[…] The same kind of difficulties are already bedeviling our Libyan war. Our coalition’s aims are uncertain: President Obama is rhetorically committed to the idea that Qaddafi needs to go, but Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, allowed on Sunday that the dictator might ultimately remain in power. Our means are constrained: the U.N. resolution we’re enforcing explicitly rules out ground forces, and President Obama has repeatedly done so as well. And some of our supposed partners don’t seem to have the stomach for a fight: It took about 24 hours for Amr Moussa, recent leader of the Arab League, to suggest that the organization’s endorsement of a no-flight zone didn’t cover bombing missions. […] – A Very Liberal Intervention, by Russ Douthat

It’s the fantastic fantasy meets the unmitigated stupidity of missing reason. But it certainly tears the bark off the Obama fan boy foundational tenet, which is that Pres. Obama is being forced by those around him, never having to take responsibility for his own decisions, because his blunders are never his own. Could it be any more insulting to Pres. Obama? I’m no booster for Obama, but I’ve always given the man a lot more credit and respect him more than this. Why would anyone vote for someone, primaries or general election, who is actually believed to be such a patsy?

This thinking unmasks what type of individual is respected in the traditional and new media world.

Newsbusters has the transcript of “The Chris Matthews” show where tingling legs rule:

ANDREW SULLIVAN, THE ATLANTIC: Well, I don’t think it’s wrong for a President of the United States to issue an opinion about some madman like Gaddafi. I do think that the American public might have been consulted before the United States goes to war. I mean, we now got, you know, the President tells people after the fact? I mean, you know, we go into a Middle Eastern country, we don’t know the consequences, it’s been hatched by Hillary and McCain. I mean, what could go wrong?

[Laughter]

SULLIVAN: I mean, when you think about it. And I think it, I’m just, I’m just, I don’t know why anybody voted for Obama in the primaries. I mean this is a, this, this initiative, this, this, this no-fly zone, this war essentially, is, is a Hillary-McCain concept.

A few minutes later, when the discussion changed to whether or not Obama will push for Social Security reform, Sullivan said he didn’t think so, and continued with this same theme:

SULLIVAN: Look, we, people who voted for this guy wanted him to let the old politics go.

MATTHEWS: Transformational president.

SULLIVAN: Wanted him to actually tell us the truth about this stuff and to do the right thing. And that was the appeal of Obama. And two years later, we have this politicized Clintonian mess.

Nice try, but what we now have is an Obama war that was begun on the wings of Executive Branch hubris and ego. As if Barack Obama didn’t have the facility to engage us in a “politicized mess.” Perhaps Mr. Sullivan slept through health care, but also the deficit commission, not to mention the Bush tax cut extension debacle, all of which were organized through a politicized Obama-directed mess.

It’s also laughable that Pres. Obama is listening to John McCain. The only people who hang on his every word reside at NBC news and “Meet the Press.”

There is also a lot of difference between being guided by Sec. Clinton and having the most powerful women inside the Obama administration being responsible for going from deliberative to first-strike, no-fly war shots and Pres. Obama deciding to let his own commander in chief hubris be his guide.

For Obama fans and delusional war hawks, Barack Obama is never responsible, even while being influenced. There is always an out for him. That’s a partisan mess peculiar only to Barack Obama, which has nothing to do with bogeyman Clintonianism, which Mr. Sullivan is always ready to reach for when his political analysis hits the rocks, which is often. Luckily for Sullivan it won’t impede his failing upwards.

Sullivan does raise a good point that is likely sticking in a lot of throats right now, but it’s not a new question, though the emotion behind his sputtering is priceless: And I think it, I’m just, I’m just, I don’t know why anybody voted for Obama in the primaries.

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s national security foundation was always going to be on the leading edge of aggressive, which is something I always knew.

As for Barack Obama, even with his anti-Iraq war stance and speech delivered in a safe district to virtual silence, there was no evidence of bravery anywhere in his career.

John McCain was the worst of all choices given he shoots first, thinks later, with Sarah Palin waiting in the wings an even larger unknown than Obama, but with neoconservative ideology in place of foreign policy knowledge, which today remains the case, Palin was always a troublesome waiting in command.

Pres. Obama may be a lot of things, but he’s not a patsy, which Sullivan implies, nor is he blameless or some stooge being led around by McCain or Sec. Clinton.

Barack Obama was simply never the man so many who voted for him thought he was, but primary voters were too busy adoring candidate Obama’s face, in Sullivan’s logic, or his persona, while sucking Plouffe-Axelrod marketing through a straw, to stop and realize that when he ducked the vote on Iran he was sending a message.

Are you hearing him now?