnt want to sound like Donald Rumsfeld, so the White House spent the first 3 days leaking stories about the deciding vote coming from humanitarian advisors to the president. If this is mostly a humanitarian effort, then you're stuck explaining why you think this one is more important than the others. It isnt, really, so I dont have a problem with this. But again, he created his own problem here. He wanted the support of people that support humanitarian interventions, and now he has to take the corresponding criticism.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

John, the president is not on vacation. He's not even on 'vacation.'

LOL, it is bad symbolism - at the very least - Heck. Why is his mother in law traveling with them?

As David Gurgen said last night, Obama has to return home and explain things to the American public.

Do you agree with that?

@mr.-t said:

John, are you saying the words "Don't Tread on Me"? If so then that is why a lot of folks have joined the Tea Party movement. They are sick and tired of the status quo from both parties.

In many ways, I support the spirit of the Tea Party movement. I am not a student of each and every action by those involved so I can't say I am or am not a 'member'.

PS I do have a 'Don't Tread On Me' lapel pin I like to wear now and then.

Obama piddled around until serious people in gov, especially the military,

said we need to help resolve the crisis over in Libya. No, Obamao isn't on

"vacation".... he never has gone to work in the first place to TAKE a vacation.

Obamao still thinks he's able to simply vote "PRESENT" like in his short past.

He's a loser as an AMERICAN, he's a loser as a leader, .... now he's being

called to be impeached... by some LEFTIST Congress people....

What the heyl ever happed to Shep's declaration that Obamao was going to make us "loved" in the world?

Where the freakin is Obamao's "magic twanger" of peace and unity?

Where in the heyl is the president that was going to have the most transparent presidency?

I'll tell you where. It's in the minds of the leftist, sold out to Dems unions, media, and Shep's as well.