…on Stanley Kurtz’s eye-opening comment on Obama’s Libya speech last night:
“Trust Rush [Limbaugh]: the purpose of Dawn Odyssey is to protect European oil interests.”
That’s an effect, not the purpose. An effect that was perhaps implicit leverage in the community organizer’s organizing the Euros to act. The purpose is nominally to establish the policy that Stanley Kurtz describes. I think his real underlying purpose is to “increase the contradictions.”
“I think it’s all a distraction to his only real interest – “spreading the wealth around,” domestically, and, it seems, internationally, and taking America down a notch or two.”
You underestimate his ambitions for America, in my opinion. He already has her down two notches, and he’s just warming up.
“Is it even conceivable to you that, just maybe, he didn’t want a massacre in Benghazi because, you know, he didn’t want a massacre in Benghazi,”
I don’t know what SK thinks, but I don’t know of anyone anywhere who wants a massacre in Benghazi or elsewhere. But if I had to find someone in public life who could care less, it would be Barack Obama, and if he wasn’t available then Hillary Clinton. They both strike me as being from the “one death is a tragedy, a million a statistic” school. Both are radical Sangerians (as in Margaret).
“Stanley Kurtz is a right wing idealogue who hates everything even remotely associated with what a Democrat does…”
Not even close. I don’t get the impression that Kurtz even thinks in terms of everyday party politics. He strikes me as being focused on radicalism on the horizon, with his work on marriage and the family as well as the work on foreign policy shifts you see here. His book on Obama, in fact, should be most seriously read by rank and file Democrats, if there is such an animal still out there.