Where is the Outrage?
Obama, the affirmed cream of the American crop, commits the US to war and goes to Brazil, a country that just said it wants no part of this war. Why is Obama taking the family for a weekend in Rio? Does that self-proclaimed mutt, Obama, stand for anything?
The incoherence of US policy is stunning, the media reaction incomprehensible and yet the potential consequences disastrous. Did you ever think the term "US Interests" would make you sick?
How about US interests in housing, jobs, bailing out big banks, democracy in Wisconsin and trillion plus federal deficits? What are the US interests of our legions of 19 year old IED-fodder scattered across the shitholes of Islamadom?
Where is the cry of "We don't need your fucking wars" to be fought by the US underclass for whom and for what? Why do we care about another Arab tribal war in Libya? Armed men opened fire on crowds of antigovernment protesters Friday in Yemen's capital, killing an estimated 45 people and injuring hundreds—prompting yesterday, is that in "US Interests"?
What are current "US Interests" in Egypt or Saudi Arabia? Are we bored with Egypt this week? Need a weekend break in Rio?
________________________________
WASHINGTON — In a Paris hotel room on Monday night, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton found herself juggling the inconsistencies of American foreign policy in a turbulent Middle East. She criticized the foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates for sending troops to quash protests in Bahrain even as she pressed him to send planes to intervene in Libya.
Only the day before, Mrs. Clinton — along with her boss, President Obama — was a skeptic on whether the United States should take military action in Libya. But that night, with Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces turning back the rebellion that threatened his rule, Mrs. Clinton changed course, forming an unlikely alliance with a handful of top administration aides who had been arguing for intervention.
Within hours, Mrs. Clinton and the aides had convinced Mr. Obama that the United States had to act, and the president ordered up military plans, which Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, hand-delivered to the White House the next day. 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. NY Times
preparing for Rio trip
ReplyDeleteAll our economic competitors Brazil, China, India, Russia and Germany, decided their interests demanded they stay out.
ReplyDeleteYesterday President Obama made a statement on Libya in the East :) Room of the White House. He gave a brief summary of the events that had taken place in Libya over the last few weeks and then went on to address a number of ‘non negotiable items’:
ReplyDelete‘…all attacks against civilians must stop. Qaddafi must stop his troops from advancing on Benghazi, pull them back from Ajdabiya, Misrata, and Zawiya, and establish water, electricity and gas supplies to all areas. Humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach the people of Libya. Let me be clear, these terms are not negotiable. These terms are not subject to negotiation.’’
Having read the UN résolution I see no mention of a demand pertaining to the withdrawal of of Gadaffi’s troops. So one has to assume that the ‘non negotiable’ point regarding the pull back from Ajdabiya, Misrata and Zawiya is in addition to the UN résolution. Why would Gadaffi need to comply to that demand if it’s not part of the resoltuion ?
Mr Khaled Kaalim, Libya’s deputy foreign minister, also gave a press conférence yesterday afternoon in which he said this :
‘Mr. Kaalim also said bluntly that Libya's government does not intend to remove its military forces from the towns and cities where they have been deployed and insisted that troops will remain outside the eastern city of Benghazi. That suggests that the Qaddafi government has no intention of meeting President Barack Obama's demand that forces stop advancing on Benghazi and be withdrawn from Adjadbiya, Misrata and Zawiyah.’
So, having read the UN résolution Gadaffi has noted that one of the ‘non negotiable’ items is not incorporated in it. He is not required to comply. So, why should he ?
One of the demands of the résolution is a ceasefire. It is also one of Obama’s ‘non negotiable’ points.
Yesterday morning in a press statement made by Gadaffi’s minister of foreign affairs he said that his government would comply with the request of a ceasefire, implémentation of which would be immédiate. However, during most of yesterday there were a number of reports emerging from Zawiyah and Misrata stating that fighting was continuing.
Mr Kaalim addressed thèse reports:
‘’I'm here to confirm to you that the statement made by our minister of foreign affairs this morning is credible, real and valid. And because of that we are calling for observers from Malta, China, Turkey and Germany to come to Libya as soon as possible, maybe in a matter of hours, to make sure that there is a real cease-fire on the ground. And to go to areas where still some countries are are not believing there is a real cease-fire of the ground.’’
