One senses a certain chill in the feet of the Old Gray Lady as they cover their President's latest foreign adventure and report on Obama's delusional "days, not weeks" timeline for US military involvement:
Obama Warns Libya, but Attacks Go On
Gosh, that headline is a real bunker-buster on my morale. Are they suggesting that Obama is impotent and irrelevant?
It gets worse. Much worse:
Mr. Obama used tough language that was at times reminiscent of President George W. Bush before the war in Iraq.
OMG - the Times broke out the dreaded Bush comparison? If they use the word "Cheneyesque" (and on the topic of Gitmo, they just might), you will know the love affair is finally over.
The Times plays Hamlet to Obama's, well, Hamlet. Can we find criticism of his dithering? Yes we can:
“If Qaddafi does not comply with the resolution, the international community will impose consequences, and the resolution will be enforced through military action,” Mr. Obama said, laying out a policy decision made after several weeks in which the administration sent conflicting signals about its willingness to use force to aid the rebels at a time of upheaval throughout the Arab world.
And can we find support for the dithering? Yes we can:
But unlike Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama cast the United States in a supporting, almost reluctant role, reflecting the clear desire of the Pentagon, which has been strongly resistant to another American war in the Middle East.
Ahh, well, we don't want to get involved but what's a superpower to do when both France and the Arab League bat their baby blues?
Say it with me - they told Glenn that if he voted for McCain we would be taken into wars with neither Congressional approval nor public debate.
SENDING A STRONG SIGNAL: The Times gets inside the decision process and reassures us that Obama is commited to vacillation and weakness. After explaining that this is Hillary's war, they deliver this jaw-dropper:
On Thursday, during an hour-and-a -half meeting, Mr. Obama signed off on allowing American pilots to join Europeans and Arabs in military strikes against the Libyan government.
The president had a caveat, though. The American involvement in military action in Libya should be limited — no ground troops — and finite. “Days, not weeks,” a senior White House official recalled him saying.
"Days, not weeks"? Seriously? Because several folks (Ross Douthat, Jeffrey Goldberg, Clive Crook) have made the seemingly obvious point that if Qadaffi simply accepts a cease fire in place (which is, after all, what the UN requested), that may not result in the fall of his government. In which case we may be propping up the rebels in Benghazi for years, not days. Is Obama really not aware of this possibility? Does he seriously think the US will abandon its role in the no-fly zone after a few days if the situation is unresolved? Or is he really just too focused on the NCAA upsets to think clearly about this? This "days, not weeks" timeline is absurd, but it seems utterly consistent with the mindset that brought the headscratching "surge and retreat" announcement on Afghanistan.
I envision a slight recasting of Hillary's Eleven, a star-studded caper film with Hillary Clinton asking Barack Obama "Are you in or out?" Because it doesn't sound like Barry realizes we can't be in for just a day or two.
LADIES NIGHT OUT: Is my snark-detector misfiring? I think the Times is showing less than full respect in this next passage, although I may be guilty of projection:
The change [in Administration policy] became possible, though, only after Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action to avert a potential humanitarian catastrophe, according to senior administration officials speaking only on condition of anonymity. Ms. Power is a former journalist and human rights advocate; Ms. Rice was an Africa adviser to President Clinton when the United States failed to intervene to stop the Rwanda genocide, which Mr. Clinton has called his biggest regret.
Now, the three women were pushing for American intervention to stop a looming humanitarian catastrophe in Libya.
Well, thank heaven Barry listened to a former journalist and not his defense specialists. Apparently the boring middle-aged guys wanted to stay home:
In joining Ms. Rice and Ms. Power, Mrs. Clinton made an unusual break with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, who, along with the national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, and the counterterrorism chief, John O. Brennan, had urged caution. Libya was not vital to American national security interests, the men argued, and Mr. Brennan worried that the Libyan rebels remained largely unknown to American officials, and could have ties to Al Qaeda.
No worries - America's role in Libya will be winding down by next weekend and won't distract us from the Final Four, or even the Elite Eight. Sweet Jiminy.
FROM COLD (BUT INQUIRING) MINDS: I never liked "chickenhawks" as a slur, but given their slim military credentials will libs be calling Hillary, Samantha and Susan the "chick-hawks"?
