It still stuns me that this *BOzo was elected. The only hope I have for the future is a strong Republican candidate who will ask Reagan’s question again: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”

*BOzo is Obama’s nickname around here … better than the other names we thought of!

Obama’s inaction and idiotic non-action rivals the quality level of Code Pink and worse.

Obama has already gone far past the level of Carter in incompetency.
Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like Ronald Ragan in comparison.

embassy under Carter, I hope our embassy people have a really good “run and hide” plan in place. Carter treated our folk like sacrificial lambs, didn’t give a rip. Can’t imagine Obama being any better.

In that sense I agree with EE.

Trouble is, I’m not sure anyone actually knows what’s coming next. Over the last few days I’ve seen a lot of abject fear on the right that Egypt will turn into a Sunni version of Iran but not a lot of evidence for why beyond, “The Muslim Brotherhood is present there.” The MB and al Qaeda are enemies; it doesn’t follow that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” but what I’ve been reading is that the MB in Egypt isn’t necessarily the same as MB in Jordan and Israel, and even if they were they don’t automatically have a lot of popular support.

The Muslim world is a young world, and given their exposure to free societies via satellite TV and the Internet, I doubt they’d be able to stomach a theocracy much better than Western young people.

Drudge linked this symposium analyzing the situation. A few takeaway quotes.

Francis Fukayama is concerned that only the organized will win, which is bad news for us:

At present, the best-organized forces in Egypt are the military and the Muslim Brotherhood. Egyptians who want a free and democratic future had better get busy organizing themselves if those groups are not to inherit the future.

Ryan Crocker, former ambassador to Pakistan and Iraq under Bush, believes

As was clear then, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood are enemies, not partners. The Brotherhood can be accommodated in the political system. But al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad would like nothing better than to regain a foothold in Egypt, the largest Arab country, and destroy that system. That must not happen.

Maajid Nawaz, former member of Muslim Brotherhood:

The Brotherhood realizes that this uprising wasn’t theirs to begin with, and that the new Egypt—more patriotic, pluralistic and inclusive—would likely reject a Brotherhood attempt at usurpation. Unlike Amr Moussa (the head of the Arab League), Mohamed ElBaradei (the former international bureaucrat), and Ayman Nour (the liberal party leader and another former cellmate of mine), no one in the Brotherhood possesses the stature to unite the nation behind them. There is no Khomeini-like Islamist figure to hijack this revolution.

The last writer believes the choice is between a violent revolution (which the news today suggests) and/or continued repression in order to protect Egypt’s middle class.

I don’t know. Not sure anyone does.

It may be that at the end of the day a different military strongman runs Egypt. The military that runs the country now probably doesn’t enjoy the thought of a theocracy stealing everything that they’ve been looting for the last three decades… the protesters will likely be attritioned into insignificance barring a massive uprising to assist them.

But then again who knows how things will go in the next few days or weeks. I have a feeling that nothing the O does or says will impact what happens though, at least not positively…

You have a deer in headlights. Can you imagine Obama having the guts to tackle Irag and Afghanistan? The surge would not have happened. He simply hasn’t the manly character to make such a decision. We would have failed and the mid-east would be far worse than it is today. It would have been a domino effect most likely.

I am so distressed I actually have friends–just as your readers do–that voted for this guy. How delightful. The whole WH is in shock. I wager there are WH advisors clammering in their offices in the West Wing saying…”what do we do…how do we handle this….!!!???” with regard to Egypt. What shou;d we expect when you elect people to office whose minds were never fully developed, hence the reason we have liberalism today.

Seriously. I have no idea. Side with the people of Egypt against the dictator, and turn them over to the mad mullahs? Or side with the dictator against the (Islamist) people, which is more or less what Reagan actually did though in a rather different time?

It’s 1979 all over again. I hope the Embassy has been fully evacuated.

I swear, I thought exactly the same thing this morning. :heavysigh:

Egyptians themselves don’t know what they believe or want from a government.

h/t linkiest.com

Faster, neater, more articulate, tan, ready, and rested.

Twice as disastrous.

http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

Expand government by creating new bureaucracies – check.
Inability to connect with American people – check.
Nobel Peace Prize – check.

And now this.

“the White House is perfectly happy to give them a seat at the table.”

I’d like to know how Obama or anyone else can tell Egypt who will have a seat at the table. It’s their country and their revolution.

Our legacy media also told us then it was a widespread democratic movement, all segments of society, all sweetness and light and let’s build a campfire at the beach. Sure, there were plenty of regular citizen marching, but demonstrations don’t take the reins of power, well-organized people with guns and a plan do.

Even CNN has reported a few times on the loudspeakers from the anti-government side spewing jihadist slogans and calls to martyrdom (even as they try to convince us the islamists are just regular folk and on the side of the angels). Just like in 1979, except it was ABC-CBS-NBC back then propagandizing for the overthrow of a US ally.

Erick wrote:

“and we now know Obama collaborated to help bring down Egypt”

What, precisely, did Obama do to collaborate to help bring down Egypt, and how do we know it?

I’m scouring the Internet looking for an explanation of this comment, and all I can find is the leftie blogs parroting Erick and calling him names for saying that.

‘I’m scouring the Internet looking for an explanation of this comment, and all I can find is the leftie blogs parroting Erick and calling him names for saying that.”

I do not know what proof he has or if he has none, but this statement has little to do with should he have said what he said or not.

Three scenarios:

A) He has proof/ the left still talks crap

B) He has an assumption backed with sources, but no solid proof to date/ Left talks crap

C) He just made this up/ Left talks crap

The left is going to call him names no matter what he says, what proof he has, nor how factual what he says is. Their irate behavior should not be a discouragement to saying what he wants to say, it should encourage him knowing he has them mad.

Reagan did great things, but the dynamic at that time was different. The USSR was a dying bear, essentially immobile, teetering on bankruptcy. Reagan is the one who finally tipped the scales.

Militant Islam is very much alive, active, wealthy and aggressive. We need a President who understands Islam for what it is and who is prepared to answer it diplomatically and where necessary militarily. We can no longer afford the “luxury” of having scintillating dilettantes (assuming for the sake of discussion that Obama is not actively collaborating with the spread of Islam) in the WH.

Remembering that the first job of the President is as Commander in Chief and given that military confrontation is inevitable, any viable candidate must be able to stand forth on this issue.

Osama and Hil-LIAR-y
are the main ones helping to overthrow this government
they want the Muslim Brothers to take over Egypt
Osama(Muslim) and Hil-LIAR-y are both Communist