Given the events reportedly unfolding on the outskirts of Benghazi this morning his words are questionable to say the least. Inevitably Gadaffi has issued a statement this morning claiming that it is the rebels who are in violation of the resolution:
''Libya's government says that its armed forces are under attack west of the rebel-held stronghold of Benghazi and have responded in self-defence.
This was issued in a statement carried by the official Jana news agency:
The gangs of Al-Qaeda attacked the units of the Libyan armed forces stationed to the west of Benghazi.
The statement accused the rebels of using "a helicopter and a fighter jet to bomb the Libyan armed forces in blatant violation of the no-fly zone imposed by the UN Security Council." (AlJazeera LiveBlog@9.54)
Obviously, there is quite a game of cat and mouse playing out. Gadaffi is behaving in a reasonably astute manner, second footing (albeit temporarily) the west and the rebels, by yesterday's announcement of a ceasefire (whether real or not), buying time, advancing on Benghazi,and paying no heed to ‘non negotiable’ points that are not in the resolution.
Obamas words were based on his interests in his own country (as for every president before him) - take decisions, be strong. His counterpart does the same, speaking in a usual arab language - be strong, take decisions.
ReplyDeleteYemen - no reason for Americans to intervene.
Saudi Arabia - no reason for Americans to intervene.
Sudan - no reason for Americans to intervene.
Ivory Coast - no reason for Americans to intervene.
China (with a long and cruel and well documented history of violation of human rights, along with some decades of occupation in Tibet) - no reason at all for Americans to intervene.
After Russia, Cuba, Iraq (and so many others), Libya turns to be the country that must be helped to have democratic values, defined by Obama. Why? All leaders of these countries often empathized, that there way was different from the western way. Until now, even with Obama, no leader of any country all over the world should ever say with conviction, that his country is different and that therefor it will not accept american values.
It is the choice of words of these leaders, not there politic, which urges every american president so far to intervene. Otherwise - why not Yemen? (Yesterday: 40 protesters shot dead by government.) Saudi Arabia - intervention in foreign country with army to suppress people. Shake hands with these leaders, Obama. You are so wrong.
Here is revised text of the speeches that Gaddafi's spokesman read out:
ReplyDeleteThe first letter to brother leader to Barack Obama:
"To our son, his excellency, Mr Baracka Hussein Obama. I have said to you before, that even if Libya and the United States of America enter into a war, god forbid, you will always remain a son. Your picture will not be changed. I want you to remain in the same image. I have all the people of Libya with me, and I'm prepared to die and we have all the men, children and women with me. Nothing more. Al Qaeda is an armed organisation, passing through Algeria, Mauritania and Mali. What would you do if you found them controlling American cities with the power of weapons? What would you do, so I can follow your example."
Letter to Ban Ki Moon, Sarkozy and Cameron:
"Libya is not yours, Libya is for the Libyans. The security council, their resolution is void because it is not according to the charter to interfere with the internal affairs of the country. … You have no right. You will regret if you get involved in this, our country. We can never shoot a single bullet on our people, it is Al Qaeda organisation."
While some in the German press argued that Germany has made a wise decision based on its historical experience, others predicted that Berlin will incur foreign policy damage for not supporting the no-fly zone over Libya.
ReplyDeleteThe Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung writes that Germany has made the right decision by refusing to participate in a no-fly zone over Libya. The daily newspaper argues that a no-fly zone would prove ineffective against Gadhafi's forces saying wars cannot be won from the air alone. Although Germany's abstention may have hurt its image with its partners, the country's image had already suffered under the Schröder and Merkel governments. The paper points out that it is important to remember that the German constitution forbids "offensive wars."
