That's exactly what other world leaders have been acting like since Qaddafi was essentially lynched by his own people. Those who had no problem whatsoever in being photographed with him just in the last couple of years are now doing what all statesmen (i.e. experts in the highest level of cowardice) do when one of their own falls into extreme disfavor and support no longer is politically or economically expedient: Distance themselves from him and to denounce him.
They're like a group of kids who all conspired to set fire to a flaming bag of dog shit on the stoop of the world, ran away and then retroactively blamed the one who got nabbed: Muammer Qaddafi.
These statesmen include
Sen. John McCain, who promised to get weapons and upgrades for Qaddafi, according to Wikileaks...
...which isn't
at all reminiscent of another completely, non-similar situation from the 80's...
...world's oldest whoremeister Silvio Berlusconi, seen above with Gaddafi just last year,
who recently said of Qaddafi's execution, "Sic transit gloria mundi", Latin for, "I told the prick his days were numbered", obviously during a party he'd held for Qaddafi late August of last year.
President Obama hailed
the lynching of Qaddafi as a foreign policy success (although, to be fair to the incumbent President, Mr. Obama was at least more serious and proactive about Qaddafi than
another President I can name.).
And Republicans such Marco Rubio, Chuck Grassley and, ironically, John McCain, have all chimed in to hail the good news and to say that Britain and France deserve most of the credit,
despite ready evidence to the contrary,
which almost made Jon Stewart's head explode.
What was lost on Jon Stewart, or what he'd chosen to ignore, was the fact that the Republicans were merely parroting what the Obama administration
said just five months ago when it, too,
downplayed America's involvement in Libya, which at the time was widely viewed as yet another example of American, imperialistic, cockwanding adventurism that lasted not "
days not weeks", as Obama promised Congressional leaders last March 18th, but months.
It goes without saying the Republicans have their own agenda and are bound and determined not to give the president any credit for anything even if he rips off his business suit, flies into outer space in his Superman costume and singlehandedly deflects a meteor screaming toward earth. But the Republicans were, technically, merely repeating what the loathed and reviled Obama administration had said this past spring. Yet anyone with one eye knows that the "rebels" wouldn't have had a chance at taking Tripoli and other key Qaddafi strongholds were it not for the countless hundreds of American unmanned drone strikes that also killed scores of Libyan civilians. In fact, it was a
US Predator drone and a French warplane that strafed and destroyed Qaddafi's convoy just an hour before he was dragged from a drain pipe and killed.
It's curious that Republicans now aren't accusing Obama of violating the War Powers Act by not getting Congressional approval for Operation Odyssey Dawn. Also noticeably absent is the fact that the rebels who've taken over the Libyan government in a blood-soaked coup are largely comprised of the same insurgents
who were killing our troops in Iraq in 2007. Also noticeably absent is the fact that these rebels who've taken over the Libyan government did so out of a
frenzy of Islamic extremism that will surely set back womens' rights at least 800-900 years. (In fact, some would call it the return of Sharia law but, hey, as long as it affects only dark woman in countries 10,000 miles away, what's a little Sharia law among friends, eh?).
What's also lost on Jon Stewart is that when people we ordinarily laugh at, clowns like John Bolton, raise the concern of what'll replace Qaddafi's four decade-long rule, it's a very legitimate one. Because, after all, when our foreign policy is so short-sighted that we prop up regimes that we later have to decimate under a false flag (Like, say, Iraq and Libya), it augurs that we ought to look further into the future before fiddle fucking with the affairs of the Arab League.
They don't care what color the woman is or how far away she is or whether it is done under Sharia law or Christian Dominionism or whatever - they're entirely in favor of rolling back the rights of women at least as far as the 19th century and earlier would be welcome too.
At least it is consistent insofar as they want to rollback everyone else's rights to the 19th century (or earlier) too.
Hey, inquiring minds want to know! And by comparison, which kind does John McCain wear? And if he wears the same – coincidence?
Yours crankily,
The New York Crank
S