Jimmy or W?

A couple of weeks ago I was watching an interview on Fox News with Newt Gingrich, the extremely intelligent, extremely evil GOP presidential candidate. Ol’ Newt was asked what he thought of Barack Obama’s response to Libya, and whether it could be termed “disappointing.”

“Disappointing would be kind,” he said—then added that America is America, and we don’t need NATO or the UN or anyone else to decide when to fight another nation.

As he spoke, I could have closed my eyes and imagined the words belonged to George W. Bush. Hell, they were, more or less, W’s approach to foreign policy. “Fuck the world—we’re the United States!” (Then we invade, get bogged down and suffer thousands upon thousands of deaths. But that’s neither here nor there).

Today, Obama stated that Col. Muammer el-Qaddafi needs to carry out an immediate cease-fire, withdraw his forces from rebel-held cities and stop all attacks on Libyan civilians—or face military action from the United States and its allies.

It gets tricky.

Here is the moment when Obama either becomes, in the eyes of Americans, Jimmy Carter or George W. Bush. Either way, he loses. If he doesn’t follow through with his words, he’s Carter. That’s all you’ll here from Republicans—Carter II, Carter II, Carter II. They’ll cite the Iran hostages, and the wonderful (but untrue) story of how Ronald Reagan brought them home.

If he goes in, and America doesn’t receive as much international support as indicated, Obama is W. A bully. A thug. America trying to overtake the world. Dems will thrash their own, and Republicans will say he has no foreign policy vision.

So … what to do?

At this point, I go in.