However, the Potsdam-based Märkische Allgemeine argues that by failing to support the no-fly zone along with its allies, Berlin has found itself in the same camp as fellow abstainers Russia and China. The daily paper criticizes the Merkel government for being hypocritical, fearing military escalation in Libya while cheering on the opposition. Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, who celebrated the democracy movement in Cairo, has lost his credibility by saying "Gadhafi must go" and then abstaining from the Security Council vote that seeks such an end, the paper opines.
The Mannheimer Morgen called Westerwelle's rejection of a no-fly zone incomprehensible. The paper claims that the German foreign minister hurt France and America's campaign for a majority in the Security Council. By deciding to largely stay out of the no-fly zone and help its allies indirectly, Chancellor Angela Merkel and Westerwelle have proven they are more willing to defend freedom in far away Afghanistan than on their own doorstep, the paper comments.
Let us not forget Hama's attack on Israel yesterday..
ReplyDelete50 mortars on civilian targets...
oh that doesnt count, they deserve it...
the arabs in the middle east should be careful at shooting at jews, they actually might shoot back...
in the meantime, the arabs in the middle east are murdering one another, as they should do, by the score...
get your popcorn, the show is STARTING!
Another UN Charley Foxtrot:
ReplyDeleteGovernment spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said the rebels are the ones breaking the cease fire by attacking military forces.
"Our armed forces continue to retreat and hide, but the rebels keep shelling us and provoking us," Musa told The Associated Press.
This is a very good and inevitable question:
ReplyDeleteTo Obama, the Libyan leader was slightly more conciliatory: "If you had found them taking over American cities with armed force, tell me what you would do."
Of course Corporal Gaddafi came to power from the end of a gun. He has, however been treated as legitimate since then. Even the US, has made nice with him after his abandonment of a nuclear program.
ReplyDeleteAlas, there are no more white hats.
It's always a bad bet to go against the will of the people but during the cold war, we did what we had to do. We avoided nuclear war but nevertheless we're suffering the fallout.
After the Iraqi, "no fly zone", I am hesitant to leave a totalitarian in power but under "country arrest". Saddam, with his oil, was able to play havoc with whirled ethics. Libya can do the same.
ReplyDeleteQaddafi has to go: Overtly by his own people or covertly by others...
Get my drift?
Time for the africans, arabs and asians to use up lots of ammo, rockets and mortars, on each other...
ReplyDeleteon can only hope that the population reduction helps reduce the footprint of these areas thus helping global warming...
The Sauds are really, really disgusted with the Obama Administration right now. There may not be any more "oil favors" coming from Saudi Arabia and who can blame them? They see that liberalism's ideal of cultural diversity won't buy a cup of coffee much less loyalty.
ReplyDeleteTime for the africans, arabs and asians to use up lots of ammo, rockets and mortars, on each other...
ReplyDeleteI think that's right. I don't believe anyone will intervene with much more than indignant platitudes. The risk, though, is that militant Islam becomes the last player standing.
Prolonged civil war across the Arab whirled could create a generation of battle tested jihadists.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying it will. Jes sayin'.
We'll need to watch carefully for expanded recruitment and movement across the Islamic arc. We need to monitor the words coming from the Mosques. If we see larger numbers of jihadists moving toward the conflict zones, we'll know that radical Islam is positioning itself.
ReplyDeleteI don't they will be able to resist the opportunity to broaden the caliphate.
ReplyDeletewhit said...
ReplyDelete"Prolonged civil war across the Arab whirled could create a generation of battle tested jihadists."
Or, as WWI and WWII did to France, they'll only have cheese eating Surrender Monkeys left, and we step in with aid for the Womenfolk courtesy of Victoria's Secret.
Gotta Hope.
Got Change?
The risk, though, is that militant Islam becomes the last player standing.
ReplyDeletethey were the 1st player standing and they will be the last player standing until we grow the nuts to destroy the black rock of mecca.
Islam needs to be forced to reform
The killing of 10's of thousands of moslems by moslems is MEANINGLESS. It has been going on since the start of Islam, let's remember moslem on moslem violence has numbered in the MILLIONS over the decades as they see EACH other as apostates.
