The American Interest
Essays & Longer Thoughts
An unexploded mortar at Tripoli Airport. © Getty Images
Published on July 26, 2014
A Job Well Done As Libya Implodes, “Smart Diplomacy” Becoming a Punch Line

The United States is pulling embassy staff out of Tripoli, and has issued a travel advisory that nicely outlines what a nightmare Libya has become. If Obama were a Republican, the press coverage of this stinking corpse of a policy flub would be quite different.

The reckless and thoughtless Libya intervention just keeps looking worse. But don’t read the critics to see how horrible things are: as the government announces that the U.S. has officially evacuated its embassy in Tripoli this morning, the latest State Department travel advisory for the country says it all:

The security situation in Libya remains unpredictable and unstable.  The Libyan government has not been able to adequately build its military and police forces and improve security following the 2011 revolution.  Many military-grade weapons remain in the hands of private individuals, including antiaircraft weapons that may be used against civilian aviation.  Crime levels remain high in many parts of the country.  In addition to the threat of crime, various groups have called for attacks against U.S. citizens and U.S. interests in Libya.  Extremist groups in Libya have made several specific threats this year against U.S. government officials, citizens, and interests in Libya.  Because of the presumption that foreigners, especially U.S. citizens, in Libya may be associated with the U.S. government or U.S. NGOs, travelers should be aware that they may be targeted for kidnapping, violent attacks, or death.  U.S. citizens currently in Libya should exercise extreme caution and depart immediately.

Sporadic episodes of civil unrest have occurred throughout the country and attacks by armed groups can occur in many different areas; hotels frequented by westerners have been caught in the crossfire.  Armed clashes have occurred in the areas near Tripoli International Airport, Airport Road, and Swani Road.  Checkpoints controlled by militias are common outside of Tripoli, and at times inside the capital.  Closures or threats of closures of international airports occur regularly, whether for maintenance, labor, or security-related incidents.  Along with airports, seaports and roads can close with little or no warning.  U.S. citizens should closely monitor news and check with airlines to try to travel out of Libya as quickly and safely as possible.

The status of the country’s interim government remains uncertain.  The newly elected Council of Representatives is scheduled to convene by August 4, but political jockeying continues over where and when to seat the parliament.  Heavy clashes between rival factions erupted in May 2014 in Benghazi and other eastern cities.  In Tripoli, armed groups have contested territory near Tripoli International Airport since July 13, rendering the airport non-operational.  State security institutions lack basic capabilities to prevent conflict, and there remains a possibility of further escalation.

Throw in the resulting civil war in Mali and the scattering of insurgents and weapons to the four winds, and you have a classic exhibition of reckless incompetence—of American arrogance, ignorance, carelessness and moralism combining in a toxic stew to sink a fragile country we never understood.

Luckily for America’s self-esteem, it was liberal Democrats that produced this particular shambles. If Republicans had done this, the media would be on the administration non-stop, perhaps comparing Samantha Power to Paul Wolfowitz—a well-meaning humanitarian way over her head who wrecked a country out of misguided ideology. There might also be some pointed questions for future presidential candidates who supported this fiasco. But since both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have their fingerprints all over Libya, there isn’t a lot of press hunger for a detailed, unsparing autopsy into this stinking corpse of policy flub.

If Obama were a Republican, the press and the weekly news shows would be ringing with hyperbolic, apocalyptic denunciations of the clueless incumbent who had failed to learn the most basic lessons of Iraq. Indeed, the MSM right now would be howling that Obama was stupider than Bush. Bush, our Journolist friends would now be saying ad nauseam, at least had the excuse that he didn’t know what happens when you overthrow a paranoid, genocidal, economically incompetent Arab tyrant in an artificial post-colonial state. But Obama did—or, the press would nastily say, he would have done if he’d been doing his job instead of hitting the golf course or yakking it up with his glitzy pals at late night bull sessions. The ad hominem attacks would never stop, and all the tangled threads of incompetence and failure would be endlessly and expertly picked at in long New Yorker articles, NYT thumbsuckers, and chin-strokings on all the Sabbath gasbag shows.

Why, the ever-admirable tribunes of a free and unbiased press would be asking non-stop, didn’t this poor excuse for a President learn from what happened in Iraq?  When you upend an insane and murderous dictator who has crushed his people for decades under an incompetent and quirky regime, you’d better realize that there is no effective state or civil society under the hard shell of dictatorial rule. Remove the dictator and you get chaos and anarchy. Wasn’t this President paying attention during the last ten years?

Some of the criticism would be exaggerated and unfair; the Monday morning quarterbacks never really understand just how complicated and tragic this poor world really is, not to mention how hard it is to make life and death decisions in real time in the center of the non-stop political firestorm that is Washington today. And the MSM attracts more than its share of deeply inexperienced but entitled, self-regarding blowhards who love to pontificate about how stupid all those poor fools who have actual jobs and responsibilities actually are.

But luckily for Team Obama, the mainstream press would rather die than subject liberal Democrats to the critiques it reserves for the GOP. So instead, as Libya writhes in agony, reputations and careers move on. The news is so bad, and the President’s foreign policy is collapsing on so many fronts, that it is impossible to keep the story off the front pages. “Smart diplomacy” has become a punch line, and the dream Team Obama had of making Democrats the go-to national security party is as dead as the passenger pigeon. But what the press can do for the White House it still, with some honorable exceptions, labors to accomplish: it will, when it must, report the dots. But it will try not to connect them, and it will do what it can to let all the people involved in the Libya debacle move on to the next and higher stage of their careers.

  • wigwag

    Bravo!

  • http://www.syalconsult.com Verinder Syal

    Thank you for not pulling your punches.
    The press (80% +) has become an organ of the Democratic party and especially this President. The press today is another version of Pravda the old Soviet Union’s newspaper. When I was younger I used to think that the press was fair to both sides; alas now I realize what a bill of goods I bought into.
    As for the smart people running this government; God help us!

    • FriendlyGoat

      Well, I don’t know how old you are, but when you were “younger”, there may have been no FOX News on TV or talk radio on the AM dial. If so, then you would have been justified in thinking the press as a whole was balanced. But now, well, you’ve seen the right-wing bias of whatever media the right wing has managed to purchase so far. Their goal, of course, is to purchase all of it. Most of the readers here can’t wait.

      • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

        No, what FNC and talk radio has done is expose the rest of the media for the left-leaning monolith it has been since Dr. Mead’s Blue Model took firm root.

        And the rest of the media is clinging to The Narrative that gives them access to the Powers That Be and the better cocktail parties … to the point that allegiance to The Narrative is a requirement for advancement.

        You, OTOH, probably are bitterly clinging to it, for the same reason as a large plurality do … to maintain your ability to elect Cool Kids who will not harsh your mellow with demands for personal responsibility and personal initiative.

        But reality has a way of breaking the cling …

        • FriendlyGoat

          The “cling” thing, as I recall, was Obama correctly diagnosing what once-proud men do when tax cuts killed their jobs and arsenals of guns are all they feel they have left to possess and rally around.

          • dwick_OR

            Sorry… but Obama makes no mention of job-killing tax cuts in his infamous ‘bitter clinger’ quote:

            “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them,” Obama said. “And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

            Try again…

          • FriendlyGoat

            The jobs started leaving with the tax cuts Carter signed in 1978, followed by a LOT more during the Reagan years.

            Twenty-five years back is the 80′s.

          • D. Zortea

            If, and that’s a big IF, you were to achieve CEO status, would your dribble be the same? Sounds like your jealous and bummed out, because you made bad and stupid decisions and you want your fair share of someone else’s hard earned money!

          • FriendlyGoat

            Most people are not CEOs. But I spent more than two decades as the accountant for a good one (a founder) in a privately-held company with 1000 employees when I left. I know what “loyalty down” looks like when the tax laws helpfully do not let all the cash fly out the top.

          • Texas_Accountant

            Accountant? Or bookkeeper?

          • FriendlyGoat

            Controller.

          • 1pakajam1

            Amen.

          • dwick_OR

            So your claim is if we’d have just kept Eisenhower/Kennedy-era tax rates, time and the rest of the world would have stood still allowing the US to continue it’s economic dominance in perpetuity via armies of unionized Henry Ford-era assembly-line workers with high school educations at most, yes? No computers, no internet, no factory automation, no etc etc. We’d all still be wearing our leisure suits stuck in a ‘That 70s Show’ time-warp listening to 8-track tapes driving around in crappy GM rust-buckets that need to be replaced every 5 years or less, right? And all those people in Vietnam, India, South Korea, China, etc would still be living in huts working in rice paddies. That’s what you want?

            And you don’t think a nearly 300% increase in the number of women in the labor force since 1950 hasn’t been a factor? And the millions of illegal immigrants (undocumented workers or whatever the politically-correct term for such people is this week) who have flooded the US since the 1980s?

            Personally, I agree pay for many CEOs is excessive… but there were a net 50M+ jobs created during the Carter-Reagan-Bush-Clinton years. So there WERE new jobs (I know, I got one of them – in the computer industry…) – just not necessarily our father’s and grandfather’s type of jobs where you bolt widgets onto thingamajigs and pay union dues for 45 years to then retire with a pension. Sorry, but those days are over. As Democrats became so fond of saying after the Clinton impeachment: ‘move on’…

            As to Microsoft… the majority of those layoffs will impact employees of the former Nokia cellular handset business that Microsoft recently purchased. The rise of the iPhone decimated Nokia’s cell phone handset business and it had been losing money for years… (why do you think Nokia wanted to unload it?) And if you’re aware at all of what’s going on in tech you should know that Microsoft’s other cash-cow businesses (Windows, Office, etc) are also under considerable threat from tablets, smartphones, Chromebooks, etc. It’s painful but it’s necessary for Microsoft to prune/integrate Nokia, make major changes to some existing businesses and focus on new ones if they want to remain a significant player in the industry. You expect Microsoft to guarantee jobs for life even to employees they no longer have work for just because they have $84B in the bank?

            If you don’t think Ford, GM, IBM, the big oil companies, and other corporate behemoths never had significant layoffs prior to 1980, I suggest you go back and read up a bit…

          • Suzyqpie

            It’s has been 10 hrs, I didn’t see a reply comment from fgoat. S/He could not possibly have assembled a retort to your scholarship.

          • FriendlyGoat

            A guy has to sleep sometimes. And have real relationships beyond these online things.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Thomas Piketty realizes that we will need tax pacts around the world to avoid a race to the bottom for people. You should too.

            There is nothing about lower taxation that got you out of a leisure suit. And we had a better country when computer smart alecks did not make fun of actual workers with high school educations, Maybe some corporations will get enough H1B visas to import some nice Indian folks for your job, eh?

          • Suzyqpie

            Financial Times published a list of errors and methodological questions in the data underpinning in Piketty’s obsequious paean, “Capital in the 21 Century.” The Left always becomes euphoric at the thought of a global tax. More money to politicians to squander in ways that will improve their reelection prospects excites some people. I guess you think the politicians will spend the money to avoid the race to the bottom for some people. They won’t. Remember the War on Poverty, billions of dollars later we have the same number of poor people. In fact, we are now importing poor people to add to the indigenous poor.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Well, all that war on poverty money must have gone somewhere. Do you begrudge the business community for ending up with most of it. They call that economic development, you know.

          • Suzyqpie

            I do not begrudge the business community. I am not R or D, I am an Independent. The major influencing factor when La Casa Blanca changes parties is whose big donors are the recipients of government largesse. Glass-Steagall, NAFTA, tax cuts, the gallimaufry of our Fed Governance is a debris field. The spending bacchanalia ends someday. Anyone who thinks that we can proceed along running trillion dollar deficits will be proven wrong. Math is coming. Math is remorseless.

