My, how times change. It seems like it was just yesterday that a young Senator from Illinois was taking then-President George Bush to task for the U.S. decision to invade of Iraq, despite the fact there was, arguably at the time, America’s national interest at stake.
Back then, tens of thousands of anti-war protesters took to the streets in protest, placards of “No Blood for Oil” littered sidewalks, and the LeftÂ vilifiedÂ the President and Congress’ decision to invade. Yet, today, it is as though crickets are chirping over President Obama’s decision to possibly shed American blood in the sands of Tripoli.
On Friday, after two successful Facebook and Twitter-led (and U.S. supported)Â regime changes in Tunisia and Egypt, Barack Obama half-heartedly declared that he was he would follow the French and the United Nations into war with Libyaâ€”despite the fact that there is no clear and present danger to the United States and whether it is in our national interest is dubious at best.
Throughout the weekend, the Left has been largely silent about our new war-monger President. Â While there have been a few protests, including in Washington, New York and (of course) Madison, they are nothing compared to the protests from eight years ago.
So, why the hypocrisy?
â€œI bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.â€ Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776