Destroy the need for opec oil and destroy the rock.
those 2 factors will change the course of the unchangeable river called "islam:
( now that the arab/persian/asian moslem world is about to crack open with men, women and babies being murdered by jihadists maybe nuking the black rock of the keeba doesnt sound as bloodlust? )
Oh that is right, if WE take out the rock we are mass murderers, but if millions of moslems are whacked by each other?
no news story here...
"Prolonged civil war across the Arab whirled could create a generation of battle tested jihadists."
ReplyDeletenaw, we'll have vast areas of starving, shell shocked, virus carrying hoards, like somolia or newark
I back, reporting from plane with my friend Barack. He busy now studying his madness chart. Maybe weekend in Rio not good idea. Brazilians protesting visit of the best US President Barack Obama struck the U.S. consulate in Rio de Janeiro with a Molotov cocktail. Big problem and police respond with rubber bullets.
ReplyDeleteU.S. Consulate in Rio not happy. Michelle upset that her handbag does not match her shoes in artificial light.
Brazilian not happy with U.S. participation in enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya, just like esteemed EB where I am now regular. Number two ( Imake joke) Now with serious intention of spirit and good dialog.
Japan? Yesterday's news. Everyone bored by smashed up towns and the beginnings of boring reconstruction. Unless the Mama San blows of course - woohoo! Then we be back open for business, take position in line and make much popcorn! Nuclear meltdown!!!!
No, people are bored. Now want to argue about Western neo-imperialism! Bombs baby! Death from above! Good argue about it here, with number one and number two!( I joke)
I have to go now.
Doug you much funny man, big favor flavor at Elephant Bar.
ReplyDeletei have to go now.
So we are going to take "all necessary measures" to protect the civilians of Libya, are we? Pity we didn't think of that 42 years ago. Or 41 years ago. Or... well, you know the rest. And let's not be fooled by what the UN resolution really means. Yet again, it's going to be regime-change. And just as in Iraq – to use one of Tom Friedman's only memorable phrases of the time – when the latest dictator goes, who knows what kind of bats will come flying out of the box?
ReplyDeleteAnd after Tunisia, after Egypt, it's got to be Libya, hasn't it? The Arabs of North Africa are demanding freedom, democracy, liberation from oppression. Yes, that's what they have in common. But what these nations also have in common is that it was us, the West, that nurtured their dictatorships decade after decade after decade. The French cuddled up to Ben Ali, the Americans stroked Mubarak, while the Italians groomed Gaddafi until our own glorious leader went to resurrect him from the political dead.
Could this be, I wonder, why we have not heard from Lord Blair of Isfahan recently? Surely he should be up there, clapping his hands with glee at another humanitarian intervention. Perhaps he is just resting between parts. Or maybe, like the dragons in Spenser's Faerie Queen, he is quietly vomiting forth Catholic tracts with all the enthusiasm of a Gaddafi in full flow.
The Middle East seems to produce these ravers – as opposed to Europe, which in the past 100 years has only produced Berlusconi, Mussolini, Stalin and the little chap who used to be a corporal in the 16th List Bavarian reserve infantry, but who went really crackers when he got elected in 1933 – but now we are cleaning up the Middle East again and can forget our own colonial past in this sandpit. And why not, when Gaddafi tells the people of Benghazi that "we will come, 'zenga, zenga' (alley by alley), house by house, room by room." Surely this is a humanitarian intervention that really, really, really is a good idea. After all, there will be no "boots on the ground".
ReplyDeleteI know the old arguments, of course. However bad our behaviour in the past, what should we do now? It's a bit late to be asking that. We loved Gaddafi when he took over in 1969 and then, after he showed he was a chicken-head, we hated him and then we loved him again. Didn't Arafat have a back-to-front but similar track record for the Israelis and Americans? First he was a super-terrorist longing to destroy Israel, then he was a super-statesman shaking hands with Yitzhak Rabin, then he became a super-terrorist again when he realised he'd been tricked over the future of "Palestine".
