Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert both had their takes on Obama's speech Monday night explaining our actions in Libya.
I did not hear the President's speech, but it really sounded weak to me. I wish he showed the kind of clarity that Newt Gingrich showed on March 7th.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: What would you do about Libya?
NEWT GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. ... The idea that we're confused about a man who's been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is. ... This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it, get it over with.
Incidentally, "Do it, get it over with," is also the e-mail that Newt sends to his divorce lawyer every three years. Which is, of course, due to his long standing open-fly zone.
(wild laughter from audience)
Folks, I gotta tell you, I even would've preferred the clarity Newt showed on March 23rd.
NEWT GINGRICH: I would not have intervened, I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Gaddafi. I think there are a lot allies in the region that we could've worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.
Because leadership is not about bombing or not bombing. Leadership is about being consistent...ly against whatever Obama does. Anyway, the speech was a failure, because it didn't answer the big questions. What's the exit strategy? How much will it cost? Is this in America's vital interests? All questions that are just as valid now as they weren't in 2003.
Videos and transcripts below the fold.
We're going to begin tonight with President Obama's speech to the nation, in our recurring segment, America at Not-War. The President's speech of course began, as all major Obama speeches do, with the presenting of the Vice Presidential buffoonery.
(in Biden voice, if Biden grew up in the Bronx) Hey, whoa, how ya doin'? Hey, whaddaya doin'? Hey, how's everybody doin'? Hey, nice to see ya! Hey, whaddaya doin'? Hey, just kiddin', I love ya baby! How ya doin'? Nice to see ya Joey. Whoa, hey, is that my seat? Get up, ya fuckin' mamalootz!
You see that guy? Who works the room at a war speech? That guy, it doesn't matter, it's a State of the Union, it's a wedding, it's a funeral, he's always set to one speed: Biden!
So, ten days after we started bombing Libya, President Obama took to the podium to convince Americans we should... bomb Libya, starting ten days ago.
BARACK OBAMA (3/28/2011): I have made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies, and our core interests. ... for those who doubted our capacity to carry out this operation, I want to be clear: the United States of America has done what we said we would do.
What are you annoyed at us for? We just wanted to know why we're bombing people... we just asked, nobody said shit to us, we were just sitting there, thinking about like, "LOOK, WE'RE DOING WHAT WE SAID WE WOULD DO! Biden, no lap dances."
Listen, initially, we all thought we went in because the Libyans asked for our help by flipping on the Hope signal.
But, now it seems there's another reason, which, mcuh to his chagrin, the President had to go on TV and talk about.
OBAMA: Last month, Gaddafi’s grip of fear appeared to give way to the promise of freedom.
No, no, no, further back than that.
OBAMA: For more than four decades, the Libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant – Moammar Gaddafi.
Keep going.
OBAMA: For generations, the United States of America has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and as an advocate for human freedom.
Thank you. So, ah, why exactly are we in Libya, instead of any of the other countries currently causing global insecurity and un-freedom?
OBAMA: Gaddafi chose to escalate his attacks ... if we waited one more day, Benghazi – a city nearly the size of Charlotte – could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world. It was not in our national interest to let that happen.
All right, that's a compelling reason. Although I have to ask, is there a massacre of a city the size of Charlotte that is in our national interest? And is it Charlotte? So, we're taking out Gaddafi. He's toast, he's drone-kill, #losing, done.
OBAMA: There is no question that Libya – and the world – would be better off with Gaddafi out of power. ... But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.
So we're not taking Gaddafi out. But... we wouldn't be upset if he was, and the rebels did it. It's kind of like the explosion version of, "hey rebels..."
Hey, ah, but Mr. President, what if they don't, you know...
Do we just sit there? Is the United States the rebels' Air Force forever?
OBAMA: Last night, NATO decided to take on the additional responsibility of protecting Libyan civilians. This transfer from the United States to NATO will take place on Wednesday.
There is an exit strategy. We turned over the mission to NATO! Man, I feel bad for whoever the sucker is that's the main driving force, financially and weapon-wise, in that organization, 'cause those guys are fu... wait a minute! WE'RE NATO!!! That's like Beyonce saying she's ceding control to Sasha Fierce.
Yeah, we were going to go with Garth Brooks and Chris Gaines, until someone reminded me that I'm old.
The point is, wherever there are people suffering at the hands of tyrants, America will be there.
OBAMA: It's true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action.
Oh. I guess we won't always be there. Perhaps we can paraphrase the stirring speech by John F. Kennedy then, for what we are doing.
(in JFK accent) Let the word go forth that from this day forward, we shall pay any price, spare any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, up to a certain point in order to assure the survival and success of liberty, subject, of course, to steely-eyed pragmatic assessment of what we in the business would call the pros and cons of doing so.
Wow, it's complex. All right, it's complex, it's nuanced, and it's situational.
WOLF BLITZER (3/28/2011): I think what we just heard, Anderson, from the President of the United States is the most, the clearest form of what we can call the Obama Doctrine.
No. It's not a doctrine, Wolf. It's a measured cost-benefit....
WOLF BLITZER: I'll play this clip. It sort of underscores what I'm now calling the Obama Doctrine.
Just 'cause you're calling it a doctrine doesn't make it a doctrine. You're not the Tyler Perry of the Obama Doctrine.
That's not what this is. Why is everybody freaking out? All Obama's done is lay bare the shining spreadsheet on the hill that has always been the real force behind Presidents' foreign policy decisions, despite all of our soaring freedom rhetoric.