You are en fuego tonight,TM. Let me take a stab here--you are as fed up as I am at this ignorant, childish ass.
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2011 at 11:18 PM
I have a friend who voted because he said a vote for McCain meant that his son would be drafted. I kid you not! Obama has to be brought kicking and screaming because his SOFT ON TERROR.
Posted by: maryrose | March 18, 2011 at 11:23 PM
should read voted for Obama. and he is. It's obviously too late for me.
Posted by: maryrose | March 18, 2011 at 11:25 PM
I think SCAM would pay good money for your friend's name and address. For one thing we have some nuclear decontamination spray he might like to buy.
Posted by: clarice | March 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM
Well if Hillary has been telling Barrack that he's wrong on foreign policy, it makes me wonder if Obama still has this glowing opinion of her that he shared with us last month:
"There is a growing bipartisan consensus that Hillary Clinton is the best ever Secretary of State, US President Barack Obama has said."
Posted by: daddy | March 18, 2011 at 11:47 PM
In October 2008 I told a friend that I was hoping Obama would be no worse than Carter. Ah, well.
Posted by: jorgxmckie | March 18, 2011 at 11:48 PM
This last point stood out to me: "Counterterrorism chief Brennan worried that the Libyan rebels remained largely unknown to American officials, and could have ties to Al Qaeda."
I conclude that the state department and CIA are so ignorant and disorganized that we don't know at all what is going on in Libya. It is hard to act when any action might turn out to be plain wrong. I suppose that they eventually thought up this "humanitarian catastrophe" line as a cover. They can now "do something" for a short time and avoid any major policy decision.
If we want the rebels to win, then we should attack Qaddafi directly, instead of running a "safe skies" operation intended to preserve an expensive stalemate. If we want the rebels to lose, then we should do nothing, or even attack the rebels. Playing referee in a war is a loser's job.
Posted by: Andrew_M_Garland | March 19, 2011 at 12:00 AM
well, they sure waited until the preponderance of the opinion polls had been analyzed. I think they figured the PR hit would have been fatal.
As it is, I think Obama's international reputation, especially because he canceled his VERY IMPORTANT SPEECH in Rio, is deep, deep down the toilet.
Posted by: matt | March 19, 2011 at 12:03 AM
So this growing but anonymous bipartisan consensus slots her in ahead of (to name a few) Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Marshall, Daniel Webster, Cordell Hull, George Marshall and Dean Acheson? On the basis of two years on the job? In which she has done...?
Do words have meaning for this man?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 12:05 AM
In the days when the major media were not hopelessly in love with the sitting president, this is what was called an "administration in disarray."
I think I will just say that I don't think this thing has been thought through, and let it go at that.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 12:15 AM
The President hasn't even asked for an AUMF yet, has he? And when he claims the "international community" will be the ones who impose consequences, the things that spring to my mind are:
On a related note, I saw the talking head on CNN(J) say one of the first steps is to bomb the Libyan runways (because the Libyan jets are such a huge threat to Western forces dontchaknow?) . . . a mission the Europeans are actually quite good at . . . but unfortunately not likely to be decisive.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | March 19, 2011 at 12:24 AM
Tut tut, Cecil. It doesn't matter if O diesn't know what he's doing, he has his right hand gal SusanRice to steer this ship of state thru the shoals.
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 12:30 AM
And if the goal were to talk 'em to death, I'd never dream of questioning their qualifications.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | March 19, 2011 at 12:36 AM
He doesn't really need an AUMF, but it would surely get Gaddafi's attention if he were to get one anyway. Is it certain thatthe congress would give it to him? (My guess is that it would, but perhaps we'll see.)
I find myself thinking, if I'm the senior US Naval officer on the scene, from whom am I to expect my orders?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 12:36 AM
Kucinich says he needs an AUMF..And Andrew sullivan's bitching--HEH''Any minute now they haul out Cindy Sheehan again.
Niters.
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 12:45 AM
Yeah, if he's planning on attacking another country, I don't see how he can get by without some sort of approval from Congress (if not specifically an AUMF) . . . it's not like this can be called self-defense.