ReplyDeleteWe talk now about the need to protect "the Libyan people", no longer registering the Senoussi, the most powerful group of tribal families in Benghazi, whose men have been doing much of the fighting. King Idris, overthrown by Gaddafi in 1969, was a Senoussi. The red, black and green "rebel" flag – the old flag of pre-revolutionary Libya – is in fact the Idris flag, a Senoussi flag. Now let's suppose they get to Tripoli (the point of the whole exercise, is it not?), are they going to be welcomed there? Yes, there were protests in the capital. But many of those brave demonstrators themselves originally came from Benghazi. What will Gaddafi's supporters do? "Melt away"? Suddenly find that they hated Gaddafi after all and join the revolution? Or continue the civil war?
Then there's the danger of things "going wrong" on our side, the bombs that hit civilians, the Nato aircraft which might be shot down or crash in Gaddafi territory, the sudden suspicion among the "rebels"/"Libyan people"/democracy protesters that the West, after all, has ulterior purposes in its aid. And there's one boring, universal rule about all this: the second you employ your weapons against another government, however righteously, the thing begins to unspool.
NPR (New People's Radio) admits to taking George Soros' money for 15 years.
ReplyDeleteGaddafi Regime Pounds Rebel Stronghold Benghazi – Rebels Shoot Down Libyan Jet
BHO demands no fly zone...over Libya golf courses.
That the US is elevating the Americas, over the Middle East, is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteBrazil IS more important to the US than Libya is. Libya is a problem for the Eyetalians and the Franks.
It is also important to the Brits, they being so obviously played for fools over the Lockerbie bomber.
The President is prioritizing, the countries in America are more important, to the United States of America, than North African terrorist leaders of yesteryear.
The Colonel has out lived his age, it WAS Ronald Reagan that bombed his encampment, back in "historic era".
I guess we are to overlook the little detail that he takes us to war on his way out to Brazil, a country smart enough to say they want none of it.
ReplyDeleteFrench military jets have flown reconnaissance missions over "all Libyan territory" on Saturday, French military sources say.
ReplyDeleteThe French are in the drivers' seat. Whodathunkit?
Qaddafi: U.N. Resolution Is 'Invalid' (looks like it's back to the ol' drawing board!)
.
ReplyDeleteAttention: Please note the following correction.
According to CBO, there was a minor clerical error in the numbers submitted by the Obama administration when they filed their ten year budget yesterday.
It appears they undercounted the budget deficit by $2 trillion. CBO puts the 10 year deficit at 9.4 trillion.
Let's see, we will probably need Rufus to check the numbers but if you divide $2 trillion by $9.4 trillion, it appears the magnitude of the error is in the 21% range.
Looks like they are getting better.
.
.
ReplyDeleteFor those who are grateful that the GOP has taken over the House and are poised to 'stop the madness', you will be grateful to hear that they continue their efforts to gut the regulatory agencies in pursuit of their aim to help the poor, put-upon bamks.
Elizabeth Warren was called before the Banking Committee this week to 'do some splaining'.
And thus the real purpose of the hearing: to allow the Republicans who now run the House to box Ms. Warren about the ears. The big banks loathe Ms. Warren, who has made a career out of pointing out all the ways they gouge financial consumers — and whose primary goal is to make such gouging more difficult. So, naturally, the Republicans loathe her too.
That she might someday run this bureau terrifies the banks. So, naturally, it terrifies the Republicans.
The banks and their Congressional allies have another, more recent gripe. Rather than waiting until July to start helping financial consumers, Ms. Warren has been trying to help them now. Can you believe the nerve of that woman?
At the request of the states’ attorneys general, all 50 of whom have banded together to investigate the mortgage servicing industry in the wake of the foreclosure crisis, she has fed them ideas that have become part of a settlement proposal they are putting together. Recently, a 27-page outline of the settlement terms was given to banks — terms that included basic rules about how mortgage servicers must treat defaulting homeowners, as well as a requirement that banks look to modify mortgages before they begin foreclosure proceedings. The modifications would be paid for with $20 billion or so in penalties that would be levied on the big banks...
