Bin Laden, dead. Qaddafi will likely wish he was. Both came on Obama’s watch. He can take more credit for the former than the latter (the Libyan rebels defeated Qaddafi, with considerable assistance from NATO). But he did what W. and Reagan could not.
Unfortunately for Obama, economic concerns have persisted. On his watch.
- Libyan People Win, Qaddafi & Bachmann Lose (themoderatevoice.com)
Watch the live stream as Libyans topple a tyrant.
There’s no debating whether Limbaugh is a buffoon. Further evidence:
Obama and Mrs. Clinton are suggesting now that we make it official, that we start arming the rebels in Libya. They are suggesting that we arm Al-Qaeda – and yet, ladies and gentlemen, we, you and me, are the extremists. We are arming Al-Qaeda in Libya!
This guy’s got a chip on his shoulder about the country. He doesn’t believe in exceptionalism about America, doesn’t believe in America’s greatness. One of the reasons he’s not doing anything in Libya with Khadafy — has anybody got a clue? — is he doesn’t believe we have the moral authority to do anything other than mouth a bunch of words in the first place.
Can we at least agree that too many people have opinions on subjects they know nothing about? Why would anyone listen to Limbaugh, or Ed Schultz, for that matter, on Libya. Their opinions aren’t formed on experience or knowledge, just regurgitated talking points.
There’s good reason to oppose the military intervention in Libya, but “because Obama supports it” isn’t one of them. That’s nothing more than fourth-grade ideology.
Been moving all weekend so am totally out of the loop. Hear things are going well in Libya. That’s nice. Perhaps we can salvage some of Gaddafi’s muumuus for Newt, who needs the wiggle room (he was for intervening in Libya before and after he was against it).
As we know Newt’s passion can lead him astray. He would’ve never cheated on his wife had he not loved America so damn much (his words).
VAN SUSTEREN: What would you do about Libya?
GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening, communicate to the Libyan military that Gadhafi was gone and that the sooner they switch sides, the more like they were to survive, provided help to the rebels to replace him. …
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. And we don’t have to send troops. All we have to do is suppress his air force, which we could do in minutes.
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.
- WATCH: Newt Gingrich Was For A No-Fly Zone Before He Was Against It (businessinsider.com)