If he doesn't want to use the military (or only in a support role), then I agree he probably doesn't need it. Which is why I suspect that's what he intends.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | March 19, 2011 at 12:56 AM
Do words have meaning for this man?
Sure. He means to use them as a distraction.
Posted by: PD | March 19, 2011 at 01:40 AM
"...the protestors, all left leaning social movements associated with the Socialist Workers Party, PSTU ... What is most ironic about the Brazil protests is that the PSTU is a hard core socialist party in Brazil. While anti-Obama protests in the US consider Obama a socialist, the socialists in Brazil consider him a yankee capitalist, the bane of the Latin American left."
Posted by: PD | March 19, 2011 at 01:41 AM
The president can, without a doubt, send the armed forces into action without any congressional authorization if he chooses to do so--if he issues the orders, the orders will be carried out.
If he does such a thing, he will be in violation of the Wae Powers Act, but no president has ever conceded the constitutionality of that Act (which is ver much in doubt), and in any event the Act prescribes no judicial remedy. The only congressional remedy is to cut off funds, but although that has been threatened I don't believe it has ever been done. In this instance I think the president would pay a substantial price if he acts without one.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 01:49 AM
Just saw this on Facebook:
Another milestone for the King of Rock 'n' Roll! Today Elvis Presley hit the 3 million mark for fans on Facebook. Thank you, thank you very much! Elvis fans ROCK!
Pretty good for someone dead over 30 years.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | March 19, 2011 at 03:05 AM
BENGHAZI, Libya (AP) — A plane has been shot down over the main rebel-held city in eastern Libya. An Associated Press reporter saw the plane go down in flames outside Benghazi early Saturday after the area came under shelling. A black cloud went up over the city’s southern outskirts.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | March 19, 2011 at 04:01 AM
Former Secy of State and rabid moonbat Warren Christopher has died.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | March 19, 2011 at 04:02 AM
I know all of our avid readers are chomping at the bit for these books:
Well fiction has always seemed her strongest asset.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | March 19, 2011 at 04:04 AM
Hmmm.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | March 19, 2011 at 04:07 AM
Bring Bush.
======
Posted by: Not his dark effigy. | March 19, 2011 at 06:13 AM
"That Damned CatFish", or "Yay, I'm the Queen Mumm!"
During the Air Raids of WW2 Buckingham Palace had avoided any major German bombing, and IIRC the brunt of the bombing had been clobbering the East End low rent district. Well finally the Palace took a good hit and got some significant damage, and the Queen (later Queen Mother), while traipsing around immaculately dressed to inspect the damage, was reported to have said for the Newsreels, "I'm glad we have been bombed. Now I can look the East End in the face". I always loved that story.
Well anyhow, now I can look Narita in the face (At least a little bit, and this is not to say they are low rent). That big ugly Catfish, Namazu, the mythical Japanese Catfish who lives under the ground and magically causes earthquakes when he gets cranky and starts flapping his tail, just flapped it again. T'was only a 5.9, but I had laid down my copy of "Thank You Jeeve's" about 7 PM local, and was napping for the late night trip home. Suddenly a very good jolt woke me right up in my bed on the 11th floor of the Narita Hilton, and the whole place started shaking quite lively. The duration I suppose was extended because the building kept swaying back and forth for what seemed to me quite a bit, so even tho' its only a 5.9. I think I can satisfactorily say, like the Queen Mumm, "Good, I'm glad I got Earthquaked. Now I can look the Narita-saner's in the face."
While googling for Namazu, the Catfish that causes Japan's earthquakes, I came across a bunch of interesting and fun old woodcuts from the 1700's, which show different tales of the Catfish, and how he periodically gets free from his keeper God, Kashima, who nods off and lets the Catfish start shaking his tail, thus causing earthquakes. Here's a quick link to some of those old woodprints, but I especially enjoyed this woodcut of the God Kashima taking 3 guilty Catfish that caused 3 earthquakes as prisoners to the Eel Broiler to be cooked and eaten, but the Union of Firefighters and Carpenters beg the God to have mercy and please not destroy the catfish because even tho' Earthquakes are terrible for Japan and its citizens, earthquakes are great for keeping them Unionized Wisconsin Teachers errr Japanese Firefighter's and Carpenters employed.
