By Mike Thayer
So I just got done watching King Obama give his address to the nation to explain why the United States has interfered with Libyan affairs.
Such speeches, especially ones dealing with a military action, are usually given from the Oval Office. Obama chose to deliver his speech at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C.
What's wrong with the Oval Office? No, there's no written rule that speeches must be made there, but it makes sense to speak to the nation from there and why so many Presidents have done so on important issues of the day and at a far less burden to taxpayers. It's supposed to be about conveying information to the people, not a photo op. Think about the extra taxpayer dollars and government resources unnecessarily used on arrangments, security, transportation, etc., for a vague 20 minute speech.
Why does the King seem to be so uncomfortable in the Oval Office? Think about it, look at how much time the guy spends away from it. He has more hours on the golf course than he does at his desk. During the BP oil spill, Obama took three vacations, to include a lot of golf and taking the family to the Acadia National Forest in Maine. Japan suffers from earthquakes, a Tsunami, radioactivity, and Obama is on ESPN talking about his NCAA basketball picks. Libya is busy blowing itself up, Obama is in Rio.
So nine days after tossing Tomahawk missiles at Libya, the King finally gets around to giving a speech about the matter. How did he do?
Did he outline how there was an imminent security threat from Libya against the United States?
Did he spell out how the affairs of Libya are of vital national security interest to the United States?
Did he explain how our military action in Libya is supported by Constitutional authority?
Did he clearly define what the mission is?
"The United States will not be able to dictate the pace and scope of this change. Only the people of the region can do that," said the Emperer with no clothes.
Then why did you launch missiles at them my liege?