Breakfast Scramble: Why Shoot Bin Laden?

Question Mr. President, from Ann Althouse:

So… was bin Laden shot because he resisted — the official story — or because a live, captured bin Laden would have torn the Obama administration apart?

More over, did the White

Usama bin Laden passes, the speech the President should have given, in total:

“Nothing personal, just business.   Bravo Zulu gentlemen.”

Bin Laden wasn’t the problem.  His passing will not the solution.

Bin Laden round-up, Aaron Worthing, Patterico’s Pontifications

Demographics and demagogues,  maybe Outside the Beltway is what a site run by college professors would be expected to be,  that one which favors political correctness over logic.  An Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern as reported by  Tulsa World:

POTUS speech reax:

From Nice Deb:

It was a grotesque and dishonest speech.

From Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post:

The president speaks, says very little

As I and many others expected, Obama today gave a speech about nothing much

Oh Boy, after shocks in Egypt:

CAIRO (AP) — Demonstrators burned cars and barricaded themselves with barbed wire inside a central Cairo square demanding the resignation of the military’s head after troops violently dispersed an overnight protest

Micheal Steele right on Afghanistan, from Dan Riehl, Riehl World View:

It seems to me, Steele and his defenders on that issue understood the implications of Obama’s changes in Afghanistan, while many of the self-professed intelligent folks in

Mediaite stirs the pot, from Frances Martel, Mediaite:

Pastor Terry Jones, who took advantage of the rapidfire late summer news cycle to become famous for burning Korans last year, has come out strongly against claims that he is directly

Dumbo dropping, from Ross Douthat, NY Times:

The President’s Credibility Gap

Addressing the nation Monday evening, President Obama suggested that the United States was in the process of reducing its military footprint in Libya, even as he explicitly rejected

Special Sgt. Schultz edition.

Stuff it Ed, from Mark Finkelstein, News Busters:

ED SCHULTZ: Republicans are attacking the Commander-in-Chief during a time of war! . . . There should be no debate: we ought to be kicking [Gaddafi’s]

Madison on the Thames, community organizers strike in London, from Ian Gallagher and George Arbuthnott, Mail

• Extremists hijack anti-government cuts demonstration
• 84 people injured – and at least 31 police officers hurt on day of violence
• Ritz hotel

Dumbo Lost, Barack Obama clueless, from Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal:

It all seems rather mad, doesn’t it? The decision to become involved militarily in the Libyan civil war couldn’t take place within a less hospitable context. The

Geraghty’s Law:  either the Constitution changed between the time that Barack Hussien Obama was a candidate for president and when took the oath of office, or more likely  Geraghty’s Law remains in effect.   Obama Question and Answer by Charlie

Dumbo’s Disaster, Victor Davis Hanson on what it wrong with Barack Obama’s war of choice on  Libya, from National Review:

4) Aims and Objectives: Fact: We are now and then bombing Libyan ground targets in order to

Putting a Boot up Max, from Max Boot, Commentary:

ContentionsTime for Close Air Support in Libya

“We do not provide close air support for the opposition forces. We protect civilians.” So says Gen. Carter Ham, head of Africa

The Very Model of the Modern Liberal War, from Bruce McQuain, Questions and Observations:

[T]here is no – none, zip, nada – connection, not even a tenuous one, to American national security and the war on Libya.

Baby