Now if only I could work in the NCAA's and Bertie going to school in Tobacco Wode, why I think I'd have covered just about everything we've talked about these last 2 weeks.
Sayonara!
Posted by: daddy | March 19, 2011 at 07:26 AM
O and his pals forced their agenda on the US,so they made him President and now everyone is upset.I think she should be African educated at Harvard and at some point in there with a gun.O and his pals will throw billions at this and they will be vindicated for all those nasty demands for cash,CIA works and leaders etc.They will have truly liberated ME,not like Iraq or Afghanistan under Repubs.
Posted by: JHG | March 19, 2011 at 08:46 AM
how long would Cindy Sheehan last camped on the sidewalk outside Barry's house in Hyde Park? I envision goons from SEIU with bullhorns in her face until she scurries off in fear. at least she'd leave knowing what democracy looks like.
Posted by: mark c | March 19, 2011 at 09:03 AM
It is only my deep love for the USA, and my growing alarm at the severe dangers and growing threats arising from Obama's incompetence that keep me from laughing my head off at the sheer buffoonery of this administration.
Posted by: Steve S | March 19, 2011 at 09:05 AM
Ah, Daddy. Good choice. Jeeves oils the angry water and calms the stormy seas.
Posted by: sbw | March 19, 2011 at 09:15 AM
OK. He's really just not that smart.
New Wodehouse chapter: "Kyrie and the Impending Doom," in which Duke's opponets face The Wrath.
Posted by: MarkO | March 19, 2011 at 09:23 AM
I have to vote 'present' here, but there's no one in that room I have any confidence in. What is the goal here, you have to state it, and outline the means you're going to use to achieve it, I know, that wasn't covered in 'community organizing 101'. One assumes the Egyptian army will provide logistical support
to the rebels, while we take out their air defenses, but even the last part isn't spelled
out. Maybe we'll have to wait out of news from India, for clarification
Posted by: narciso | March 19, 2011 at 09:32 AM
Obama's working "behind the scenes." (Does that mean he's a roadie? AV crew? Nerd?)
That's his way of saying that anything good that happens belongs to him.
Posted by: MarkO | March 19, 2011 at 09:38 AM
And now this: "Meanwhile, leaders from the US, the UK, France, and Arab countries are to meet in Paris to discuss military action in Libya."
Why not? I've eaten at Maxim's. I'd go back.
Posted by: MarkO | March 19, 2011 at 09:42 AM
Apparently we have silently bugged out of Bahrain, moving our ships out for "exercises" in Oman.
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 09:46 AM
Majority of New York City voters think teacher layoffs should be based on performance: poll
Cops, too.
Makes you wonder whether this Wisconsin stand was a good move for Big Labor.
Posted by: Extraneus | March 19, 2011 at 09:48 AM
I've noticed something that I haven't seen on the news or on a blog yet.
There are no carriers. The nearest carrier was on the other side of the Suez canal when the UN voted on the resolution.
No one told the Navy to be ready for a no-fly zone. Why?
Because the President only made up his mind a few days ago. Or he changed his mind.
Either way, it's irresponsible. We probably won't pay for this indecision because the Libyans are weak, but next time it could cost us.
Posted by: John Lynch | March 19, 2011 at 09:50 AM
I think you overestimate the amount of nuance available in the NY Times story. The Times is surely aware that its readership is generally ignorant of most issues and needs to be led step by step to the desired position. I read this story as classic water carrying by the Times for Barry with a dash of "don't worry, it's only days", thrown in.
Posted by: Steve W from Ford | March 19, 2011 at 10:00 AM
They will have truly liberated ME,not like Iraq or Afghanistan under Repubs.
It's just as I have suspected: Our Luciferian visitors are liberals.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | March 19, 2011 at 10:01 AM
Narciso,
It started as a reasonable French backed military coup but Daffy's muscle and will were a bit underestimated. The French backed Libyan
traitorspatriots should have assassinated the group at the top immediately. Had they done so, they wouldn't have had to drag the UN into the usurpation of an established state under the tissue thin pretext of 'humanitarian' relief (Darfur, anyone?) of a populace that is fairly well subsidized in comparison to others under the heel of Mahometan tyrants.If France wants Libya, then let France expend the blood and treasure necessary to obtain it. After all, they have the wonderful freedom fighters of their Foreign Legion who can surely subdue the bloodthirsty African mercenaries employed by Daffy without any American help.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | March 19, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Is Obama "Slow" ... as in stupid?
