Obama Need to Win the Libyan War to Win Re Election

Rush Limbaugh is very wise to see through the bogus rubbish of Obama. The speech to the union addressing the Libyan crisis had a hidden objective. It was to make Obama look presidential and a proud American. It was very different when Obama was elected into office. The apology tour to the Muslim world was a dead giveaway. Now, Obama puts himself in the spotlight with the Libyan war, which he needs to win to win re-election. It is Obama's make or break moment. If Gaddafi loses, every media outlet will make Obama a war hero and it will be the news til election day. If Gaddafi wins, Obama has other wars he can conjure up before November 2012.

(Rush Limbaugh says Obama sudden Patriotism is because it is an election year)
CALLER: I'm really worried after listening to the speech, I have a feeling there's an impostor or doppelganger or something going on here, because for years we've heard him talk about and apologize for actions like this from America --

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: -- and that he's proud of America, his wife for the first time because he's dominated, what's going on? I don't understand.

RUSH: 2012, reelection. Yeah, I know what you're talking about. You're talking about Obama talk about freedom and the United States is the engine of freedom. We guarantee it and anybody who wants it, they have to call us, we're the only people that can guarantee it, fight for it, give it to 'em. American exceptionalism, all of that, right? You heard that last night. I couldn't believe it.

CALLER: I couldn't. I was stunned. This is not the America I heard him describe, ever.

RUSH: No. But it's called reelection 2012. It's "2012 or Bust" time, is what this is. He's lost the independents. He lost the independents in the November election. He's gotta get the independents back. Remember, now, when he ran for election -- when he ran against America -- he was running against an unpopular George W. Bush and against an unpopular Bush policy: Iraq. It wasn't until he was elected that he actually ran around and started apologizing for the country. It wasn't until after he was elected that people's radar was tuned on. Ours, you and I, we knew all long, but it wasn't 'til after the election that people started wondering: Does this guy really not like the country that much?

Now he's got to make it look like he does. We're in reelection mode. Remember, now: Liberals can never be honest about who they are and get elected, particularly in a national election. So I want to just... You know, Michael, be prepared because not only are you frustrated but you are gonna get doubly frustrated as people believe this going into the campaign. You're gonna get doubly frustrated when you hear the liberal hacks on all the cable networks talk about American exceptionalism and how Obama defines it in fact. You're gonna have your intelligence insulted multiple times a day, multiple times a night.

You're gonna be asking yourself, "Do people not remember the past two years?" You're gonna be asking yourself that -- and the reason is, it's similar to the monologue I dug into last week in Wisconsin. We do things by the rules. We persuade hearts and minds and then we go have an election and then we win. So we think it's time to implement our ideas. When we lose elections what do we do? We say, "They won. They get their judges. They get this or that." They never lose. They'll thwart the democratic process at all costs. Now, there's, I think, another way to explain this to people.

You can do it. It's hard hitting, but you can do it within the entire context of freedom. Have you ever noticed that leftists, wherever they are -- here in America or the Soviet Union or Cuba -- have to wage war on freedom? They have to wage war on liberty. Liberty and freedom are the enemies to their existence. They are statists, authoritarians. They believe in dictatorship, tyranny, central planning, and control. We, on the other hand, believe in freedom. We welcome it. We want it for everybody. We don't try to impose a thing on people. Now, liberalism, leftism, communism, Marxism, whatever it is, is an enemy. We fight it, but not in the same way they fight us. They can never rest. If there is freedom anywhere, liberalism is threatened. We, on the other hand, never feel threatened when people are free, even to be liberals.