Banks Banking on th GOP
As for the regulations and the regulatory agencies:
The home page on the House Financial Services Committee’s Web site has been turned into a screed against Dodd-Frank. Clearly, the committee is going to spend this session trying to minimize the effect of the legislation, starving agencies of the funds needed to enact the regulations mandated by the new law, for instance. In fact, that effort has already begun.
It’s not just the House Republicans either. Already the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has reverted to form, becoming once again a captive of the banks it is supposed to regulate. (It has strenuously opposed the efforts of the A.G.’s to penalize the banks and reform the mortgage modification process, for instance.) The banks themselves act as if they have a God-given right to the profit they made precrisis, and owe the country nothing for the trouble they’ve put us all through. The Justice Department has essentially given up trying to make anyone accountable for the crisis..."
And so the world turns.
.
.
ReplyDeleteIn the Right Matters blog at the WaPo the following was posted.
Discussions War Powers: Where’s Congress?
The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. That doesn’t mean that Congress has to use the words “declaration of war,” but it does mean that it has to authorize the use of force unless the president is acting in the nation’s self-defense in an emergency.
We have just gone to war with Libya. I think there are good arguments for and against what we’re doing. But the place where the decisive debate should have taken place is Congress. President Bush was right to go to Congress before making war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama is wrong to make war in Libya without congressional approval.
What do you think?
.
Good thoughts, Anon.
ReplyDeleteYes, that is the conundrum.
.
ReplyDeleteClinton goes on TV and states 'things are different now'.
She cites the "unprecedented" step taken by the League of Arab States in calling or a no fly zone and other actions as a major factor in the US getting involved.
Then analyst Richard Engel comes on MSNBC and when asked what part will the Arab states take in the anti-Ghaddafi effort, he states they can provide 'legitimacy' to the effort as well as 'moral support' and 'funding'. No mention of troops or the SA air force.
So basically the way I read it the US, France, and Britain are paid mercs doing the bidding of the Arab States in an effort those states don't want to get their hands dirty with.
At least Clinton is earning her money. There is no way you could pay me enough to go on TV and spout the manipulative bullshit she is throwing around.
.
French jet has fired on Gaddafi military locations at 16:45 GMT (al-Jizeera)
ReplyDeleteCowboy Sarkozy
CAIRO — Celebrating their first taste of genuine democracy, Egyptians in unprecedented numbers streamed into polling places Saturday to endorse or refuse the military’s proposed constitutional amendments and, more broadly, take the first step toward moving their revolution into the halls of government.
ReplyDeleteEgypt is holding free elections today! Wow!
Arab Spring.
They say the American "empire" is declining, but it's an empire of ideas, and democracy is chief.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHooray'
ReplyDeleteLiberte'
Equalite'
Fraternite'
That's what I say'!
Let the French colonize Libya.
After a long, long civil war. A Mexican standoff. A partition of the country. Then French colonialism.
I wish that Hugh Fitzgerald fellow were still writing over there at Jihad Watch. Always kinda liked the guy.
His point of view - Do whatever weakens Islamic lands.
I vote for that.
It's all good. It's keeping Charley Sheen off the news for instance.
ReplyDeleteThey are going to have to institute a no-drive zone as well, keep the tanks and artillery at bay.
Obama could have stopped off in Colombia on his way to Rio. But didn't of course.
http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-185803-galleryV9-detn.jpg
ReplyDeleteLibyan Freedom Fighter - carrier of the coming new Libyan civilization.
Let them all kill themselves.
My dad did business with a Libyan once, he was an asshole, and he had been kicked out of there by Qadafi. But he got out with some money.
The Navy says we have three submarines in the Mediterranean preparing for Libyan operations.
ReplyDeleteUh, why are we announcing this?
The U.S. Navy fires the first U.S. Tomahawk cruise missiles against Libyan leader's Muammar al-Qaddafi's air defenses Saturday, Fox News has learned.
ReplyDeleteSyrian security forces fired tear gas to disperse crowds chanting anti-government slogans at the funeral of two people killed during protests yesterday...
ReplyDeleteWheeee!
Faster, please.