Think back. When did you know, I mean really know, that sanctions were not going to stop Libya’s K. Daffy? A week ago … two weeks ago …. last month ….. even before sanctions were imposed because sanctions never work? Forget whether you think the US ought to get involved in Libya or not, when did you KNOW sanctions were not going to stop K. Daffy?
Well, congratulations you little Mensa candidate. You’re smarter than the President. Because the “administration sources” let it slip that Barack Hussein Obama didn’t know it until Tuesday.
ABC's Jake Tapper does the best he can with the material he has, but nothing disguises this fiasco:
For President Obama, Libyan Tipping Point Came Tuesday: "What We're Doing Isn't Stopping Him"
On Tuesday, President Obama became clear that diplomatic efforts to stop the brutality of Libyan dictator Col. Moammar Gadhafi weren’t working.
Presented with intelligence about the push of the Gadhafi regime to the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, the president told his national security team "what we're doing isn't stopping him.”
I’m not sure whether to believe this or not. If it’s spin to make Obama look good it’s a huge fail. We can go back to assuming that Obama was pushed into supporting action to counter the public perception that he was a feckless bystander.
If it accurately reflects Obama’s judgment or intelligence it indicates that a serious effort should be made to impeach him as a danger to the Republic on grounds of stupidity.
Posted by: Moneyrunner | March 19, 2011 at 10:04 AM
Because the President only made up his mind a few days ago. Or he changed his mind.
Or, as the NYT reported, Obama is purposely limiting U.S. participation to support-only with air traffic/signal jamming aircraft.
Posted by: DebinNC | March 19, 2011 at 10:04 AM
I'm not sure, but I thought USS Nimitz had entered the Med via Suez about a week ago. Did she leave again?
But we've only got ten of them now, and three or four have to be in port at any given time. And there are two wars, assorted hot spots, and a lot of ocean out there.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 10:07 AM
You can read that well between the lines, Rick, I didn't they think they had much of a DGSE presence in the region, then again they could be operating out of Chad. There doesn't seem to be one figure in the opposition, to rally around, except for Jalil, then again
maybe they know Alinsky as well.
Posted by: narciso | March 19, 2011 at 10:13 AM
I have been told several times recently by other military moms that their sons have been told they are being shipped to Italy as the base for Libya.
Most of those being sent had later orders for Afghanistan for May and this summer.
Posted by: rse | March 19, 2011 at 10:18 AM
"The American" (George Clooney) is out on DVD, so I got it from the library and watched it last night.
Afterward, I thought to myself, "What was that about, anyway?"
Posted by: PD | March 19, 2011 at 10:21 AM
DoT==From Dennis Sevakis
://formerspook.blogspot.com/2011/03/saturday-skedaddle.html
Friday, March 18, 2011
The Saturday Skedaddle
Almost without notice, ships of the U.S. 5th Fleet in Bahrain slipped from their berths and headed into the Persian Gulf early Saturday. An "extended" exercise with Oman was the official reason given, but few believe it. As the security situation in the Manama continues to deteriorate, the Navy cannot afford to have even a single vessel--and its crew--in a port that may be hostile in a few days (or less).
Radio talk show host John Batchelor was among the first to report the news. Experts he spoke with said our relations with key Middle East allies have reached the breaking point:
The news from Manama, the capital of the small island state of Bahrain, is that the Fifth Fleet HQ has gone on maneuvers to Oman for an indefinite time frame. In sum, bug-out from the proxy war in Bahrain between Riyadh and Tehran. Am told that the IRGC has staffed and funded the so-called protesters. The social media messaging that now floods the web, #bahrain, is suspect of being an IRGC disinformation campaign. Of most significance, am told the Bahrain confrontation marks the breakdown of the 65-year-long alliance between Washington and Riyadh.
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 10:26 AM
I have to vote 'present' here, but there's no one in that room I have any confidence in. What is the goal here, you have to state it, and outline the means you're going to use to achieve it, I know, that wasn't covered in 'community organizing 101'.