          • Suzyqpie

            Who gets to decide what constitutes “excesses?”

          • FriendlyGoat

            Duh. The people who are doing the excesses? Or,……

          • Suzyqpie

            Duh, who are the people who are doing the Excesses? How do we identify the Excesses? What is “excesses?” Subjective enforcement of the law is selective enforcement of the law,

          • FriendlyGoat

            Ever heard of high speed trading? Or million dollar college coaches? Or Girls Gone Wild?

          • halpap

            Actually, it was a Clinton era change to the tax code that made executive compensation go through the roof. Under Clinton, executive compensation over $1mm was not deductible unless it was incentive pay for performance. So, they started creating these very valuable stock option plans, which are inherently tied to performance, or at least the stock price going up, gave management the incentive to care about their stock price (at least at exercise time) and executive pay took off. This has nothing to do with cutting tax rates but the perverse incentives that demagogues, like Clinton and Obama, who know nothing about business (other than lining their own pockets off of their government work) have put in place.

          • FriendlyGoat

            So, get John Boehner and Mitch McConnell to repeal that problem and dare Obama to veto it.

          • Peter Regan

            Friendly Again with the tax cuts theory. Your tax cuts = higher CEO pay = lost jobs in rural America comment is asinine. You don’t have any idea about these things.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I know if Susan makes $40,000 working at a profitable company taxed at 50% that her job costs the bottom line $20,000 due to the tax savings from deducting her salary from taxable income. I know if the taxes are cut to 25% that Susan will now be blamed personally for suddenly costing the company $30,000 instead of $20,000. That’s why they’ll be more motivated to eliminate her position.

          • MartyH

            You claim to be a controller above, but your fundamental misunderstanding of this issue shows that you are a BS artist. I’ve shown you the math on this before, and you come back with a hand wave.

            Let’s go over this again: Profits are taxed. Profits are income minus expenses. Labor is always a deductible expense-this is foundational tax accounting 101 stuff. There are no “tax savings from deducting her salary,” just as there are no tax savings from deducting COGS. There may be some controversial expense deductions, but labor is not one of them.

            “I know if the taxes are cut to 25% that Susan will now be blamed personally for suddenly costing the company $30,000 instead of $20,000.”

            That statement makes as much sense as saying, “The tide is coming in! We’ve got to get our boat out of the water otherwise it will sink!”

            Assuming Susan’s pay is unchanged, under the scenario you present where taxes are cut from 50% to 25%, the owner’s net earnings go up by 50%. What they pay Susan is irrelevant-they could pay her $100K , or $40K, or $20K-regardless of what they pay her, their net revenue increases when tax rates go down. She’s not going to get blamed for costing the company money. If anything, she may get a raise or a part time assistant to help her out, because the company has more to reinvest.

            The formula is simple-lower tax rate equals more money available for pay, benefits, reinvestment, withdrawal, etc. the fact that you misunderstand this shows that you’ve never personally worked with these issues and are just blowing smoke.

          • FriendlyGoat

            No, MartyH. The example works precisely as I stated it and this is precisely what you and most others do not acknowledge when you get on that false bandwagon that “lower taxes create jobs”

            I am not arguing that higher taxes leave companies with more cash (for “withdrawal”, as you suggested). I am arguing that higher taxes on net income make it easier for profitable companies to decide to retain employees. At 50% taxation, the company can lay off Susan from her $40,000 job and only save $20,000 net because they would have to pay $20,000 more tax when they eliminate a $40,000 deductible cost. At 25% taxation, they only have to pay $10,000 tax for laying off Susan and they keep $30,000 of the $40,000 they formerly paid her.

            No one who is employed in business, as I was, goes to work and argues for the employer to be subject to higher taxes. That would be seen as a form of disloyalty. BUT, when you retire and get away from it, as I have, and look back at BOTH sides—-both the employer’s interest and Susan’s interest—-you realize that a higher tax burden CAN take away some of the temptation for the employer to lay off Susan.

            Remember, we’re talking about profitable companies here. I’m QUITE aware that it’s not easy to be in business or easy to make a profit at all—due to lack of sales or competition. BUT, as much as we want to do something to help unprofitable companies, the problems they have ARE NOT tax rate problems.

          • MartyH

            Susan appears to be deadweight-she is not contributing directly or indirectly to the bottom line at all. She is not being paid for her job performance-she may be a long time employee kept on as a courtesy for years of service, or maybe the owner’s niece. In any event, in the situation you described, the company is better off without her under any tax regime. As the rate tends to zero, the company bears more of the cost of firing her.

            After tax profits enable deadweight. Consider your scenario: 50% high tax rate, 25% low tax rate, Susan making $40K. If the company’s profits exceed $80K, their net proceeds are higher with Susan under the 25% rate than without Susan under the 50% rate. The only scenarios where the math swings in favor of your argument is if the company makes less than $80K in profit. At that rate, the deadweight Susan is effectively taking 1/3 or more of the company’s profits. At that point, it really isn’t being run as a business.

            Most employees are not deadweight like Susan-they contribute more to the company’s bottom line (directly or indirectly) than they receive in pay. For these employees, you assertion does nto apply at all.

            So you managed to find a case where lowering taxes may incentivize a company to reduce deadweight, and you seem to want to base tax policy on that, not for the majority of productive employees.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Ladies, where are you? Marty, here, thinks any hypothetical woman named Susan in an employment example is deadweight that any company would be better off without. This crappy attitude is exactly what you get from conservatives when you vote for their tax-cutters.

            Not only that, Marty believes you possibly have to be someone’s unproductive niece to even have a $40,000 job in the first place

            Meanwhile, once again, the example works for any company that had any net earnings at all before it decided to lay off Susan. You know, like Microsoft, which is now planning—-because it can—- to cut 18,000 jobs while profitable and while holding $84,000,000,000 in cash.
            Shall we get poor Microsoft another tax cut to help it keep folks employed—– like Republicans always claim is needed?

          • MartyH

            You are the one who says that Susan is deadweight. In your example, Susan is laid off and the company’s profits grow by exactly her salary. That’s the very definition of deadweight-Susan was adding zero value to the company’s bottom line.

            In my company, if Susan were laid off, the company’s profits would grow by less than her salary, or even shrink, depending on her productivity.

            So you’re the one insulting women with your example.

            Furthermore, you speak as if minimizing taxes is the company’s goal. But it is not-maximizing after tax revenue is.As I have already conceded, the numbers you have chosen make your point-but they are unrealistic for two reasons:

            a) You assume Susan does not contribute to the bottom line at all-she is simply an expense. If that is the case, there is no economic reason to keep her in any scenario.

            b) a company consistently making a $10,000 profit is more of a hobby than a company. It really shouldn’t have any employees at all.

            More realistic numbers simply prove you wrong. For example, consider the case where Susan’s net benefit to the company is $20K, and the company’s before tax profit is $80K with her.

            At a 50% tax rate, the net revenue for the company with Susan is $40K. Without Susan the net revenue is $50K.

            At a 25% tax rate, the net revenue with Susan is $60K-higher than at a 50% tax rate without her. The lower tax rate makes it easier to keep Susan as an employee, because the lower tax rate lets the owners keep more of their profit.

          • FriendlyGoat

            You have attacked me, you have attacked a hypothetical “Susan” in an example, and you have then somehow claimed I am attacking “Susan”.

            I do KNOW that the Republicans spin the idea that companies “keeping” (as you say) more of their net profits will automatically use that money to retain or hire more people. Makes perfect sense, right? Except it doesn’t. Companies have proven that is not what they do with “kept” money.
            They minimize both labor and taxes to whatever extent society permits them to do so. Then they send the savings from minimizing both to the owners and managers where it accumulates in ever-growing piles. The present-day situation with Microsoft makes it very clear that lack of after-tax cash is not the reason it is dumping 18,000 people while already holding enough cash to keep them working for 50-100 years.

            You could easily understand the example I gave you—-which works fine with or without your attempts at twisting—-, but you don’t want to—–because you get your self-worth by identifying with the Republican spinners. I’m not really trying to “help” you overcome that bias, because that’s very likely impossible—with you. I write in these places for those others, who don’t seek to paint just any “Susan” as a bum and those who are tired of having America completely screwed over by lying Republicans. The tax cuts didn’t help us the way they were advertised. Some people are starting to “get it”, whether you ever do or not. Bye, bye.

          • MartyH

            I am not attacking you. I am pointing out that in your hypothetical example at the start of this thread, “Susan” does not add anything to the company’s bottom line. And you did it again in a later post, where you said, “If, for instance, the company in our example was only making $10,000 pre-tax to start with, it will be making $50,000 after it fires Susan….”

            If Susan were a productive employee then the company’s profit should drop by less than her salary.

            The fact that you continue to miss this obvious point does not speak well of your understanding of basic economics.

            Now to Microsoft: over two thirds of the layoffs are as the result of a merger with Nokia, and it is former Nokia employees who are largely being laid off. This should not be a surprise-there is always consolidation after a big acquisition, particularly since both companies are struggling in the telecom space.

            I don’t disagree that companies try to minimize labor and taxes, although I would put the goal as maximizing after tax income. That’s a virtue, not a liability.

          • dwick_OR

            The present-day situation with Microsoft makes it very clear that lack of after-tax cash is not the reason it is dumping 18,000 people while already holding enough cash to keep them working for 50-100 years.

            Are you STILL flogging the Microsoft layoffs thing?

            If you’re the retired big whiz former controller, accountant, successful business person you claim… then you should know Microsoft is a business – not a charity. So I’ll ask you again as I asked 2 days ago: You really expect Microsoft to keep employees they no longer have meaningful work for on the payroll indefinitely just because the company has $84B in the bank?

            If so, and you were the ‘financial controller’ for my business, the only aspects of my business you have visibility into starting tomorrow would be sweeping the floors, emptying trash cans, and cleaning restrooms.

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            My engineering career started in 1983 … and supply-side economics has given me opportunity after opportunity to practice and grow in my profession, bettering my lot.

            As it did for everyone who exercised the initiative to grow their own careers and finances … instead of waiting for others – unions, government, Big Business – to grow prosperity FOR them; a central tenet of the Blue Social Model, BTW.

            The latter, are among the ones hurting the most today.

            The jobs didn’t leave because of the tax cuts.

            They left, because the rest of the world caught up with us after rebuilding from WWII … and were willing to work smarter and harder than we were in our Big Blue Bubble that we lived in from 1945 until that time … and long after that time, for some of us..

            Your rant about CEO’s is totally irrelevant, except as an attempt to jam your socio-economic morality down others’ throats … it is not a failure to curb “excess” that led to the cuts; what they have been cutting is Blue Model-derived bloat in many cases. You seem to think that employees are OWED a job … they are not.

            When they cut into real meat , their company performance and stock price suffers … so the truly short-sighted greedy CEOs do face the discipline of the market then.

            Perhaps employees should be more selective in who they work for … and if there are more candidates than good jobs, they need to make sure they are delivering the maximum value for their hire. But that takes personal initiative, which the Progessives’ Blue Social Model suppresses.

            Progressives OWN this malaise.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Do you believe everyone can be an engineer? In other words, that engineering jobs can exist for whomever gets a STEM degree—–without some people who actually pour the concrete or weld the steel for whatever is engineered?