GEORGE W. BUSH (2006): The security of our nation depends on the advance of liberty in other nations.
Iraq? Yes. Sudan? No, no, no, my friend. President Clinton:
BILL CLINTON (1993): Our hands are with those on every continent who are building democracy and freedom.
Balkans? Yes. Rwanda? [clucking noise "no"]
GEORGE H.W. BUSH (1989): Freedom is like a beautiful kite that can go higher and higher with the breeze.
Kuwait? Yes. A beautiful kite?! What the who? Oh, God, I'm sorry, President Bush, I forgot to tell you, a 9-year-old girl called, and said, "Man up!"
RONALD REAGAN (1981): We will again be the exemplar of freedom...
Except in Nicaragua.
JIMMY CARTER (1977): We can never be indifferent to the fate of freedom elsewhere.
But, if they declare martial law in the Phillipines, we still gotta give them a half a billion dollars to use their bases.
DWIGHT EISENHOWER (1/20/1953): Love of liberty means the guarding of every resource that makes freedom possible.
Unless that resource is Iran's democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh, who in 1953 we stopped from nationalizing Iran's oil reserves by having the CIA cut-and-paste out him for this guy, who in 1979 the Iranians cut-and-pasted out with this guy, who, since then has basically just been copying and pasting himself. This! This is the delicate dance of the Presidency, to balance the high-minded rhetoric of our ideals, with the more base and pragmatic immediacy of our needs. Needs, by the way, typically sold in barrel form.
Obama just gave us a little less poetry, and a little more long division, perhaps leaving himself vulnerable to a 2012 opponent more versed in deft, soaring rhetoric.
SARAH PALIN (3/29/2011): I haven't heard the President say that we are at war, and that's why I, too, am not knowing do we use this term intervention, do we use war, do we use squirmish, what is it?
(wild laughter from audience)
Niled it!
Squirmish, huh? Well, that's either some sophisticated foreign policy analysis, or what happens when worms get into a fight.
We'll be right back.
Last week, President Obama, in coalition with NATO and Arab partners, launched a full-scale... something... on Libya. No one's sure what to call it. First, I thought it was a war, then a humanitarian mission, then a limited occupation, and now this.
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE (3/27/2011): And the President is obviously not happy with his set of choices. One person told me in a meeting he called this military action in Libya a "turd sandwich".
Which brings us to our continuing coverage of....
Folks, I don't blame the President for feeling that way. The situation in Libya is so muddled right now, that coalition forces can't even settle on the spelling of the enemy's name. The French spell it like this, the Spanish spell it like this, the Brits like this, the Italians like this, and the Qataris like this!
I think that looks made up. I think they're just fucking with us. So, in a desperate, desperate sad attempt to clarify what has been called Obama's Vietnam by many of me, last night, the President addressed the entire nation, and I was so disappointed by it, that I didn't watch. There's no need to. I have my colleagues.
RUDY GIULIANI (3/28/2011): The President's speech tonight has made things even murkier than they were before.
SARAH PALIN (3/28/2011): ... profoundly disappointing speech because it proved that the Obama Doctrine is still full of chaos and questions.
JOHN BOLTON (3/28/2011): The speech was a dog's breakfast.
Yes, a dog's breakfast. Obama's speech was like bacon, jalapeño corn muffins, and Pop-Tarts. By the way, my dog Gipper has a serious case of the runs. I hope I'm giving him enough jalapeño corn muffins. Now speaking of which, folks, you know what really chaps my ass? Obama's plan involves surrendering America's leadership over to NATO, which is led by Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard of Canada. Canada!!
Canada?!? Great, great. Instead of a no-fly zone, we'll get a no-fly-unless-you-really-want-to-in-case-we-prefer-you-didn't-but-go-ahead zone. Soh-ree.
Again, I did not hear the President's speech, but it really sounded weak to me. I wish he showed the kind of clarity that Newt Gingrich showed on March 7th.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: What would you do about Libya?
NEWT GINGRICH: Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. ... The idea that we're confused about a man who's been an anti-American dictator since 1969 just tells you how inept this administration is. ... This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it, get it over with.
Incidentally, "Do it, get it over with," is also the e-mail that Newt sends to his divorce lawyer every three years. Which is, of course, due to his long standing open-fly zone.
(wild laughter from audience)
Folks, I gotta tell you, I even would've preferred the clarity Newt showed on March 23rd.
NEWT GINGRICH: I would not have intervened, I think there were a lot of other ways to affect Gaddafi. I think there are a lot allies in the region that we could've worked with. I would not have used American and European forces.
Because leadership is not about bombing or not bombing. Leadership is about being consistent...ly against whatever Obama does. Anyway, the speech was a failure, because it didn't answer the big questions. What's the exit strategy? How much will it cost? Is this in America's vital interests? All questions that are just as valid now as they weren't in 2003.
Jon also
looked at the mind-numbing military terms of a "kinetic military action" being used by the Obama administration to describe our actions in Libya. As opposed to... non-kinetic military actions?
Stephen also looked at Christians getting more obese, and had Stephen Prothero on to help him find a new faith. Then Stephen responded to Jimmy Fallon's challenge to have him go on his show to sing Rebecca Black's "Friday" if enough people donated to DonorsChoose.org.
Jon talked with Miguel Nicolelis, while Stephen talked with Anthony Fauci.