Quite the opposite, actually. Community organizing involves deliberately hiding your real motivations. Otherwise, those on whose behalf you claim to be acting will realize your socialist ideals and reject you and your agenda.
Posted by: PD | March 19, 2011 at 10:26 AM
DoT, the Enterprise is in the northern Red Sea, just south of Suez. Just a hop, skip, and a jump (1000 miles) over Egypt to Libya. I'm sure Egypt would allow flyover and tankers could refuel jets along the way.
Posted by: sbw | March 19, 2011 at 10:32 AM
More from Cousin Maggie in USS Mustin:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 10:44 AM
Great post from Maggie, DoT. So much good that we never hear about is done by our military.
Posted by: MaryD | March 19, 2011 at 10:51 AM
The other night, however, we did transit through quite a large snow storm that covered the ship with enough of a layer that in the morning we had two snowmen on the bridge wings standing as extra lookouts.
That is priceless.
Posted by: PD | March 19, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Golly, I love that girl, DoT. You all must be so prou of her.
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 10:56 AM
I misspoke about Nimitz; should have said Enterprise. And as far as I can tell she is indeed back in the Red Sea.
Great-nephew Link has orders to USS Stout (DDG 55) off the coast of Libya but is having trouble getting to her. Arrived Athens a couple of days ago and is now headed for Stout aboard an oiler; as of now he expects to get aboard Stout on March 29. Sure hope he gets aboard before they squeeze off any Tomahawks or SAMs.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 10:58 AM
Smart power!
Posted by: bunky | March 19, 2011 at 11:00 AM
I've lost track of the threads. France now flying over Libya.
Posted by: MayBee | March 19, 2011 at 11:02 AM
Gosh, DoT, your posting of Maggie's email make me tear up with joy and pride at what our military does in times of crisis.
Posted by: centralcal | March 19, 2011 at 11:06 AM
Off to Rio!
Words fail me. (h/t Newsbird)
Posted by: centralcal | March 19, 2011 at 11:19 AM
spreading Maggie's reports all around
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/03/19/latest-on-japanese-rescue-operations/
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 11:22 AM
And, DoT, if you don't mind, I'll publish a version editing out names to bring our local readers closer to the situation.
Posted by: sbw | March 19, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action
Would it be ungentlemanly to inquire as to the military service records of these three ladies, esp. the combat experience which alone provides the moral authority to do what we are told they have done?
Posted by: bgates | March 19, 2011 at 11:26 AM
Does Maggie know we have adopted her?
Posted by: Old Lurker | March 19, 2011 at 11:29 AM
110316-N-1447C-002 PACIFIC OCEAN (March 16, 2011) Sailors aboard the guided-missile destroyer USS Mustin (DDG 89) load food, clothing, blankets, hygiene products and other goods donated by Sailors embarked aboard Mustin into helicopters for delivery to victims of a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and subsequent tsunami in Japan. Mustin is off the coast of Japan supporting Operation Tomodachi. (U.S. Navy photo by Command Master Chief Rachel Costello/Released)
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 11:33 AM
We all love her too, Clarice, and are just bursting with pride. Please go right ahead with whatever you would like to publish, sbw.
I am going to send he a brief note telling her of her growing legion of supporters, and I'll be sure she understands she's now in the public domain.
I just wish all the world could meet that young lady.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 11:37 AM
...esp. the combat experience...
How quickly some forget Hillary's gritty performance under fire in Bosnia.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM
Salute to Maggie!
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 19, 2011 at 11:45 AM
... and for all those on Left that say the military is always itching for a fight ...
... clearly the Pentagon is not the instigator here. They are just following orders.Yet to be seen is if the old feminist myth, that more women in government would result in few wars, is true.
Posted by: Neo | March 19, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Maggie. Maggie. Maggie.
Posted by: MarkO | March 19, 2011 at 11:55 AM
--Are they suggesting that Obama is impotent and irrelevant?--
I'm gonna cut the guy a break on the impotent part.