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            You miss the point … the point is you get ahead in sustainable ways by exercising your personal initiative to enhance the value of your skill set, and by not just settling for the job you have … no matter whether you are digging ditches or working as a rocket scientist. I learned that from my millwright father, who came from a dirt-poor family in Appalachia to make a good enough living to send two sons to college (and expected them not only to work to pay for some of the expenses, but expected them to pursue courses of study that were not financial dead-ends).

            And those in the trades, actually can make good money – even without the help of a union – if they are willing to go where the work is and show some initiative. You should check out Mr. “Dirty Jobs”, Mike Rowe’s foundation at profoundlydisconnected.com … he is funding scholarships and promoting the trades as an alternative to go-nowhere-but-deep-in-debt college degrees, and his take on initiative reinforces mine.

            You are FAR less likely to get ahead if you take the Blue Model approach of expecting to work the same job in the same way in the same place for a lifetime, expecting others to secure prosperity FOR you from the top down … but that is precisely the message Progressives send to this day.

            They have misled many to believe they are mere “workers”, and therefore do not have the responsibility to “think like a businessman” regarding their own skills and abilities when it comes to leveraging them in the marketplace of labor to better their lot.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I have never been a critic of personal initiative. But there has to be a better job being created somewhere in order for the go-getter to go get it. We’re trending the wrong way on that with some exceptions, such as the fracking fields, and you know we are. Meanwhile, corporate profits have never been better, their cash reserves have never been higher, and never before has so much money been spent in politics to buy tax-cutters. Corporations are winning while people are losing.

          • Suzyqpie

            This is now a cold thread. I have to move on to a new research project. Monitoring here for three days has been fascinating and compels me to ask, FriendlyGoat, the preponderance of votes have been against you. dwick_OR, halpap, MartyH, Richie, go_gipper and suzyqpie have vastly out scored you in upvotes. I am aware that the consensus is not always the truth. Does the voting tally create doubt that your belief system could be wrong?

          • FriendlyGoat

            Not in the least. I’m liberal by nature and I know I am tramping around in a camp of conservatives/libertarians.

          • Suzyqpie

            After the Boston bombing, I thought that Pres 0bama would give a speech admonishing the Muslims for clinging to their Korans and their pressure cookers. Guess not….

          • FriendlyGoat

            Why didn’t you give that speech somewhere?

          • Suzyqpie

            Awesome idea, Thanks for the motivation FriendlyGoat, I think i will give that speech right now right here, “We The Taxpaying People of the United States of America need a US citizenship verification process at our plethora of welfare offices. We The Taxpaying People of the United States of America are a generous and thoughtful people. We The Taxpaying People of American, can not be expected to provide for anyone from anywhere in any number who finds their way to our shores. I get it, it sucks to be Mexican, Gualtamalian, Salvadoran, Hondurian, I seriously do not want it to suck to be American. Democrat do not do math, Thank you very much.

          • D. Zortea

            Better to have and not need. You will probably call the cops if something really bad went down, only to learn your overlords killed the airways “for your own good!’ who is going to help you? The government? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

          • FriendlyGoat

            I’d reply to you if your post made any sense.

          • tm11999

            really? if you are having trouble with reading comprehension it’s probably best if you don’t reply, please stop with the progressive jealously. capitalism ain’t for sissies.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Do you believe that capitalism is like football, where only the toughest 40 or so make the team and only eleven are good enough to start at a time—-offense or defense? Or do you believe that capitalism is like football where taxpayers build the stadiums, public schools grow the players, society pays for the injuries, the business community entertains clients in the skyboxes, beer sales pay for a lot of the TV coverage, and all the attending fans burn ENORMOUS amounts of fossil fuel just to show up on Friday Night (high school), Saturday (college) and Sunday (pro)?

          • go_gipper

            On the one hand it takes more intelligence and vision to understand capitalism. So friendly has to make a lame football metaphor. As Hayek tells us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek capitalism too complex to control so liberals don’t or can’t make the effort to understand that it is the sum of billions of individual decisions seeking their own happiness.

            On the other hand, it is just that simple. That I have produced more apples than I / need and you have more flour than you need. You give me enough money to buy more trees (capital). Then I jump in my Cadillac to go to a football game!

          • FriendlyGoat

            It’s hard to answer the pugnacious tone of “capitalism ain’t for sissies”. I actually did a pretty good job of thinking up something intelligent to say, but I didn’t know anything about your Cadillac.

          • go_gipper

            Its hard to answer because it is true.

            Your example is lame and false on its face. Contra “Football”: the entire population is in the game. Schools procure labor and supplies in the economy, all society (except for hermits) is laboring and consuming, businesses via the invisible hand are creating wealth, and the capitalistic system continues to enable us to burn less fuel via finding more and more economical ways to transport ourselves.

            I’m sure you came up with something intelligent to say in your own mind.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Football is a no-sissy thing, and tm11999 wants us to believe that all capitalism requires all people to behave in that tough “knock’em over” manner to be competitive and survive. And he implies that all the sissies deserve to lose.

            I am pointing out that the tough “knock’em over” nature of actual football only even EXISTS because of huge public subsidy. The same, could be said of all the no-sissy jobs in the military, the police, the fire departments, and the prisons, by the way. Capitalism has many sides and it’s important to not be tunnel-focused and miss half the reality.

            Without knocking Adam Smith’s invisible hand, why not also look at all the visible hands in plain sight?

          • Justwaitinforchange

            Wow – are you smoking medical marijuana? Obama was wrong on may fronts including his stupid comment abut bibles and guns. Most of those jobs are killed by the EPA.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Obama didn’t say tax cuts killed the jobs. I said that.

          • ISOaPBR

            Feeble attempt, Casper. Feeble.

          • FriendlyGoat

            And YOUR explanation of a world view is What?

          • Peter Regan

            Friendly come on man. Tax cuts destroyed jobs in the rural areas Obama was alluding to? You just made that ridiculous nonsense up.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Tax cuts are not the only forces weighing on jobs. But they are certainly a significant part of the problem.

        • mesocyclone

          If you were being fair, you might ask yourself why the right wing media is far more successful commercially than the branded left wing media (e.g. MSNBC) and the unbranded left wing media (e.g. CNN). Then you might ask yourself why right wing talk radio has been so popular, while left wing talk radio (e.g. Air America) has never made a penny. And then, if you were honest, you would recognize that left wing media fails because there is already a left wing media – the “main stream” media.

          Right wing media wins because there is a demand for it, due to the lack of all but left wing views from the “main stream” media. That simple exercise shows not that right wing media is the only biased media, but rather that it is merely a balance against the left wing bias that has been there for a long time.

          • FriendlyGoat

            The more right wing media you have, the less living-wage jobs you have. It’s an odd correlation.

          • Grunt

            Yet incomes rose in Michigan after they went RTW. As usually leftists claims fall apart in the real world.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Whose incomes?

          • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

            The more left-wing leadership you have, the less opportunities – and motivation – you have for people to exercise their initiative to get living-wage jobs, and then get better ones. That correlates quite well with the workforce participation percentage.

          • Steve Goldstein

            From an analytic viewpoint that makes no more sense than saying “The more President Obama you have, the less living wages you have”. Right wing media have only been around a relatively short time, as has the president. Our problem regarding living wage jobs go back far longer.

          • Suzyqpie

            Roorback, again or still. FriendlyGoat you are somnambulant ovine sycophant.

      • cas47

        Well, we like to know what is going on in the world. And Professor Mead and Fox are the only chance we have of hearing it. Else, Libya will go down the memory hole, like Obama’s other failures.

        • FriendlyGoat

          I’ll stick with PBS as much as I can, thanks just the same..

          • disqus_yeZNegncsV

            The worse of the worse. I hate myself for having donated both time and money to PBS over the years, when I was a dumb liberal.

          • FriendlyGoat

            My Goodness! What HAPPENED to you? Did you buy the main upside-down backwards argument that “tax cuts create jobs” or did Rush just lull you to sleep between his schtick of hawking mattresses and such?

          • Corlyss

            You don’t know much economic history, do you? As for Rush, the only time I’ve ever heard the man is when I was trapped in a rental car with a young uberLeft colleague who insisted on listening to Rush so he could yell epithets at the radio.

          • FriendlyGoat

            What economic history/theory are you talking about? We have had the lowest high-end taxation in modern American history during the last ten years and both jobs and wages are stagnated in the private sector. The reality of it is SO BAD that the Federal Reserve can barely mask the problem by printing trillions of dollars to fix the mess that tax cuts created. I know you guys are getting famous for climate-change denial, but do you have to be economically blind too?

          • Fed Up

            Liberals seem to know even less about economics than science, which is truly hard to believe. It’s amazing what this country did economically for its first 140 years without an income tax. Please, read a little history.

          • FriendlyGoat

            It’s actually much MORE amazing how much MORE this country did WITH high income taxes. Imagine, for instance, we could make progress even without slavery, child labor, and the concentration of wealth of the Gilded Age.

          • HJD

            You’re really stuck on these tax increases as if it would actually make a difference if we taxed all these greedy people at 100%. You’re not very economically literate.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Actually, 90% is a high enough top bracket, and only on VERY high incomes. Remember, the high rates are not just about raising revenue. They are about curbing excesses. We don’t really want “quant” wizards, for instance, who can out-trade everybody else in the markets.
            Only idiots “celebrate them for their great success” at lessening the investment potential of the rest of the nation.

          • Suzyqpie

            Who gets to decide what constitutes “VERY high incomes?”

          • FriendlyGoat

            The people.

          • Suzyqpie

            What about 4th & 5th Amendments constitutionally protected property rights guarantee against takings without just compensation….Two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner is only equitable for the sheep if the sheep has a gun.

          • FriendlyGoat

            We have an amendment specifically to permit income tax. Otherwise we would not be the exceptional nation. Yes, the tax structure is precisely what made us exceptional.

          • Suzyqpie

            The (well) Fed is to adjudicate what constitutes “VERY high incomes” via the 16th Amendment?

          • dwick_OR

            You really need to get over this fixation on the top marginal income tax rates. Federal receipts from individual income taxes as a percentage of GDP since the Bush tax cuts are about the same as they were back in the 1950s glory years Democrats obsess over when the top marginal rate was 90%. Total federal receipts post-WWII have bounced around between 15 to 19% of GDP – just like they did from 2002 to 2008.

            The reason the country was able to do so much MORE back then was because we weren’t spending nearly 70% of every tax dollar on transfer payments (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Income Security, Veterans benefits, etc)

          • FriendlyGoat

            The transfer payments do more to keep the whole economy afloat than you think.

          • dwick_OR

            “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”
            - Margaret Thatcher

          • Alan_McIntire

            You overlook that “Obamacare” is a significant tax on employers

          • FriendlyGoat

            The main “tax” on employers is that they were never given the opportunity to have health care lifted off their backs with a sensible single-payer plan.

          • radioone

            Hey, it’s the American Way. Rush hawks mattresses and Hillary hawks “herself”. Plus you should be happy now that the “Bush tax cuts” are gone, Federal Tax Revenues set records through May, and big corps are moving overseas to become part of the Global Economy!

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yeah, it’s really cool that my local Walgreens—-”down on the corner of Happy and Healthy”, as they advertise—-can move its tax home to Switzerland.

          • Corlyss

            Not very conservative of me, but I terminated my donating to them when WETA

          • Corlyss

            A guaranteed way to stay ignorant. CPB still suffers from CDS (conservative derangement syndrome) they contracted when the Republicans took the Congress in 2004. One needs more discrimination in dealing with the programing by the propaganda machine there.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I actually like to listen to people who are not beholden to the makers of Viagra, Cialis and a rotating dozen of other prescription drugs or to the writers of reverse mortgages.

