We cats don't usually go in for the "what if?" school of history and current events. But the hysterical reaction to Libya in the media and blogosphere — not to mention in Congress — has been SO silly. Therefore, we're tempted.
Why, we wondered? Oh why oh why oh why can a Republican do things like take action against a horrible dictator, and get laurels and hardy handshakes — but if a Democrat (particularly a black Democrat) does it, we all have to tear our hair out and scream?
The answer to that question remains elusive, so let's just get on with the game. Finish this sentence: If Reagan were still President and he decided to attack Libya....
- Congress, especially the Republican House, wouldn't utter a peep. (Well, maybe Dennis Kucinich.) And by the way, Ronnie did not get Congressional approval when he bombed Ghadafi in 1986.
- The media would be out-and-out celebrating the recent rebel advances.
- John McCain would be saying, "We are all Libyans now."
- Nobody would be accusing the President of not explaining the mission. (For the record, President Obama already has done so in an initial statement, three press conferences and a Saturday video.)
- There would be no talk about exit strategies. That's because Republicans and their media enablers know nothing as fun as beating the crap out of somebody. When the GOP is in charge, they couldn't care less about casualties or how much it costs.
- The media would relentlessly cite previous atrocities that weren't prevented, complete with gory pictures.
- The "I" word not only would be verboten, it would be completely unimaginable — and totally marginalize whoever was foolish enough to raise it.
"Liberal media"? "Country first"? Give us a break.
UPDATE: Silly us. How could we have forgotten these?
- FOX "News" would be the lead cheerleader.
- Everyone would be wearing yellow ribbons that say, "Support the air strikers."
No comments:
Post a Comment