Posted by: Ignatz | March 19, 2011 at 11:55 AM
LUN for the sooper geniuses in the MFM showing off their awesomeness when it comes to military reporting.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 19, 2011 at 11:58 AM
I'm old enough to remember that though the press made us think it was the military which pushed for greater involvement in Viet Name, it was, in fact, the Kennedy "best and brightest". Surely the three harpies will do the same media twist should things fail to work out.
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM
Muffer vs Gates? I got no dog in that fight. More popcorn.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 19, 2011 at 12:13 PM
**Nam**
Posted by: clarice | March 19, 2011 at 12:21 PM
CH, I am surprised the Arizona won't be participating in the Mediterranean Sea.
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 19, 2011 at 12:43 PM
Don't give 'em ideas, TK.
Posted by: Captain Hate | March 19, 2011 at 12:46 PM
My ear just quit ringing with "No blood for oil." Is it safe to assume we wont be hearing that refrain after this verse? Somehow I think I put my money on the dont pass line with this shooter. They were not anti war, were they just cheering for the enemy?
Posted by: Gmax | March 19, 2011 at 12:50 PM
Gmax-
I'm waiting for the next brilliant move of oil-for-food sanctions and financial sanctions so the "international community" can loot whatever is left of the funds from LIA and selling the oil.
Posted by: RichatUF | March 19, 2011 at 12:56 PM
Thomas Donahue, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, on the uncertainty, mandates, taxes and new regulations put upon business by the healthcare legislation..."it's a job killer"
Posted by: Army of Davids | March 19, 2011 at 01:09 PM
I guess the MFM won't check a Berth-Certificate on anything.
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 19, 2011 at 01:09 PM
Way to live up to your name, TK.
That was awesome, though.
Posted by: bgates | March 19, 2011 at 01:36 PM
Over at Drudge there is a link to an article about the violent socialist protests against Obama.
Posted by: Jane | March 19, 2011 at 01:48 PM
more good times in Rio...
Posted by: Janet | March 19, 2011 at 01:50 PM
Here is a picture of the poster in Brazil for the speech...I think it's been canceled though. Interesting placement with the Jesus statue silhouette.
Posted by: Janet | March 19, 2011 at 01:56 PM
Well, I'm surprised the French got there that fast. Not that they don't have the fighters, but getting the support stuff on line usually takes a bit more time. They also don't seem to've bothered rolling back the Libyan air defenses, which may be a bit risky.
I suspect, with absolutely no data to support it, that we're providing tanker, EW, ABCCC, and SEAD assets behind the scenes (which is fine). The only thing I wonder about is whether the Libyans can manage to down an aircraft or three, and what the acceptable loss rate is for the French (and whoever else actually flies combat sorties) fighters.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | March 19, 2011 at 02:00 PM
O.M.G. Janet. What a classy, tasteful and chic FLOTUS we have! Not.
Posted by: centralcal | March 19, 2011 at 02:01 PM
OK, this is freshly stolen, but what the hell: They informed Obama that Brazilans were protesting his visit, and he said "how many in a brazillion?"
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 02:05 PM
Barry's foot sure looks better, Janet. I hope Brazil appreciates his spin.
Posted by: Threadkiller | March 19, 2011 at 02:06 PM
So far as I am aware, no current French, Italian. Canadian or Italian aviator has ever flown a combat mission. Clould be some learning-curve issues at the start--assuming anything starts.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 02:08 PM
Didn't Samantha Power say Hillary was a mess? And didn't that cause her (Power) to withdraw from Obama's inner circle?
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | March 19, 2011 at 02:11 PM
Good Morning! Man what a night.
Interesting. I've never been to Rio,but I've been to Sao Paolo. I went to Sao Paolo 12 years ago on business. The office was 4 blocks from the hotel,but they wouldn't let us walk for fear of our safety. So we took a 20 minute cab ride each day. To go 4 blocks,and only 20 minutes because our driver knew the shortcut.
The food,however,was really really good. Meat,meat,meat,a little beans,and more meat. And the caipirinhas were excellent.
One of my fellow travelers was the project director for the software rollout. Because of her last name,I joked one night..."so are you an heiress to the Kellogg family?" Hahaha,she's a Cereal Queen. Light banter after a couple of drinks.
She said,"Why,yes,yes I am." Wait. What? Interesting. (don't even ask about her parents,worried about her virginity going into a quasi-arranged marriage,sending her to what was essentially a male prostitute to . . . um . . . give her experience. Oh my!)