          • HJD

            No, they’re just beholden to Uncle Sam’s $, that being ours.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yeah, that’s why they can do the best programming.

          • Suzyqpie

            The PBS pledge drive conversations could be looped and used as a form of punishment in prisons.

          • FriendlyGoat

            We endure them instead of commercials for erectile dysfunction drugs.

          • D. Zortea

            Do you earn a living? If so, you are beholden to a capitalist! I guess you hate your employer! Or you are self made and have a very disturbing view of yourself.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I’m retired. Accounting in a manufacturing company first. Then accounting in a church-run charity. Then successful small self-employment, not in accounting.

          • Suzyqpie

            Your man 0bama is paying for the viagra-cialis-diabetis-kneepain-catherter-backbrace-swallowing-therpy gallimaufry.

          • HJD

            taxpayer funded PBS, that is.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, thank heavens. No one else has any journalistic freedom while censored by corporate advertisers.

          • D. Zortea

            Government funded and run news!? You are not too bright.

          • FriendlyGoat

            It’s not government run. If it was, they wouldn’t be doing pieces on the over-reach of the NSA.

          • Suzyqpie

            Don’t worry about the NSA. Quote Pres 0bama, “We do not have a domestic spying program.” ICYMI, Pres 0bama said that on a Leno Show appearance.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Do you think Obama created spying or the whole “national security” apparatus?

          • Suzyqpie

            Sen 0bama railed at great length about the Patriot Act. In Dec 2005 Sen Obama said, “This legislation gives people no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear their plea, no jury will hear their case. This is just plain wrong.” Sen 0bama was correct. In May 2011, Pres 0bama signed a 4 yr extension to the Patriot Act with no changes. Sen 0bama would not recognize Pres 0bama, which is my criticism of Pres 0bama. Sen 0bama 2007, “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US govt can’t pay its own bills. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit,” quote Sen 0bama. How many times has Pres 0bama raised the debt ceiling….Sen 0bama would not recognize Pres 0bama. Democrat duplicity is so awesome. Pres 0bama was the rightful recipient of the Lie of the Year award.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Coulda had McCain/Palin, you know?

          • Suzyqpie

            We have Pres 0bama, “Eat your peas.”

      • Joe_NS

        I don’t know how old you are, but anyone suggesting that the predictably liberal, monotone media of 40 or 50 years ago was “balanced” is still just a child—no, an infant—at heart.

        Impossible to overstate how stupid your comment is.

        • FriendlyGoat

          Well, admittedly I was being a tad sarcastic at the overdone tone of the article. But Walter Cronkite for instance, was not once the most trusted man in America for no reason at all. Conservatives watched him all the time and were not over-wrought UNTIL they got a bunch of right-wingers purchasing media operations and then TELLING them what to think. (They follow like sheep, unfortunately.)

          • Fed Up

            Ask yourself why Fox News even exists, let alone dominates the cable “news” market. If the MSM had been earning even a D+ grade over the past decade or two, Fox would be struggling to survive. But no, the mainstreamers failed with a capital F in every aspect. You want right-wing media punditry to be reasonable? Start demanding the MSM devote a smidgen of integrity to their professions instead of ‘smidgens of corruption,’ to coin a phrase.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Fox is not successful for telling people the truth, as you imagine. Fox is successful for capturing a targeted audience—-not much different than the way soap operas were also VERY successful when more women stayed home to watch them. People go to Fox News because they want to be with their tribe. There, the advertisers sell you stuff.

          • Suzyqpie

            I detest the smidgens. They make such a mess in the park and on the sidewalk. I wish people would quit feeding them.

          • HJD

            FriendlyGoat, you do not know much about Conservatives if you think we follow like sheep.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Are you kidding? The lobbyists, the NRA, the anti-union movement, the anti-science movement, the anti-teacher movement, many of the churches, and every titan who wants a tax cut are rounding you guys up the the corral better than prize-winning sheep dogs.

          • D. Zortea

            And every ‘anti’ that you mentioned are run by, followed like your ‘sheep’, and adored by leftists. So, what is your point?

          • FriendlyGoat

            My point is that many conservatives are being duped for their contributions and their votes. They are VERY reactionary and easily led. This is why they are the targets of all those fundraising letters. They can make some of you even believe the financial crisis of 2008 was Obama’s fault. They have made most of you believe that nobody is benefiting from ObamaCare. They even make some believe that Michelle is a witch for trying to get kids a more healthy diet at school. It’s a sight on earth what they can say to get you to write a check to “Americans for Blank”.

          • dwick_OR

            eh… you mean like the one further below that came in Friday from my good friend Nancy?

            First, President Obama is not the first sitting president to be sued by Congress.
            And Sarah Palin is the only Republican of any stature(?) who has talked about
            impeachment. There is no such movement afoot in the House.
            I get several emails a week like this from Democratic Party organizations soliciting donations to combat alleged ‘threats’ of one type or another.

            —-
            From: Nancy Pelosi [mailto:dccc@dccc.org]
            Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 4:44 PM
            Subject: Impeachment (TODAY)

            Sorry to email you late on a Friday, but I need your urgent support:

            - Yesterday: for the first time in history, Congress voted to sue a sitting president
            - Today: the White House alerted us that they believe “Speaker Boehner…has opened the door to impeachment…”

            What Republicans are doing to President Obama is historic — and offensive.

            With everything happening right now, I hope you have a chance to chip in to defend President Obama.

            We could use your support today.

            ALL GIFTS TODAY TRIPLE-MATCHED!

            If you’ve saved your payment information, your donation will go through immediately:

            Chip in $5 immediately >>

            Chip in $35 immediately >>

            Chip in $50 immediately >>

            Chip in $100 immediately >>

            Chip in $250 immediately >>

            Or click here to donate another amount.

            Thanks,

            Nancy

          • FriendlyGoat

            Well, is Boehner really preparing a lawsuit or not?

          • dwick_OR

            Neither Boehner or anyone in the House has publicly said anything about impeachment… unlike Pelosi back in 2007 when she was freely throwing around the i-word while also threatening to sue Bush over his use of signing statements (you know, like the 26 signing statements Obama has issued to date after pledging during his 2008 he wouldn’t use them…)

          • FriendlyGoat

            When Sarah Palin says it, it’s Republican gospel. That’s what you people pay her for.

          • dwick_OR

            “When Sarah Palin says it, it’s Republican gospel. That’s what you people pay her for.”, he squeaked – out of anything substantive to further contribute to the conversation.

          • FriendlyGoat

            It’s true, though. Sarah is your spirit guide.

          • dwick_OR

            And Sarah is to you as The Koch Brothers are to Harry Reid. She sure gets you people worked up…

          • OHIO GAL

            Projection

          • HJD

            FriendlyGoat, after reading so many of your comments, I can only surmise you’ve had a rough childhood.

          • inyouri

            I surmised it does’t pay much in taxes.

          • FriendlyGoat

            And I can “surmise” you eat macaroni and cheese with a pet goose in a tree house. We can all “surmise” anything.

          • Suzyqpie

            FriendlyGoat has participated in a good conversation until now. FriendlyGoat, if your goal was to pen a comment bereft of value, information, or scholarship, consider yourself a success with this mac-cheese-surmise-treehouse gallimaufry.

          • FriendlyGoat

            What is someone supposed to say when the critics start “surmising” about the comment writers personally instead of debating the issues? My “goal” was to blow him off.

          • Suzyqpie

            FriendlyGoat, roorback, look it up. While you are on merriam-webster dot com check out non compos mentis, Denial is very powerful, at some point the democrats will have to acknowledge the debris field that 0bama has created.
            It is hard to acknowledge that your whole believe system is a debris field.

          • FriendlyGoat

            B.S. Look that up.

          • Suzyqpie

            Tu quoque, look that one up, it is you.

          • Suzyqpie

            The totality of your comment is roorback.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I don’t think that’s a real word.

          • Suzyqpie

            You are, not surprisingly, wrong. Merriam-Webster is your friend.

          • tm11999

            walter was trusted because we thought he was like us, an american, little did we know he was a communist/progressive put into the job to change the conscience of people and get them to question the very base of what made this country. he was happy to be pampered by the eastern communist elitists as long as he lived. a real lying pig of a man!

          • FriendlyGoat

            Curiously, most conservatives liked him.

          • Boritz

            He was very likeable which is a desirable trait in a teleprompter reader and there is no limit to how far these skills can take a person.

          • tm11999

            he was a liar, so there’s that.

          • mesocyclone

            This conservative watched Walter Cronkite, and saw his left wing roots revealed in his highly biased reporting of the Vietnam War, of which this conservative was a participant. Cronkite, self labeled as “the most trusted man,” was not revealed earlier because most of the facts supporting anything but a left wing view were suppressed by the left-learning MSM, of which Cronkite was a part.

            When I hear liberals claiming that right wingers only think that way because they are told what to think, I hear projection – liberals think that way because *they* are told what to think and cannot imagine anyone independently coming up with ideas.

          • FriendlyGoat

            What is/was the right wing view of the Vietnam War?

          • halpap

            The reason he was the most trusted man in America is that there were no challenges to the liberal monolith that controlled the media. Now there are alternative outlets.

      • D. Zortea

        Seriously!? Fox is one channel! How many of the big 3 and the rest of cable, are in the tank for libs? Jagoff!

      • CosmotKat

        Your juvenile rant is lacking any semblance of intellectual honesty.

        • FriendlyGoat

          What makes you think so? That it doesn’t conform to the conservatives’ pack mentality?

          • OHIO GAL

            You throw out falsehoods without facts.
            How’s that?

          • FriendlyGoat

            You must have finally found Saddam’s WMD, huh?

          • OHIO GAL

            ISIS did lil fella

          • FriendlyGoat

            Are you old or big? You seem to think others are smaller and younger.

          • OHIO GAL

            I’m Obama’s age and very petite.

      • Boxhawk

        What flavor is your kool-aid today?

        • FriendlyGoat

          It’s the Tea you have to watch out for.

    • VictorErimita

      All true. But the time to see through the media mythmaking was before voting for Obama twice, as Prof. Mead did, not after. So many of us saw through it all along. But not the terribly smart, intellectually sublime members of academia, elite opinion and members of the Establishment hive mind. Now, after electing and re-electing the most catastrophically destructive president in our history, a man of zero career accomplishment and marinated in radical socialist orthodoxy, they dissect his myriad failings for us. Well, thanks for nothing. I’m sure we will be reading about the incompetence and arrogance of Hillary or Elizabeth Warren in a few years, after the same group of wise sages supports one of them.

      • JoeyBagels

        Absolutely. And didn’t Prof. Mead write a love poem about Hillary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department just a few weeks ago? This latest piece of his is spot on; but when his Party beckons in November ’16, the good professor will heed the call….

  • Angel Martin

    excellent dissection of the US media by Professor Meade.

    I am always amused at the US media doing profiles of what they see as biased media outfits like RT/Russian Today.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russian-news-english-accent-11-12-2005/

    RT is condemned as propaganda, biased, favourable to a specific political faction… hey wait a minute !

    • Curious Mayhem

      Yep.

  • JamesDrouin

    All completely predictable and predicted.

    The self induced intellectually retarded left wing liberal response:

    ‘Libya failed because of George Bush, and because Republicans wouldn’t ‘invest’ in stabilizing the country after it was freed.’

