Eli Lake, a national security correspondent for the unabashedly conservative Washington Times and not exactly a fan of President Obama, raised a point on Twitter that the right probably didn’t care for. (via Zack Beauchamp)
Though I suspect the choice of words will be very different, I suspect Obama’s re-election team will be pushing a similar message next year. Sure, national security policy probably won’t drive the presidential race, but for those who consider the issue, Obama and his team will have a compelling pitch to make.
Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, meanwhile, joining the “peevish and small” contingent, issued a statement today that said, “Ridding the world of the likes of Gadhafi is a good thing, but this indecisive President had little to do with this triumph.”
It’s an odd line of attack. Whether one considers U.S. intervention in Libya to be a wise move, a terrible tragedy, or something in between, it’s tough to argue that Obama was “indecisive.” The Arab League endorsed intervention from the West; the administration assembled an international coalition with surprising speed; and the mission gained approval from the United Nations. Bombs started dropping soon after.
Maybe this was the right course, maybe not. But slamming Obama for being “indecisive” is foolish.
And speaking of the president, he addressed the developments in Libya this afternoon from his vacation spot in Massachusetts.