So whereas it is not our natural inclination to eliminate them -- not just from positions of power, but from virtual existence -- it is their objective to eliminate any opposition that is rooted in freedom. It's the #1 enemy they face. So we win the election. Scott Walker wins in Wisconsin. We implement policies that were campaigned on. Those policies are in direct contradiction and they contravene the beliefs of the American left, and they challenge their bread and butter. They challenge their economics; they challenge their lifestyles. So anything is fair game to defeat, impugn, get rid of or what have you their enemies in Wisconsin -- and they'll stop at nothing. The law doesn't stop them (you know, a fake judge, renegade judge or what have you). So we're fighting, you know, with two different, completely different motivations

Gaddafi to al-Qaeda Rebels, CHECKMATE

Libyan Rebels seek cease-fire after US vows to withdraw jets from further action. Since NATO has taken full control of the situation, any further assistance from the US would need NATO approval. It is comical as the Libyan rebels retreat calls for a cease-fire with demands. Well, Gaddafi is now in full control and there is no negotiations with the al-Qaeda operatives (rebels). Since NATO took control, it is certain that Gaddafi will crush the opposition. It is determined that there are 1000 untrained rebels fighting against Gaddafi. With that diminutive size, it won't take long before Gaddafi destroy the rebels and mock the international coalition. At this point, the international coalition is breaking apart from the seams.

(Bloomberg) Libya’s opposition called for a cease-fire after the U.S. said it’s withdrawing aircraft used to attack Muammar Qaddafi’s forces following adverse weather that prevented strikes allowing Libyan loyalists to push back rebels.

Libya’s rebels would accept a cease-fire if their demands for freedoms are met, said Mustafa Abdel Jalil, head of the rebel National Transitional Council, during a news conference televised today from their stronghold of Benghazi. Any agreement would have to involve Qaddafi’s fighters withdrawing from cities and their surrounding areas, he said.

Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said U.S. jets, won’t be flying with NATO forces over Libya after April 2. Mullen said planes would be made available only if requested by NATO.

Rebels have been in retreat for three days as Qaddafi’s troops regain the initiative after almost two weeks of allied air strikes against them. Mullen said poor weather over the past three days in Libya meant pilots “can’t get on the targets; they can’t see the targets.”

U.S. political and military leaders said they’re unwilling to start providing arms and training for rebels fighting against Qaddafi. Mullen said there are “plenty of countries who have the ability, the arms, the skill set to be able to do this.” Gates said the U.S. doesn’t know enough about the insurgent groups beyond a “handful” of leaders.

Obama Taken Us into Another Open Ended War in Libya

If the American people couldn't stomach the 2 wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) during Bush's term, I can expect everybody having a severe ulcer knowing Obama has taken us into 3 war at the same time. Not only the presidents rhetoric made no sense, Obama's promises during the campaign trail was a bunch of lies. Obama promised to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, close down Club Gitmo, and re-establish America's moral authority in the world. Instead, we still have troop in Iraq, the good war in Afghanistan in chaos, Obama going on an apology tour, and Obama decided to spill precious blood and treasure in Libya. If you are scared now, just wait when Obama gets another term in office.

(Yahoo) On Monday, President Barack Obama addressed Americans in an effort to clarify ongoing mission in Libya. He stressed that America and its allies intervened aerially to prevent slaughter of innocent civilians.

Quite a turn around for a president who is a Nobel Peace Prize winner and whose campaign's theme was opposition to America's two wars-in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

It is now 2011 and the president has not delivered. U.S. involvement in Iraq has been reduced but there are still 50,000 troops stationed in the country and the level of violence is still high. Iraqi civilians are being targeted every day and the government is not in complete control.

In Afghanistan, the situation is actually getting worse. Recent revelations about a U.S. army "kill team" which carried out inhumane attacks against civilians for "sport" has hurt the operation greatly and added to anti-American sentiments not only in Afghanistan but also in neighboring Pakistan.

Instead of focusing on ending these two conflicts and pooling resources to rebuild America's standing in the international community, President Obama has now given the country another war to bear.