  • Jmaci

    Excellent analysis, WRM. Are you ever invited to appear on any of the “Sabbath gasbag shows”? You would be a refreshing change from the usual suspects.

    • Curious Mayhem

      But don’t start emitting gas yourself — your fans will never forgive you. We have high standards :)

  • Anthony

    Better late than never – not much to add WRM (“the reckless and thoughtless Libya intervention” sums it up).

  • sunpapushi

    “a well-meaning humanitarian way over her head who wrecked a country out of misguided ideology”

    God save us all from the well-intentioned ones.

    • tricknologist

      Those “well intentions” are a myth.

      • FriendlyGoat

        Yeah, that’s what Jesus said somewhere in a Conservative’s Bible.

        • tricknologist

          Looks like I hit a raw nerve.

  • Pete

    “But since both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have their fingerprints all over Libya, there isn’t a lot of press hunger for a detailed, unsparing autopsy into this stinking corpse of policy flub.”

    What you write here is true, Mr. Mead. But think of its implications.

    Our media is thoroughly corrupt in being as partisan as it is. You should write a piece on how dangerous this is for the Republic, because it is a poison that could spell its doom.

    • JoeyBagels

      By not thoroughly critiquing the Obama administration’s handling–or mishandling—of the nation’s foreign policy, the media allows them to keep on making the same mistakes over and over again–without even attempting to correct them. This is the what will have dire consequences for all of us in the days and years ahead…

      • tricknologist

        I mostly agree, but what makes you think that Obama’s “mistakes” are actually mistakes ?

        The Left gets away with what they do because they use the old saying, “Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by ineptitude.” as a get out of jail free card.

        We as a people are willing to cut people some slack for good intentions for even the worst outcomes. The Left uses that tendency to play people for chumps.

        • JoeyBagels

          I understand what you’re saying, and maybe I should have put quotes around “mistakes.” But my point is that the media allows the Obama administration to keep mismanaging crisis after crisis–whether through ineptitude, venality , cynical politics. Every other administration had to answer for their actions, and in doing so learns to make changes or alterations to their agenda in response to criticism from the media–and from within their party, and from constituents. Obama doesn’t have to–to the nations detriment….

          • tricknologist

            I understood your point.

            It’s just that they’ve gotten away with so much under the myth of “good intentions” that it needs to called out at every opportunity.

          • radioone

            But, with the Libs, “good intentions” is all that’s required. Outcomes……well, that’s Somebody Else’s problem.

  • wigwag

    If it’s a punch line you’re looking for it pays to take a look at the most recent comment on the Libyan situation uttered by the class clown currently masquerading as the American Secretary of State.

    Just this evening, Secretary Kerry appeared before the press at the U.S. Embassy in Paris accompanied by Foreign Minister Davutoglu of Turkey (the country which recently compared Prime Minister Netanyahu to Adolph Hitler) and Foreign Minister al-Attiyah of Qatar (the country which provides more funding for Hamas terrorists and other Muslim Brotherhood thugs than any nation in the world).

    Before thanking Turkey and Qatar for their great work in seeking a cease fire in Gaza, the American Secretary of State made some brief remarks about Libya. Here’s what the imbecile who directs American foreign policy had to say,

    “…So many people died and gave so much effort to the birth of the new Libya, and
    we’re very, very hopeful that together all those people will recognize that the
    current course of violence will only bring chaos and possibly longer term
    difficulties.”

    It’s hard to overstate what a fool Kerry is and it is frightening to contemplate what a dilettante, his boss is.

    Kerry’s remarks can be read in their entirety at the State Department website,

    http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/07/229811.htm

    After reading them it was hard to know whether to laugh or to cry.

    • Curious Mayhem

      John Kerry, patrician airhead.

  • Corlyss

    I agree with the analysis mostly. But then I was there 9/11/12 while Chris Stevens’ body was still being dragged around the compound in grizzly triumph. As one poster says, “Better late than never.” I must note, however, we weren’t alone in the creation of the debacle and Doofus would never have moved on Libya at all if not for the hectoring of the bloviating dimwits in France and Italy and a bunch of equally dim HR pimps here in the US. It is merely confirmation that no one in their right mind would follow a Democrat, especially Doofus, around the corner for a smoke, never mind to undertake military intervention anywhere in the world, including the US border.

    I cheered when Romney jumped on Benghazi within hours of receiving the news, utterly dismayed by the administration’s and the media’s attempts at disinformation and misdirection, esp. the latter’s gullibility. But then the fact that the media is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic propaganda apparatus is a story becoming old enough to vote. As market analysts say, “That’s baked in.” Outrage over it, at this late date, is tardy, trite, and feckless. I hate to accept it as a part of the permanent landscape of political life, but there it is. Can’t fight gravity either.

    • disqus_yeZNegncsV

      “Ef” Candy Crowley, the big oaf.

    • Corlyss

      At last! I am finally hearing people parse the numbers about why the electorate does not want Obama to do anything militarily: pollsters and analysts are starting to draw a distinction between isolationism that most here think is the reason and the fact that for 6 agonizing years we’ve watched Doofus and his snarky apology tours and his genuflection to Islamicists and his resets and his “America ain’t nothing special” and his red lines and his Benghazi/Syria/Iran/Russia debacles and misjudgments and don’t want him to touch anything. Better to wait for someone Val doesn’t control 24/7.

      • B-Sabre

        Yep. My opposition to this Administration bombing Syria over the invisible “Red Line” was not that bombing would be wrong, but there was no way The Gang That Can’t Shoot Straight could execute the plan in any effective manner.

        • Suzyqpie

          A microcosm display of the 0bama’s administrations ability to assemble a complex plan was demonstrated in Bundy vs BLM, true, that endeavor was only made “complex” by ineptitude. There was only a weak Plan A, there was no evidence that a Plan B or Plan C existed. BLM launched with millions of dollars in govt assets, rounded up the cattle, released the cattle, and it’s Splitsville, we’re outta here. No achievement whatsoever and the mission, of questionable merit from the beginning, has never been heard from again. The binLaden raid was a very complex plan. It was, however, 10 yrs in the making and all 0bama had to do was get out of the way of it. However, staying true to form, they created a debris field in the aftermath of the binLaden raid with the gallimaufry of press releases and conflicting roorback.

  • TRE

    Funny how “things” for the people of Libya were better under Kadaffi, just like they were for the people of Iraq under Saddam.

    Neither dictators were champions of humanity and reason; however, they did far, far, far less harm than ISIS and the other Islamists are doing in those countries today. Sometimes, it’s best to leave other countries deal with their own piles of dung…

    …because every country is ruled at the consent of its people. If the people desperately want change, they rise up with skin in the game and make the change. That is “smart diplomacy.”

    Luckily, in the United States of America, we have more civilized ways of reclaiming the power. Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry have all worked hand-in-hand to destroy foreign countries (financially support and strategically spread the Muslim Brotherhood and the terrorist groups) and work against every long-term American interest: including State Sovereignty.

    Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John Forbes Kerry are either all ignorant self-deluded fools, or obeying a master beyond the shadows. It is just too unreal to take in.

    But, the government is at the consent of its people, and we the people NOW act more vigilantly to ensure federally elected and state-wide elected representatives, as well as their appointees, all faithfully uphold their oaths of office and duties thereof, or be lawfully removed from office.

  • ta111

    Liberalism is a mental disorder.

  • LarryD

    For years, some have criticized the pragmatic policy of dealing with authoritarian regimes that were non-hostile to us, even going as far as making alliances of convenience with them.

    Libya was the first example of the idealist counter policy. Turns out the pragmatists were right, removing a dictatorship can make thing worse. To add to it, the idealists violated every applicable law, US and international: The War Powers Act, Congresses war declaring power, the UN Security Council resolution (which only authorized enforcing a no-fly zone). The Left has been wont to label every conflict it doesn’t like an illegal war, the Libyan adventure indisputably was. And how many voices on the Left were raised in criticism?

    • https://www.facebook.com/ritchietheriveter Ritchie The Riveter

      Turns out the pragmatists were right, removing a dictatorship can make thing worse.

      Not when one is willing to deal with the aftermath of such removal.

      It took a while for Mr. Bush to become sufficiently willing to deal with it … but he eventually did, and Iraq was turning around.

      That us, until we elected someone who had NO willingness to deal with it, except to use it as a convenient club against more prudent people in his own nation.

      Therein, is the difference.

    • ojfl

      What Iraq had told us Larry is that before doing anything like removing a despot, the US needs to create relationships in country, to understand who are the people that can really be trusted. But it seems we did not learn the lessons.

  • Maynerd

    Thank you for doing the work the establishment media refuses to do.

    Obama and the left are veering off a cliff. They need a responsible media to call them out and promote course corrections and critical thinking.

  • bflat879

    I can’t even imagine what Obama’s poll numbers would be if he had Bush’s press. It’s really come down to the fact we don’t have to ask “what would it be like if Obama were a Republican” it’s really obvious now. Why do you think Obama can go out on the stump and look the camera in the eye and say, “Sue me.” If Bush had done that he’d have been skewered.

  • ojfl

    “But luckily for Team Obama, the mainstream press would rather die than subject liberal Democrats to the critiques it reserves for the GOP.” If this does not summarize perfectly the state of affairs I do not know what will. And I fear it does not limit itself to foreign policy issues. It also permeates the coverage of domestic issues as well. In the minds of the media there is never two sides of the issue. After all there is a reason why the trust in the media is at an all time low and will go lower with time until only the true believers are left.

  • disqus_yeZNegncsV

    We all know the answer to that question.
    I truly hate the press. They are slime.

  • JoeyBagels

    Yes, the media is effectively the propaganda arm of the Obama administration, and there are three reasons why they will not dare challenge, critique or question their misconduct of foreign policy, First, they agree with Obama politically ;Second, the media is mindful of the fact that Obama-as the first African-American president–must not be allowed to be perceived as a failure. No matter what happens under his watch, he must be remembered for all posterity as a heroic, trailblazing combination of Jackie Robinson and JFK; Third, the media will do anything in it’s power to avoid giving a propaganda victory to the Republican Party. They musn’t be allowed to capitalize electorally by reminding the nation that they were right to oppose him. This is also true of pundits, bloggers and radio talk show hosts of the conservative media. They’ll never be allowed–outside of their echo chamber–to burnish their credentials with the public at large by crowing about how they were right about this inept, narcissistic community organizer. This is something the mainstream media will simply not abide. They must always control the narrative….

  • surfdog

    Russia was happy to ” reset ” back to the cold war and Libya disintegrates due to the bungling of Obama and Clinton . Ready for Hillary ?

  • Brian J.

    Nonsense. The Bush-Cheney intervention in Iraq killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, thousands of American soldiers, and cost something close to a trillion dollars to produce a civil war-wracked country with exactly the kind of Islamist successor state that we want to war to prevent. Whatever can be said of the Libyan intervention, it hasn’t been that bad. Obama succeeded when graded on the curve with Bush, making this abysmal performance look less bad than his opponents’. (It doesn’t help that people like you have no ideas going forward or constructive criticism.)

    • smedley

      Yeah, when Bush left Iraq was a seething cauldron of ethnic tension while under Obama it has been an island of stability and democracy – tra la, la, la, la. Did you even read the article? Do you realize you are doing exactly what Meade accused the media of doing?

      • Brian J.

        No, I’m putting the situation into the context Meade refuses to acknowledge; Obama’s mistake was much less costly than Bush’s, and there’s no real way to criticize Obama without subjecting Bush to a hundred times worse.

