Why a pass for Obama on 3rd war?

Only when the Libyan war became diplomatically correct did our president become commander-in-chief ordering pre-emptive strikes of a sovereign nation without finding weapons of mass destruction where oil is involved in our “national interest”. Sound familiar?

So how is Libya any different from Iraq? It’s not. The wars in both nations are similar in the following ways: a ruthless dictator, a secret “civil” war systematically murdering its citizens, economic oppression and al-Qaida. It’s all the same in a part of the world where Islam informs culture.

How is it that Obama gets a pass from the media and public opinion for presiding over three simultaneous wars? Where are the hand-wringing the-sky-is-falling liberals sponsoring anti-war rallies? How does Obama get away with a pre-emptive strike of a sovereign nation and Bush did not?

George was perceived as a Texas redneck and Obama can “preach.” America’s response to the same type of war is explained by perception, not reality. That perception begins, and maybe ends, with how the White House spins the war. Bush didn’t do spin; Obama preaches. George came across uneducated; Obama is a professor.

History will record that President George Bush courageously set the precedent for toppling ruthless dictators in the Mideast. Even if re-elected Obama will be remembered for pushing health reform when our economy was in the pit, arriving at an oil slick too late, failing at promised immigration reform when voted for by our Latino citizens and, yes, preaching a good sermon.

Paul O. Bischoff

Wheaton