Iranians Starting an Uprising and Many Wonder if Obama Will Help

In 2009, Iranians held massive protest after Ahmadinejad was re-elected as president. The Iranian people are saying that the hardliner was re-elected due to massive vote rigging in June 2009. At that time, Obama didn't do anything about it. Obama allowed Ahadinejad to imprison and punish the dissidents on the streets. Since Egyptian leader Mubarak was ousted from power, Obama gave full support and incited the Egyptian people to not back down. After the aftermath, there has been a domino effect throughout the Middle East with a revolution for democracy or "mob rule." In Iran, there are thousands of protester congregating in Tehran mimicking an Egyptian protest. Many are wondering if Obama will support the Iranian people as he did with the Egyptian people. Also, many Iranian are frightened that Obama will turn a blind eye and allow Ahmadinejad to commit a human right's atrocity by imprisoning and killing dissidents like the Iranian president did in 2009.

(Breitbart) Riot police on Monday fired tear gas and shot paintballs at protesters who turned what they said was a Tehran rally in support of Arab uprisings into an anti-government demonstration, witnesses said.

The clashes broke out at Tehran's prominent Azadi (Freedom) Square when crowds of opposition supporters began chanting "Death to Dictator!" -- a slogan used by protesters against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after the disputed 2009 presidential election.

Witnesses said police fired tear gas and also shot paintballs at protesters who had gathered despite a ban by authorities.

Websites and witnesses said thousands of opposition supporters had taken to the streets of the capital in support of Arab revolts despite a heavy police deployment.

While Iran has backed the Arab uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, the interior ministry in Tehran banned the Monday rally which Mousavi and fellow opposition leader Mehdi Karroubi had sought to hold.

Witnesses and websites said the opposition supporters had walked in scattered crowds silently to Azadi Square from several parts of the capital as policemen kept a sharp watch and tried dispersing them.

Riot police on motorbikes armed with shotguns, tear gas, batons, paintball guns and fire extinguishers were deployed in key squares in the capital to prevent the gatherings

Now, the Egyptian People Wonder how the Egyptian Military Will Govern

Not surprisingly, after the overthrow of the Mubarak government, the Egyptian people are starting to wonder the full intent how the military will govern. In the old adage, "you break it, you buy it." The Egyptian people have no idea what they stirred up. They removed Mubarak from power and allowed Mubarak's general and best friend to take over. The likelihood for a nice transition will be innocuous at first, but let's wait and see six months from now. Throughout history, military leaders having absolute power will eventually lead to absolute corruption.

(The Independent) Two days after millions of Egyptians won their revolution against the regime of Hosni Mubarak, the country's army – led by Mubarak's lifelong friend, General Mohamed el-Tantawi – further consolidated its power over Egypt yesterday, dissolving parliament and suspending the constitution. As they did so, the prime minister appointed by Mubarak, ex-General Ahmed Shafiq, told Egyptians that his first priorities were "peace and security" to prevent "chaos and disorder" – the very slogan uttered so often by the despised ex-president. Plus ça change?

In their desperation to honour the 'military council's' promise of Cairo-back-to-normal, hundreds of Egyptian troops – many unarmed – appeared in Tahrir Square to urge the remaining protesters to leave the encampment they had occupied for 20 days. At first the crowd greeted them as friends, offering them food and water. Military policemen in red berets, again without weapons, emerged to control traffic. But then a young officer began lashing demonstrators with a cane – old habits die hard in young men wearing uniforms – and for a moment there was a miniature replay of the fury visited upon the state security police here on 28 January.

It reflected a growing concern among those who overthrew Mubarak that the fruits of their victory may be gobbled up by an army largely composed of generals who achieved their power and privilege under Mubarak himself. No-one objects to the dissolution of parliament since Mubarak's assembly elections last year – and all other years -- were so transparently fraudulent. But the 'military council' gave no indication of the date for the free and fair elections which Egyptians believed they had been promised.

But a clear divergence is emerging between the demands of the young men and women who brought down the Mubarak regime and the concessions – if that is what they are – that the army appears willing to grant them. A small rally at the side of Tahrir Square yesterday held up a series of demands which included the suspension of Mubarak's old emergency law and freedom for political prisoners. The army has promised to drop the emergency legislation "at the right opportunity", but as long as it remains in force, it gives the military as much power to ban all protests and demonstrations as Mubarak possessed; which is one reason why those little battles broke out between the army and the people in the square yesterday.