    • Timothy Lane

      You seem to have carefully forgotten that Obama ‘n’ Biden proclaimed Iraq a success story from 2010 to 2012. Whatever has happened since then clearly is not the fault of either Bush.

      • Brian

        Exactly.

        People forget that the military in Iraq did more than shoot and blow things up. They inserted themselves between factions that were hostile to one another and mediated fair and mostly impartial settlements of disputes.

        The mediation role of our military and diplomatic corps was every bit as important as our role as combatants.

    • HJD

      That’s the problem with you liberals….’it hasn’t been that bad’. Try telling that to the four families of our fallen diplomats. You have no shame, it would seem all that is important is covering Obama’s backside. As for no ideas or constructive criticism, what difference, at this point, does it make?

    • Terry D

      Brian, it’s a f-cking mess in Libya and your boy Barry has his hands all over it. The only thing were wondering is why you’re so stupid.

  • smedley

    Let’s be honest. What would the press say if Obama were a (white) Republican?

  • Lyle7

    The executive branch is such an absolute joke at the moment. We’ll all be dead before President Obama gets his just deserts.

  • jb

    ‘you have a classic exhibition of reckless incompetence—of American arrogance, …”
    Well, no. Substitute out American for progressivism and then you are corect.

  • Potomac cynic

    George Bush was unmercifully vilified by the press for eight years and his approval ratings were in the upper 30% range. Barack Obama’s approval rating is approx. 40% despite a fawning, sycophantic media. What would Obama’s rating be if he had been subjected to the same treatment as GWB?

    • Suzyqpie

      Sans the MSM, there would have been no Pres 0bama. They, de facto, created him by their steadfast refusal to report on the reality of who 0bama really is, the nefarious associations, the college transcripts, the trip to Pakistan….on & on.

      • Potomac cynic

        Dan Quayle was relentlessly mocked when he added an “e” to potato, which BTW is an acceptable archaic spelling. Where were the snorts of derision from the MSM when Obama claimed that there were 57 states in the Union? *crickets*

        • GitOffMahLawn

          …or that asthmatic children used breathalyzers?

          • Potomac cynic

            … or that the border is secure?

        • dwick_OR

          …or pronouncing ‘corps’ as ‘corpse’?

          • Potomac cynic

            Unfortunately, the list goes on and on.

  • Neotrotsky

    Agree, it is the left bias in the MSM; however, with Papa Obama, the left’s ‘soft bigotry’ of low expectations for minorities is also a factor. Luckily, for the MSM, the first black President was a Democrat. Had he/she been a Republican, the MSM would have had a hard time connecting their bias against the right and supporting someone just because their were a “minority-first”. Of course, after Papa Obama, the press will feel free to attack any conservative minority running for President. Having Papa Obama gives them a “win-win”. They had a black candidate they supported and now, it frees them to go after any other black candidate. Of course, it is safe to assume, they will save that for those from the right.

  • Benzion

    The premise that the media would attack a GOP President for this policy is likely true, but to the extent Obama helped this along, all he did was speed up the inevitable. Gaddafi was going to trigger a civil war if Obama did not.

    • Terry D

      Nice try at excuse making, but you even suck at that. Obama is a moron and you’re getting tired of making excuses for the incompetent moron.

    • AlFromBayShore

      You are making the assumption that the fall of Qadaffi was an inevitability. You have nothing to prove this. The one thing we know is that the strife in Libya was helped along with U.S. military power. You’re attempt at discounting this factor amounts to a rationalization which is not supported by anything. History is full of examples where civil strife and conflict did not lead to an inevitable removal of a leader. Iran is one example. Syria seems to be holding on, even with U.S. and Saudi intervention via supplying arms. You are trying to sustain a pro-Obama narrative with assumptions that have little foundation in the course of recent world history. Your comment is nothing but a campaign meme.

      • Benzion

        It is perfectly plausible Qadaffi would still be in power, but there would without question be a bloody civil war regardless. We have seen in Syria what a strongman can do when the people (both good and bad people) rise up against them and the west does not stop them.

        Again, I agree the results of Obama’s policies are bad. But that only goes to prove US effort were wasted. The blood and carnage was inevitable regardless of US action.

      • Brian

        Exactly . . . Gaddafi might well have remained in power but for Mr. Obama and the Europeans exceeding the UN resolution whose authority they operated under.

        Would that have been worse than what has followed? I don’t think so.

      • GitOffMahLawn

        “History is full of examples where civil strife and conflict did not lead to an inevitable removal of a leader. ”

        Exactly so- you could point to the unrest in Iran that soetero ignored instead of encouraging that occurred during his first term of misadministration.

  • http://BPICampus.com/ Crissie Brown

    This article presumes that the U.S. under President Obama invaded Libya and toppled Muammar Gaddafi, just as the U.S. under President Bush invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein.

    But the U.S. never invaded Libya. The Libyan people overthrew Muammar Gaddafi. Our only role was to provide EW and communication aircraft in support of a NATO mission. The so-called Pottery Barn rule — “you break it, you own it” — doesn’t obligate the U.S. to fix Libya, and we haven’t … because we didn’t “break it.” The Libyan people “broke it,” and they’ll have to fix it.

    • paulsailor64

      You don’t really think the Libyan “people” would have overthrown Gaddafi without US air power, do you?

    • Terry D

      Crissie, get off the democratic talking points. The article is saying Obama is a total fool with his handling of the downfall of Libya. He is real good at giving the speech and telling everyone his in your Dreams plan to do something and then he checks out and does nothing, except maybe play a round of golf.

    • http://theological-geography.net/ David R. Graham

      Oh good grief, Chrissie, USSOCOM and CIA were all over Libya on ground, in air, in space and at sea. There is no air or fires support without ground recon and guidance.

    • Brian

      As I point out above, the US could have stopped the Libyan adventure in it’s tracks by simply telling the Europeans that they would enjoy neither our political nor our material support if they exceeded the UN resolution whose authority they were operating under. (The goal of the resolution was to protect civilians, not to topple Gaddafi.)

      In the event, Mr. Obama supported the overthrow of the Gaddafi regime by adding material and political support for an active air campaign against government forces. (He “led from behind.”)

      Even toppling Gaddafe could have ended successfully IF the victors had been willing to deal with huge problems following Gaddafi’s departure.

      But they were not. And that’s dumb foreign policy on stilts.

  • WBC

    The combination of Barry Obumwad, the Hildebeast (a/k/a Baroness Voldemort), Jean le Kerre, and Chuck “trannies in the ranks” Hegel have made an utter hash of American foreign and defense policy. Our enemies are laughing and our former friends are desperately looking for alternative support and leadership. In only a few short years they ;have destroyed a tradition and a level of trust that has taken a century to produce. It will take a generation to rebuild presuming that the electorate is smart enough to reject the next demoncrap candidate. Words are insufficient to describe the stupidity and ineptitude of this gaggle of scum.

  • Jason Mayo

    May I add just this addendum: Tom Friedman’s incessant sophmoric comments in the NYT need to be called out. Friedman is a dangerous idol of the public and is why one must read the MSM reports carefully.

  • accountant

    As Americans we have come to accept that we are living under the “Hey Dude, that was a long time ago” foreign policy regime.

  • Poppa

    the entire obama administration is clueless that hash tags don’t make others do what they want them to. Juvenile and incompetent, they do more damage to America every day.

    • Suzyqpie

      Only the scale of the final damage done is in doubt.

  • Samuel Adams

    Borrowing from Keith Jackson…”Whoa Nellie!”. Prof Mead is one of the sober voices out there, this just shows the degree to which the political news cycle obsessed incompetents in the White House have turned everything they touch to cr*p.

    • GitOffMahLawn

      yep, instead of a president we have King Mierdas.

  • internet823

    Everything Obama has done, be it domestic or international has been a complete and total failure. This administration is the most corrupt in modern history, including Nixon. The most inept, including Carter, yet as the article points out the press continues to worship Czar Obama and the majority of people don’t even realize it. An excellent article, too bad this Goat idiot manipulated the conversation into tax cuts or anything but the truth about the Media, Education, Union, and Entertainment Industries manipulation and propaganda.

  • Rod

    Mr. Mead demonstrates a talent Rush Limbaugh is noted for, i.e., pointing out what they’re not saying. It can be quite effective, since the obvious eludes most of us as we concentrate on what we are hearing, rather than what we should be hearing.

    • AlFromBayShore

      Let the record show that your comment is devoid of any specifics that can be used to both substantiate your case as well as to discredit the one made by Mead. Your commentary has nice sounding words, a criticism but no examples of any action or event. If I didn’t know any better, I’d suspect you to be among the many liberals who reflexively come to the defense of democrats without giving any thought to the reasons why you support your extremely vague and general ideas.

      • Rod

        Let the record show that your comment makes no sense since I was complimenting Mr. Mead, not discrediting him nor criticizing him. And you don’t know any better, so you probably do think I’m a liberal.

        Precise enough for you?

  • Joanne

    Smart and Obama; two words which should never again be used in the same sentence. It was all hype, lies, smoke and mirrors. But you can only blow smoke up society’s a&$ for so long before it clears and the truth comes out, courtesy of a world that refuses to bend to the US liberal agenda.

  • dontblamemeborn1981

    Re Samantha Power as a “well-meaning humanitarian,” humanitarians can’t get the two children in a two-child family to get along with each other. I would give anything to have public policy made by people who are well aware that conflict will never, ever come to end and not by people who think that conflict will come to an end someday. Forgive me for being cynical about the fact that people just can’t get along with each other at any given date in the future for the remainder of time.

    • Guest

      We might have a chance if we can get rid of idiot religion.

      • http://theological-geography.net/ David R. Graham

        You start the parade

  • inyouri

    It doesn’t help when many of the big letter networks higher ups have a family member or a spouse working for the obama administration.

  • Attila

    …And we’re stuck with President Selfie, his ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSNBC, CNN, NYT and WaPost media lapdogs and the Democratic Party, asleep at the wheel, for the next two years. God help America.

  • dave72

    Obama’s smart diplomacy is an oxymoron.

  • Mike CJ

    When Obama first started, I wrote on a liberal blog that we were going to see if the “professor’s ” way of doing things would work. For years professors had said, particularly liberal professors, that we were dumb in what we were doing and “here’s the intelligent way to do foreign policy. ”

    Finally, they had their chance to try their basic philosophy.

    It’s been an utter failure.

    • Suzyqpie

      Ditto the economic advisors, Austan Goolsbee, Peter Orzag, Chistina Romer, Larry Somers, Alan Krueger. They used to write brilliant articles of what would work if they were to be in charge, and now they write brilliant articles about why it did not work when they were in charge. (paraphrase VictorDavisHanson)

  • Ronald W. Mann

    The Zero administration is a failure at everything, foreign and domestic

  • Arch

    The press have decided Hillary will be the next president – She’s got the credentials and it’s her turn. Hogwash!

    Her tenure at Foggy Bottom was a disaster. The Middle East is in chaos and sectarian wars. Russia and China are rebuilding their armed forces and threatening their neighbors again. Iran is on a path to build a nuclear weapon, while North Korea, who already has one, is developing an ICBM capable of reaching the West Coast.

    Hillary’s excuse is that it’s all Obama’s fault. He sets the foreign policies and she did what she was told. The problem with that is that had she strongly disagreed with policy, she should have resigned. By remaining as Secretary of State and touting her experience in foreign affairs, she must also accept responsibility for the failures. Her most grievous failure, leaving 4 Americans to die in Benghazi, renders her unsuitable to be Commander-in-Chief.