I back. Bid day in Rio, but first my must confession. When first that I heard we were coming I thought we were going to Reno and was most excited. But no matter I here with
ReplyDeleteObamas --Malia, Sasha, and Marian "First Granny" Robinson included. They really like this big airplane for them.--We are in Rio for sure in Brazil on Saturday, and based on the outfits the first lady and her daughters have worn so far, it would seem that great fun is the name of the game.
For their departure from the White House on Friday night, 12-year-old Malia sported beige booties. It was very nice but in no way compare wit big bootie on Michelle. a polka-dot skirt, a military green jacket, and a pink tote bag for the flight. These Obmas have many changes for all possible conditions. 9-year-old Sasha complemented her sister in a polka dot trench, red shoes, and a tye-dyed tote.
Mrs. Obama wore a mst snazzy black leather jacket. Number one for sure, bootieful jacket.
Then we touch down in Brasilia and in some hours later, family emerged in a range of playful prints (except for me and the president, we wear dark suit). Malia looked a little more business, topping of her dress with a navy blazer. And all three Obama womans wearing an armful of bracelets and bangles.
Later in day, whole family family force with joining celebration with Brazilian President Dilma Vana Rousseff (herself most recent recipient of an extreme makeover). First lady had changed into a metallic suit, later removing the jacket to speak before 50 Brazilian youth ambassadors in shiny sexy one-shouldered dress. Youth ambassadors had big eyeful of Michelle bare shoulder and big bootie.
I have to go now.
We are in our third Muslim war. Nothing from Congress about the unilateralist president taking it upon himself to take the US to war while he does Rio for the weekend and not even bother with obtaining as much as a consent from Congress:
ReplyDeleteU.S. military officials have confirmed the first American tomahawk cruise missiles have been fired at targets inside Libya from ships in the Mediterranean Sea.
The move is the first direct U.S. involvement in the international operation mobilizing to stop Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's attacks on opposition strongholds and enforce a U.N.-backed no-fly zone.
Pentagon officials said there were 11 U.S. ships stationed in the Mediterranean Sea, including three submarines and two destroyers capable of firing cruise missiles, and several amphibious ships and supply ships.
The first strikes in what is being called "Operation Odyssey Dawn" were expected to target air defense missile sites around Tripoli, Misratah, and Surt, but no areas east of that or near Benghazi, officials said.
President Obama told members of Congress Friday that he had not yet authorized the use of U.S. planes, but a senior military official said Saturday that U.S. aircraft would be involved.
Doug rubs prostate himself
ReplyDeletein humility and appreciation.
PBUHu
Cheers,
Stinkyfinger
"Nothing from Congress about the unilateralist president taking it upon himself to take the US to war while he does Rio for the weekend and not even bother with obtaining as much as a consent from Congress:"
ReplyDelete---
GOP Leadership is logical and consistent:
If Pelosi sidesteps the rules to illegally fund Obamacare, the GOP stands fast against legally changing the rules to defund the illegal funding.
Leaderhip now stands fast on the high ground of not engaging in criticism and namecalling of Leftist Warmongers.
New Dole Republicans.
Rumor in DC is that GOP Leadership intends to get involved in Foreign affairs with bill renaming the Tomahawk Missile to something acceptable to Native American Activists and Organizers, Inc.
ReplyDelete110 Freaking Tomahawks!
ReplyDeleteShades of Bill Clinton.
Pony up them tax dollars, you helpful Pubs, you:
Our Missile Gap Margin has grown thin again.
Hellfires would be too humble an offering to
ReplyDeleteThe Won.
'Operation Odyssey Dawn'...
ReplyDeleteI'll wait to see what the Street Dictionary has to say about that.
Nobody can accuse Obama of lying about the rationale for this war. Because he didn't give one.
ReplyDeleteRemember, Comrade Rufus said he'd heard it all before about California going tits up, and this was just more of the same?
ReplyDeleteWe'll see:
Having Brown get elected is probably the best thing that could have happened.
Maybe Cuomo in NY too.
The Fecal Matter is hitting the fan.