She and the other fellow traveler extended their trip to Brazil to include Rio. They got mugged on/near the beach.
Anyway,turns out Ms. Kellogg's husband (she kept her last name) was a big muckety muck for the Red Cross. You shoulda seen their home up in Genesee,CO. Wowza.
I wonder if he's still with the Red Cross and is involved in the Japan efforts?
And thus ends my attempts at conflating my history with current events.
Posted by: hit and run | March 19, 2011 at 02:13 PM
Barry's foot sure looks better,
Hahahaha...yeah, I had forgotten about that. LOL! Was it his left foot? Oh my, hahaha...
Posted by: Janet | March 19, 2011 at 02:15 PM
The French at least were operating in AF, I believe. (It's defeating my google-fu at the moment, though.)
Posted by: Cecil Turner | March 19, 2011 at 02:15 PM
What I like about Obama
Obviously, the biggest problem with Bush was sending the military into an Arab Muslim country that hadn't even attacked us. Among the several things that made that offensive were
* the rush to war - it was only several months after the possibility of military involvement was raised that combat operations began
* lack of United Nations sanction - only 17 relevant resolutions were ever passed before they were enforced
* lack of Congressional oversight - the President authorized the use of military force based on the flimsy pretext of a bill passed by Congress titled "Authorization of the Use of Military Force", rather than seeking a document that had the words "declaration of war" in it; that's every bit as bad as getting no Congressional approval at all
* obvious financial motives - clearly no one approved of the murderous dictator or sought a normal working relationship with him besides the French; at the same time, one couldn't help but be suspicious of the fact that the population we were ostensibly protecting was located conveniently near the oil fields
* stretching our military - we were overburdened as it was, and our brave military despite its courage lacked the resources for yet another operation
* inflating our military - the only way to keep the bloodthirsty Pentagon beast fed was to give it the hordes of jobless young men who had no prospects in an economy that saw unemployment skyrocket above 4% in most states
* ignoring our generals - the decision to go to war was made by political hacks who had never worn a uniform
* inflaming the Arab Street - despite some touchy-feely talk about Islam, it was impossible for the Muslim world not to notice how the President made repeated, insistent proclamations of his Christianity, how he only ever used the military against Muslim targets, and how at the time the war started he'd kept the concentration camp at Guantanamo open for over a year
* wasting money - it was completely irresponsible to commit the military to an expensive mission when the President's fiscal mismanagement had resulted in a budget deficit of over $150 billion in 2002
But anyway, what I really like about Obama is that he's gone 29-3 in his bracket picks over the first two days. You have to spend a lot of time watching college basketball to be that good.
Posted by: bgates | March 19, 2011 at 02:18 PM
Ah, here's a video (of French combat missions and assorted hoorah motivational stuff).
Posted by: Cecil Turner | March 19, 2011 at 02:18 PM
Centrical @11:19
Let's hope Michelle doesn't wear a thong when she visits Copacabana beach.
Posted by: Cohen the Barbarian | March 19, 2011 at 02:20 PM
Incidentally, I learned of the President's startling success in the NCAA brackets from USA Today; it's still a pleasant surprise to see most of the comments are along the lines of my favorite,
"Odumbo goes unbeaten in 2011 White House Easter egg hunt bracket. Wins plate of cookies and glass of milk."
Posted by: bgates | March 19, 2011 at 02:23 PM
2 headlines at google -
"Residents Protest Barack Obama's Visit To Brazil"
"Brazilians Welcome Obama As Their Own : NPR"
Which is it?
Posted by: Janet | March 19, 2011 at 02:27 PM
Hit, what's this stuff about an arranged marriage etc.? Was the lady a Kellogg by birth or by marriage? Who was the husband? More, more, more...
Posted by: Danube of Thought | March 19, 2011 at 02:27 PM
I hope clarice or Glenn Reynolds or somebody can spread bgates's 2:18PM post far and wide.
Posted by: Ignatz | March 19, 2011 at 02:32 PM
Here is a picture of Obama in Brazil. He actually doesn't look too healthy.
Posted by: Janet | March 19, 2011 at 02:35 PM