    • Suzyqpie

      Terrific political pageantry will be delivered watching how skillfully Hillary distances herself from the debris field, domestic and international, that 0bama has created. Yes, Hillary made a substantial contribution to the debris field. The evidence of Hillary’s contribution is about to be, as they say in the ME, disappeared.

  • Arch

    A diplomat friend points out that American diplomacy is only as effective as long as our friends and adversaries believe we will act on our promises. There’s an old saying, that diplomacy is saying, “Nice dog, nice dog until you can find a big rock.” The US military is a very big rock assuming others believe you will use it.

  • Terry D

    Which is a worse nightmare? Our MSM or our President. Add another one, the people that believe in them.

    • Suzyqpie

      They operate as a triumvirate nurturing each other. They are analogous to the symbiosis between the host and the parasite.

  • ChangeHopeInAZ

    Is it any wonder that our foreign policy has become a punch line having the likes of Kerry and Biden as point men in the world of foreign diplomacy? There are plenty of people who have long memories of these two clowns and their lack of accomplishments on the world stage but the same can be said of the person who appointed them so in the final analysis, we get what we deserve since the community organizer was elected not once but twice.

  • Rick Caird

    The foreign policy of this administration has been one catastrophe after another. Those catastrophes are followed immediately by MSM coverage that belies their claims of independence. The MSM were incompetent enough to tilt the scales to elect this incompetent, lying, thug of a President, not once, but twice.

  • Gregale

    How nice it must be to get credit for being “well intentioned.” Republicans can’t even get that much from the press!

    PS. You left out, “It’s all about the OOIIILLLL!!!!!!”

  • Black_Saint

    We needed a bigger-than-life President – we got …..A Radical Left wing Chicago Ghetto organizer that organized mob of takers to blackmail the makers that has been surrounded and tutored by American hating racists, terrorist and Marxist all of his life!

    We needed a well-grounded stable President – we got a certifiable narcissist.

    We needed bold leadership – we got a teleprompter

    We needed a seasoned hand – we got a hand in in our pockets

    We needed a champion for American citizens… We got hate for the Makers and a champion for the Takers and love for the uneducated horde of invading Welfare Takers!

    We needed a skilled bridge builder – we got a class-warfare specialist and inciter-in-chief.

    We needed practical, proven policies – we got socialist dogma and monumental waste nd rampant corruption.

    We needed an inspirational visionary – we got an ideologically blinded, left learning-impaired radical.

    We needed a Constitutional champion – we got a domestic enemy of the Constitution.

    We needed a restrained, respected and intimidating warrior – we got groveling, bowing, Barney Fife

    We needed a patriot – we got G. D. America, G. D. America, G. D. America.

    We needed someone to unshackle our economy – we got someone who is a friend to our enemies and an enemy to our businesses

    We needed a president beyond color – we got a green president embracing every whim and myth ever spoken by the kook environmental fringe.

    We needed mature, principled leadership – we got a narcissist, petulant, lying, whining, blaming, sulking, accusing, excusing, lazy, cowardly, despicable, man-child.

    It is a national disgrace that someone this Lazy, this Incompetent, this Corrupt, this Racist, could be elected to the office of the Presidency.

  • Joe Truth

    Shame, shame on the whites that voted for the seditious half-Kenyan piece of garbage!!

  • Black_Saint

    Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like a good President, Richard Nixon look honest, Slick Willy look truthful, Bush Jr. look smart and competent, Benedict Arnold look like a patriot and all ex-presidents look like workaholics!

    • Suzyqpie

      Awesome analogy….

  • pnkearns

    Whoa whoa whoa my friend…

    “(Libya) the scattering of insurgents and weapons to the four winds, and you have a classic exhibition of reckless incompetence—of American arrogance, ignorance, carelessness and moralism combining in a toxic stew to sink a fragile country we never understood.”

    Libya was a European war to protect European oil concessions led by the U.K. and France. Let’s get that one straight up front.

    • Brian

      Sure . . . but it could never have happened if the US had opposed it. (“No, we’re not going to support this adventure either politically or materially.”)

      And by “the US” I mean President Obama who justified the intervention on Samantha Power’s lofty moral “principle” of the US having a “Duty to Protect” (a “principle” that turned out not to apply beyond the borders of Libya itself, and arguably not even within Libya’s borders . . .).

      It’s also worth noting in passing that the way the US got the UN on board was to promise that our intervention would be limited to providing a “no fly zone.” In the event, the coalition launched air strikes on behalf of the “militants.”

      • GitOffMahLawn

        Speaking of which- does anyone have the Senate voting results of when soetero went to the Senate to seek approval for the military action in Libya?

  • Black_Saint

    “Yes We Can!” and “we’re the ones we’ve been waiting for;” of hope and change and slowing the rise of the oceans; of claiming his candidacy would “ring out across this land as a hymn that will heal this nation, repair this world, make this time different than all the rest”–lie in ruins and is the greatest display of narcissism,delusion and mass public stupidly in the history of this republic!

    Obama and his administration has turned into a national & world sick joke and a nightmare for American citizens and our friends around the world!

  • Jakareh

    You want “smart”, start by firing John Kerry. In fact, since he launched his career by telling vicious lies about his comrades-in-arms in Vietnam, that will also greatly help in the “integrity” department.

    • iconoclast

      Kerry hasn’t finished ensuring that Hamas will survive its latest acts of war and terrorism against Israel. Maybe after that….

  • Black_Saint

    The danger to America is not Barrack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with no accomplishment or qualification to give any hint that he would or could execute the duties of the world,s most important job..

    It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of the laziest, most incompetent, treasonous President in the history of the Republic than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved uneducated electorate looking for handouts thus willing to elect such unqualified men for their president.

    The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.

    The Republic can survive a Barrack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president.

    ” Author …..Former Premier of the Czech Republic Vaclav Klaus.

  • Doug Santo

    The Obama Administration is the worst administration of my adult life. The current MSM in the United States is the worst, most biased, most corrupt national media since the Civil War. I agree with the author’s post 100%.

    Doug Santo
    Pasadena, CA

  • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

    Mindblowing that you can dismiss a war we lied our way into, spent trillions on, cost thousands of American lives and tens of thousands of Americans maimed, killed hundreds of thousands of locals, and which was entire our own concoction but work up such indignation and contempt for a truly collaborative effort where we played a minimal (and relatively painless) role. The lessons of both Iraq and LIbya is that American Military Might can NOT call the shots any place it wants and any time it wants in any way it wants. Not even should not. CAN not. The Obama Administration works within reality. The Bush Administration defied it. The fact that reality is not always pleasant and not always subject to control by American foreign policy is always missing from the right wing analysis.

    • nickshaw

      Again with the “lied our way into”.
      American military might has indeed been able to call the shots in the past.
      A prosperous Japan and Germany attest to that.
      But, that was back when war was fought to be won.
      That hasn’t happened since the 50s.

    • ptm

      MIND BLOWING that anyone can be as STUPID as YOU!

    • ptm

      It’s ALSO mind blowing that someone like you can post almost 4,000 postings and get 10% up votes – TELLS YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW!

      • The_Repentant_Curmudgeon

        That is kind of amazing.

    • OBUMYA

      Mike, the 60s are over and Baby Boomers like you are dying.

      Can you hurry up please, we have a Nation to fix…go play with Billy Ayers, he has a great track record of blowing up his own people…including Obama.

      You’ll always have Ann Arbor…

      • http://idealog.com/blog Mike Shatzkin

        Startling how directly the specific fact points are addressed and inspiring how the ad hominems are avoided.

        Mike

        • OBUMYA

          Mike I need to deal with the lack of substance of your retorts by noting that you are a New York liberal, and theretofore not worthy of any respect. Go be a Boomer and pass on….or at least try to comb that mop of “hair” ok?

      • Suzyqpie

        If 0bama launched a drone strike on Ann Arbor, the survivors would line up the next day and vote for him. Again.

    • OBUMYA

      and dude what is with your hair? Its like Larry Fine met Larry David at a storm chasers convention…

    • ptm

      You want REALITY – OK, “Assad must GO, I drew a RED line” oops – turned to pink and finally WHITE “I give up, please buddy Putin help me”.

      Ok, Putin, take over Crimea, IGNORE my pronouncements and Threats.
      Can’t get a deal in Iraq, so I’m pulling out without leaving a soul behind because I Can’t negotiate with ANYONE. Oh by the way, I’m sending 700 BACK IN to help fight the 15,000 ISIS!
      I’m ALL FOR the overthrow of Mubarak, let the Brotherhood take over and KILL the Christians all over! Ooops, within a year the Brotherhood got OVERTHROWN – nice work.
      Libya, let’s overthrow Gaddafi, who know what will replace the regime but it’s got to be better – right? Ah, NO IT’S TEN TIMES WORSE – NO GOVERNMENT as we speak!
      Afghanistan, PULL OUT COMPLETELY – oops, everyone is telling me I must leave troops behind otherwise it’ll be another Iraq. Taliban are gaining power ALL OVER the Country, IIDDIIOOTT Kerry’s negotiations are going down the drain!
      Israel and Gaza, AGAIN iiddiioott Anti Semite Kerry’s “truce” shot down by israeli Cabinet since it had NOTHING but Hamas talking points in it – PERIOD!

      • Brian

        Yes . . . if I could amplify one point?

        The SoF agreement that Mr. Obama failed to get was a product of his insistence that any agreement be approved by the Iraqi Parliament, a condition which, from its inception, doomed approval of the SoF agreement.

        We could have had a SoF agreement if we’d accepted the legitimacy solely on the basis of al-Maliki approving it (i.e. by bypassing Parliament).

        Now, we have some 700(?) “advisors” back in Iraq, the SoF agreement based solely on al-Maliki’s approval . . . Parliament having been bypassed.

        This administration just keeps stepping on its manhood . . .

    • 57nomad

      ‘A war we lied our way into.”

      Wow! Can’t you Clinton/Pelosi haters just forget the past and just MoveOn? Why, after all these years do you insist on dredging up these lies they told. Why are you guys always hating on the Clintons?!?!?!

      “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq
      the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
      That is our bottom line.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

      “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We
      want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass
      destruction program.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

      “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction
      technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a
      mockery of the weapons inspection process.” -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA),
      Dec. 16, 1998

      “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam
      Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock,
      his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also
      given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda
      members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein
      will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical
      warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen.
      Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

    • Heywood Jablowme

      Jackass.

  • Charles Hensel

    The mainstream press and especially the NYT, is nothing less than the propaganda wing of the white house and democratic party, and the disservice they do to their profession and the COUNTRY simply cannot be measured. Would some one please explain what these people get out of the fundamental compromise of the truth????

    • John Morris

      You almost ‘get it.’ The NYT and the rest are the PR shop of The Party. You got that. Then you indicate you don’t really believe it with the rest of the same sentence. Their profession is not ‘journalism’ it is ‘Public Relations.’ What disservice are they doing to their profession? PR Flacks do not serve the ‘Truth’, they serve the client. Their client is The Party in exactly the same way PepsiCo’s PR shop wants nothing more than to sell you as much sugar water at the highest price… with the only limit is they will avoid outright lying if a) they know they will get caught and b) if they think the buying public will punish future sales.