The suspension of the constitution – a document which the millions of demonstrators anyway regarded as a laissez-passer for presidential dictatorship – left most Egyptians unmoved. And the army, having received the fulsome thanks of Israel for promising to honour the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, announced that it would hold power for only six months; no word, though, on whether they could renew their military rule after that date.

As Expected, Egyptian Military Suspended Egypt Constitution

As expected, the Egyptian military suspended Egypt's constitution and begun quelling the dissidents on the streets. Preventing another uprising, the military is showing what every coup d'etat leader in history has demonstrated. As the old adage goes, "those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." It is unlikely that the Egyptian military general, who is a lifelong friend of Mubarak, will relinquish military hold on the country any time soon.

(Reuters) - Egypt's military delivered an ultimatum on Monday to dozens of committed protesters in Tahrir Square, nerve centre of a movement that toppled Hosni Mubarak, to leave and let life return to normal or face arrest.

Soldiers had scuffled with demonstrators the day before as they reopened the central Cairo square to traffic. Some protesters insisted on staying, determined to see through their demands for civilian rule and a free, democratic system.

Protest leaders say Egyptians will demonstrate again if their demands for radical change are not met. They plan a huge "Victory March" on Friday to celebrate the revolution, and perhaps to remind the military of the power of the street.

Egypt's generals, who played an important role in the anti-Mubarak revolt by making no effort to crush it, are asserting their control following Mubarak's overthrow.

Having suspended the constitution and dissolved parliament on Sunday, moves welcomed by those who saw both institutions as geared to serve Mubarak's personal ends, the military council was planning to issue orders intended to stifle disruption and get the country back to work, a military source said.

Free and fair elections will be held under a revised constitution, the military said, but it gave no timetable beyond saying it would be in charge "for a temporary period of six months or until the end of elections to the upper and lower houses of parliament, and presidential elections".

Political analysts were beginning to ask how long the whole process of amending the constitution, having a referendum on it and then holding elections would all take.

Egypt's army said it wowuld lift the hated state of emergency, implemented after the assassination of Mubarak's predecessor Anwar Sadat by Islamist soldiers and kept in place by Mubarak to stifle dissent, but has not specified a timetable which has troubled protesters.

The army said at the weekend it would uphold Egypt's international obligations. These include its peace treaty with Israel, whose defence minister has been in touch with his Egyptian counterpart, who heads the military council.

The army source said military authorities were expected to issue an order soon that would ban meetings by labour unions or professional syndicates, effectively forbidding strikes, and would tell all Egyptians to get back to work.

There would also be a warning from the military against those who created "chaos and disorder", the source said, adding the army would, however, acknowledge the right to protest.

Like Afghanistan, Obama Now Owns the Crisis in Egypt as Well

Like the "good war" in Afghanistan, Obama now owns the crisis in Egypt as well. So far, Obama owns a horrid economy, a deflating dollar, the Gulf Oil Spill, high unemployment, wasteful spending, national debt, radical Islam uprising, and now civil unrest around the world. I think he is doing a "bang-up" good job. Don't you think? (Sarcasm)

(Yahoo) WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday welcomed the peaceful transition of power in Egypt with the resignation of longtime President Hosni Mubarak. "The people of Egypt have spoken. Their voices have been heard. And Egypt will never be the same," he declared.

In brief remarks in the Grand Foyer of the White House, the president noted that it was "not the end of Egypt's transition, it's a beginning." He said that many important questions remain to be resolved and difficult times lie ahead.

"I'm confident the people of Egypt can find the answers," Obama said. He spoke hours after Mubarak stepped aside, turning authority over to the military. It was a turnaround from the night before, when the Egyptian leader defiantly refused to give up his title.

Obama began his remarks by noting that "President Mubarak responded to the Egyptian people's hunger for change." That was the only time he mentioned the resigned president.

Obama said he is confident that a democratic Egypt can assert its role as an influential player in the Mideast and beyond.