Nuveen Urges Brown to Shun Gimmicks Closing $28 Billion California Deficit
California Governor Jerry Brown will be judged on how he avoids gimmicks, cuts spending and raises more money when he presents a budget to close a $28 billion deficit for the biggest U.S. state borrower, according to bondholders such as Nuveen Asset Management.
The plan unveiled today will be “an honest budget,” Brown has said, without accounting ploys such as moving the last state payday from one fiscal year to the next, an $800 million device that helped Arnold Schwarzenegger balance the books in 2009.
“Investors look at those gimmicks as not permanent solutions,” said Paul Brennan of Chicago-based Nuveen, which holds $73 billion of municipal securities including California debt. “They are just one-time things, a shot in the arm that only medicates the patient but doesn’t solve the illness.”
Brown, a 72-year-old Democrat who was governor from 1975 to 1983, has already warned that his budget will cut deep, a move likely to face opposition from unions that helped elect him. He’s said he won’t raise taxes without voter approval and is widely expected to call for a special election to extend $8 billion in expiring levies.
Schwarzenegger, who faced similar pushback as he grappled with $100 billion of combined shortfalls in the last three years, relied on several bookkeeping maneuvers to erase deficits that left the state that produces 13 percent of U.S. gross domestic product tied for the worst credit rating in the U.S.
Gimmicks
In October, Schwarzenegger and lawmakers helped close a $19 billion gap by simply declaring that they would get more tax revenue than was officially projected. They booked another $2.3 billion by approving the sale and lease-back of 11 state buildings, a move now facing a court challenge.
California shares with Illinois the lowest credit rating of any state from Moody’s Investors Service. The A1 grade is Moody’s fifth-highest.
Standard & Poor’s rates California A-, its fourth-lowest level for investment-quality securities.
US astronomers announce discovery of room temperature dwarf brown star. NASA immediately names it Gary Coleman.
ReplyDelete‘Atomic Anne’ Keeps France Spinning
ReplyDelete“I assure you, they can’t strangle me in a dark corner!” said Anne Lauvergeon, the embattled boss of one of France’s largest nuclear enterprises, the largely state-owned Areva.
When told that some would not mind strangling her out in the open, she leaned back and laughed.
If she signs that Green Bay Packer Fullback Offer, what do we do for a First Lady?
ReplyDeleteCNN: Libya threatening to use nuclear bomb unless the allies leave immediately.
ReplyDeleteObama cuts short his 18 holes in Rio and just plays nine.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWe are a heavily contingency-fied species to say the least. Sometimes the disasters have been good for us. Don't get too upset over it all.
ReplyDeleteSpace rock
ReplyDeletehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2147879.stm
All this stuff with Libya started when Qadafi claimed most of the Gulf of Sidra(?) and Reagan sent in an aircraft carrier to show him it wasn't so, and shot down a couple of their jets, if memory serves. A little like Saddam claiming Kuwait as a province and the Iranians claiming Bahrain.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/concoughlin/8389222/Why-the-Bahrain-rebellion-could-prove-calamitous-for-the-West.html
Teresita said...
ReplyDelete"CNN: Libya threatening to use nuclear bomb unless the allies leave immediately.
Obama cuts short his 18 holes in Rio and just plays nine."
---
Can't believe you fell for that one T:
The real story is hole 10 features a windmill.
SS neglected to warn him.
He's deathly afraid of windmills, has nightmares about them chopping off his ears, etc.
Windmills built by Immelt on other people's property with our money?
...not so much.
I think the French could do this. And, I think the British could do this. But, a "Joint Command" of Brits, and Frogs?
ReplyDeleteThere ain't that much popcorn in the whole world.
.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama, speaking during a visit to Brazil, reiterated promises that no American ground forces would be used.
“I am deeply aware of the risks of any military action, no matter what limits we place on it,” he said. “I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice, and it’s not a choice that I make lightly. But we can’t stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people that there will be no mercy.”
I've heard Obama make this charge on a couple of occasions. In fact, 'the tyrant' told the people of Benghazi that if they put down their weapons they would recieve mercy. If they didn't they wouldn't.
Ghaddafi may have been lying. But that doesn't justify Obama's lying to the American people.
.