  • valwayne

    Obama told us that Al Qaeda was on the run. He and Hillary both told us that Libya was a success. Such a success that they didn’t even provide security for our Ambassador and left him and 3 other Americans to be murdered by Al Qaeda related terrorists on 9/11. Now we see the result of Hillary and Obama. Al Qaeda isn’t on the run, we are. The murdering terrorists are chasing all Americans out of our Embassy, and the country. Obama has our nation on a full out panicked run all over the world. We have the weakest, most inept, most INCOMPETENT, and worthless President in all of our history. The danger is growing folks. Everywhere in the world our adversaries, and the terrorists are on the move. Meanwhile Obama has gutted our economy, our military, and our national defenses. No President has ever damaged our nation so badly, and its going to get a lot worse.

  • The_Repentant_Curmudgeon

    What this means is that the days of reasoned debate are over. And the Right needs to stop pretending as if we gain any ground by winning debates.

  • OBUMYA

    Oh come on lets not be so harsh on liberals.

    Everybody should own at least one to feed to their pets

  • Shore101

    Does anyone remember when we had a free press?

    • gripples

      1972-Nixon LIAR, 1980-WAR MONGER Reagan, 1992- GHB NOT IN TOUCH WITH AMERICA, and 2000- IDIOT GWB. It was not 1976- Gullible Carter, 1996-Rapist Clinton, nor 2008- Peter Principle Obama….Sense a tend????

  • gnadfly@gmail.com

    We still had ambassadors in Libya? Where’s that reset button?

    • Suzyqpie

      Hillary gave the Reset Button to the Russians. In the name of fairness, Pres 0bama’s favorite theme, John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, needs to request that it be returned to the 0bama Administration.

  • nickshaw

    Since when has a war been fought against a country that had eschewed belligerence against it’s neighbors and given up it’s weapons that would allow it to do so?
    That had merely threatened to put down rebellion within it’s own borders against a group that had sent fighters to foreign lands to fight Americans and then proceeded to attack the government of it’s home country?
    Did Ghaddafi tweak the West’s nose with the welcome of a terrorist?
    Yes but, so what? That terrorist was released with the help of the West’s business interests in the first place.
    Only in the age of Obama and a UN full of islamists could this happen.
    Not to mention a few idiotic Republicans.

  • bowhowdy2

    While I don’t disagree, I am thankful that Obama and company are actually not trying to do much. When they do have all the levels of power, the results are even far, far worse. The best thing for the country and the world is if Obama heads to the golf course for the next 2 1/2 years and Kerry does the same with windsurfing. In this case, no action is the best action. We should simply be thankful for every day that this clowns are on vacation and not creating even more damage then they already have.

  • Funkmaster5000

    How’s that red line thing working out, Barack?

  • Arthur Ross

    We should blame Obama that the entire world isn’t at peace and that he wasn’t able to turn Libya from a horrible, ruthless dictatorship into a democratic heaven with singing angels as their government.

    Let’s blame Obama for North Korea too.

    It’s true that Libya is in an awful and chaotic state, and the American government has failed at improving the situation. But it’s beyond arrogant to assume that any American policy (or, by your article, republican policy) could have magically made things better somehow. At least we didn’t spend a trillion dollars and that thousands of American troops didn’t die in the process.

    • Doug

      Did you read the article? Prof. Mead isn’t criticizing Obama for not making things better today, he’s criticizing Obama for doing things yesterday that lead to today’s mess.

    • GitOffMahLawn

      “…and thousands of American troops didn’t die…”

      Why are you going on about soetero’s failures in Afghanistan?

  • John Hutchinson

    Mr. Mead:

    You seem to be growing a pair.

    By the way. You might not want to advertise the “passenger pigeon” too loudly. After the NSA fiasco, the Russians and Germans, who have given some public musing about using manual typewriters, might get some ideas.

    • Eugene Dillenburg

      You are thinking of the carrier pigeon: a common rock dove (Columba livia) trained to carry messages. The passenger pigeon is a different species altogether (Ectopistes migratorius) — once the most common bird in the world, hunted to extinction after the Civil War, with the last captive specimen dying in the Cincinnati Zoo on September 1, 1914.

  • Uncle_Dan

    Well, at the time, Hillary was very proud of her (and Obama’s) accomplishment: “We came, we saw… he died!!”

    • Suzyqpie

      “We came, we saw… he died!!” That is a fine display of Hillary’s pedestrian and sophomoric communication skills. Similar to eat your peas, let ‘er rip, or wee weed up from Pres 0bama. These people are credentialed, they are not educated.

  • Bandit

    God’s truth

  • newageblues

    I was wondering what the comments would have to say about the situation in Libya, but the situation in Libya seems like the last thing on the minds of the people posting here.

  • Charles Hensel

    John, your comments clarify my thoughts and intentions.

  • Black_Saint

    We have taken Affirmative Action to the Max. extreme and elected a Man of Zero qualifications, Zero accomplishments, Zero character, Zero honor, Zero ability, Zero truth, to the Office of President of the USA!

    Obama is now rated as the worse President since WWII and before he is thru. he will be rated as worse President in the history of the Republic!.

  • Velvet_Hammer

    I am beginning to think Ivy League graduates are not as smart as they think they are.

    • Suzyqpie

      Intelligence has to do with the difference with being “Educated” and being “Credentialed.” The Ivy maybe blends the two so that the grads look smarter than they are, ie, 0bama.

  • indipete

    Thank you, Walter Russell Mead, for writing about this. I’m astonished this has received almost no attention, even from Republicans.

    You express my sentiments exactly — except that you didn’t mention Quadaffi was our most important North African ally against Al Queda, and, at a time we were supposedly trying to get Iran to drop its nuclear program, we killed a leader who had dropped his country’s program.

    In a perfect world, Obama would be deported to Libya.

    • Black_Saint

      In a prefect world the American people would never ever been Stupid enough to elected a man like Obama!

  • Black_Saint

    We needed a bigger-than-life President – we got …..A Radical Left wing Chicago Ghetto organizer that organized mob of takers to blackmail the makers that has been surrounded and tutored by American hating racists, terrorist and Marxist all of his life!

    We needed a well-grounded stable President – we got a certifiable narcissist.

    We needed bold leadership – we got a teleprompter

    We needed a seasoned hand – we got a hand in in our pockets

    We needed a champion for American citizens… We got hate for the Makers and a champion for the Takers and love for the uneducated horde of invading Welfare Takers!

    We needed a skilled bridge builder – we got a class-warfare specialist and inciter-in-chief.

    We needed practical, proven policies – we got socialist dogma and monumental waste nd rampant corruption.

    We needed an inspirational visionary – we got an ideologically blinded, left learning-impaired radical.

    We needed a Constitutional champion – we got a domestic enemy of the Constitution.

    We needed a restrained, respected and intimidating warrior – we got groveling, bowing, Barney Fife

    We needed a patriot – we got G. D. America, G. D. America, G. D. America.

    We needed someone to unshackle our economy – we got someone who is a friend to our enemies and an enemy to our businesses

    We needed a president beyond color – we got a green president embracing every whim and myth ever spoken by the kook environmental fringe.

    We needed mature, principled leadership – we got a narcissist, petulant, lying, whining, blaming, sulking, accusing, excusing, lazy, cowardly, despicable, man-child.

    It is a national disgrace that someone this Lazy, this Incompetent, this Corrupt, this Racist, could be elected to the office of the Presidency.

    • The Greatest freedom

      Stop repeating yourself..This post has been around about 100 times//

      • Black_Saint

        yes I know Obama Cult members hate it because it hits to close to the real Obama!

        • The Greatest freedom

          Actually I agree with you, but repeating the same messages all the time is contra productive..just some feedback..

  • WBC

    If the American electorate cannot learn from the serial failures of the Obama presidency then there is no longer any hope for Western Civilization. This is what progressive government looks like. This is exactly what Obama promised. This is the America he always wanted.

  • timb117

    Not only is Mead supporting Kadhafi, he is also excited by the prospect of all the civilians in Benghazi being massacred.

    Brave stance, you anti-Obama drone

  • rakesh

    The problem is that the country only has one president at a time. I think the country would be best served if the entire foreign policy team from the likes of Nuland, Powers and Rice were asked to look for other jobs outside of the government. The team down to under secretary levels needs to be replaced.

  • CrassyKnoll

    For all of Mead’s sturm und drang it is important to bear in mind that Mead, and people like him, are the reason Obama was in a position that enabled him to topple a dictator and then fecklessly walk away.

    How much of this is real remorse, and how much of it is simply an effort to regain some semblance of credibility. Credibility that will then allow him to endorse the lefter of the two weasels next time around.

  • tcp53

    Obama had 2 YEARS when he controlled both the Senate AND Congress. He accomplished nothing positive, while driving poverty (i.e.- welfare, medicaid, disability, food stamps, minority unemployment, national debt have ALL skyrocketed) up, in the last 5 years. His disastrous foreign policy is even worse than his domestic. He is, without a doubt, the worst President that we’ve ever had.
    Obama = (Nixon + Sharpton) x Carter

  • koblog

    As someone said, the only way to get the press to do its job is to elect a Republican President and Congress….

  • ejochs

    Didn’t the author vote for Obama twice?

  • dilsin

    “[T]he Monday morning quarterbacks never really understand just how
    complicated and tragic this poor world really is, not to mention how
    hard it is to make life and death decisions in real time in the center
    of the non-stop political firestorm that is Washington today.”

    Somehow, the media only seems to understand this during Democratic administrations.

    “Smart Diplomacy” was a punchline from Day 1 for anyone who understood the complete lack of qualifications of the President and his team. For those who weren’t convinced back then, events have now definitively proven false that Obama is the smartest man to ever hold the office.

    Another casualty of this administration is “smart journalism”. America now knows without a shadow of a doubt that we have an agenda driven media that has chosen sides in Americas politics and is no longer the fourth branch that holds those in power accountable.

  • http://surewoodforest.blogspot.com/ dicere

    Wrong word, not evacuate, but retreat. The US is retreating all over the world.

  • Matthew Guerreiro

    As if Libya weren’t having enough troubles: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28521551

    • Suzyqpie

      Tks for the link. I have noticed in any article reporting on the debris field in some ME muslin country, always included, every time, is a picture of a pickup truck with a rocket launcher mounted in the bed.

  • Michael Shorts

    I think that you are too hard on Obama. He proved that you can create a failed Arab state at a much lower cost than Bush did.

  • valwayne

    Obama told us that Al Qaeda was on the run. Well that was a lie. First we had Al Qaeda/ISIS invading Iraq and declaring their own country, and now Al Qaeda and its affiliates have Obama on the run right out of Libya. Libya which was the success story of Hillary and Obama, and now Obama won’t even tell us if our running Embassy personnel will ever go back? I suppose its better to run, than for Obama to leave them their to be murdered like he did with Benghazi. Obama is the worst, weakest, most inept, and INCOMPETENT idiot we’ve ever had for a President. if he were a Republican with the world on fire everywhere you look the Poodle Press would be crucifying him, but with Obama the excuse is that Obama has created so many disasters at one time that they can’t be expected to cover all of them. There’s not enough room to cover Obama’s disasters on the front page. The list of Obama disasters is very long so there is some truth to that. Here’s a partial list of the nightmares Obama has created through sheer INCOMPETENCE: Putin/Ukraine, China, Libya, Syria, Israel/Hamas, Iraq/ISIS, Iran/Nukes, IRS, V.A., Border with Mexico, NSA, Fast & Furious, Economy, Jobs, taxes, DEBT. Only a partial list, but who can keep track of the damage Obama has done and is doing?

  • Conrad

    Libya’s going according to Obama’s Plan. It will be integrated into his Islamic State someday soon. He is already being groomed as its caliph as embellished by the traitorous/criminal that he actually is.