Comments by CIA Director Panetta Saying Strong Likelihood Mubarak Steps Down Stokes Worldwide Furor

What do you expect from a reject that came from the Clinton Administration? Another inexperience person doing a job that is beyond his comprehension. Panetta needs to step down as director of the CIA because Obama doesn't need someone to make him into a fool. Obama is doing just fine without anyones help.

(Washington Post) CIA Director Leon Panetta helped touch off an avalanche of erroneous expectations Thursday when he testified that there was a "strong likelihood" that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak would step down by the end of the day.

Within minutes, senior aides to Panetta sought to tamp down the impact, saying he was merely referring to media reports. But by then, the comments had ricocheted around the Internet, underscoring U.S. confusion about events unfolding in Egypt, as well as the perils of publicly weighing in on such developments while serving as director of CIA.

Panetta acknowledged the daunting aspect of that assignment in testimony before the House intelligence committee, saying that for spy services, "our biggest problem is always: How do we get into the head of somebody?"

Panetta, who had little intelligence experience before taking the CIA job two years ago, has been praised for his skill in leading a notoriously temperamental agency, and for handling public controversies with a deft touch.

Unlike other senior intelligence officials who were more circumspect in their comments on Egypt, Panetta did not hesitate in offering assessments of the rapidly shifting events.

After the committee chairman referred to media accounts predicting that the Egyptian president would step down, Panetta said, "I got the same information you did, that there is a strong likelihood that Mubarak may step down this evening, which would be significant in terms of where the hopefully orderly transition in Egypt takes place."

Shortly thereafter, a U.S. intelligence official said that Panetta "was clearly referring to press reports alluded to" by the panel chairman, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.).

Obama Not Satisfied that President Mubarak is Staying On

President Obama has no right to use $1.5 billion military aid as a bargaining chip to oust Mubarak as leader of Egypt. In fact, Obama has no right to meddle and dictate another sovereign country. Surprisingly, the Obama Administration realizes that he has limited influence upon the matter and needs to reflect his statement "respecting the rights of the people."

(My Way) WASHINGTON (AP) - Bristling with impatience, President Barack Obama on Thursday openly and sharply questioned whether Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's pledge to shift power to his vice president is an "immediate, meaningful or sufficient" sign of reform for a country in upheaval.

Without naming Mubarak, Obama issued a written statement that criticized the leader for not offering clarity to his people or a concrete path to democracy. He called on Egyptian government leaders to do so, declaring: "They have not yet seized that opportunity."

Obama's comments came after Mubarak, in a televised speech, refused to step down despite intense speculation that he was on the brink of ouster. He said he was delegating powers to Vice President Omar Suleiman, yet Mubarak remained president and defiantly said he would so until a successor was elected to replace him in September. Protesters were shocked, saddened and enraged.

At the White House, Obama scrambled with his national security team over how to respond to a speech that had left many surprised and even baffled. In his statement, Obama challenged Egypt's leaders to plainly explain what the new changes mean and how they would lead them to the freedoms or opportunities that have driven enormous crowds into the streets since late January.

Still, analysts and even U.S. officials themselves acknowledge the White House has limited power to shape what Egypt does.

Obama devoted most of statement to the familiar calls by his government for Egypt to respect the rights of its people and to immediately negotiate a path to free elections.

Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said Mubarak's speech left the fundamental situation in Egypt unchanged. "We cannot steer things," Haass said. "We have limited influence."

Obama Scrambling Damage Control from WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks’ release 250,000 US diplomatic document to the public. The contents consist of US dealings with the rest of the world and Washington’s assessments of foreign leaders. It left Barack Obama’s administration scrambling to limit the damage amd further embarassments.

The contents is nothing new but may cause a strain in relations with our allies. Also, it confirms most of the rumors set by many bloggers as fact. The only devestating document release is Hillary Clintons role as Secretary of Secretary mandating US Diplomats to spy on diplomats from other countries at the United Nation.

It may be an embarrassing moment for the White House, but nothing the mainstream media can fix.

Read Story: US tries to limit WikiLeaks damage