A liberal explains the difference between Libya and Iraq

Posted by: Phineas on March 25, 2011 at 4:01 pm

**Posted by Phineas

It’s simple! Obama is awesome!!

Makes perfect sense.

via Jonah Goldberg

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 Responses to “A liberal explains the difference between Libya and Iraq”


  1. Lumpy Gravy says:

    Shred of credibility held by the Left went straight to hell last week.
    1) Obama sends us to War #3.
    2) Obama then goes on vacation.
    3) Obama then hands Soros-dominated Petrobas an oil rig permit. Something we’re not allowed to have.
    4) Petrobas can now drill in the Gulf of Mexico. Something we’re not allowed to do.
    5) Petrobas then will sell the oil to the US. Because we can’t drill our own.
    6) Obama admits the trip to Brazil is to help the economy of Brazil – while completely ignoring our ruined economy.
    7) During all this, Obama almost completely ignores the earthquake/nuclear meltdown in Japan, the effects of which have now reached our shores.

    I dare – DARE any Liberal to defend this.

  2. Carlos says:

    Sure it’s defensible, Lumpy. The obvious difference is GW got us into Iraq with the urging/blessing of Congress, with stated purposes and goals.

    Duh-1, on the other hand, waited 3 weeks for the UN Security Council to pass a resolution, then used that resolution as the basis to commit the United States to a war, completely ignoring Congress and with absolutely no clear objectives (although he has offered several conflicting ones).

    Of course GW was wrong and Obhammud is brilliant! It’s obvious even to the most slobbering of all media sycophants.

  3. Tom TB says:

    0bama is the Commander in Chief waging war in three different countries simultaneously.
    Has the electric kool-aid finally worn off that affected the Nobel Peace Prize committee members?

  4. baseballguy says:

    Hypocrisy, thy name is a liberal talking point.