The Egyptian situation

I got up this morning to the "breaking news" that Mubarak had finally resigned - and the military seems to be in charge.

So we'll see how the protesters like the new regime. Now that the military is in charge, will they react with kid gloves to the protesters?

Here's some of what Rush had to say on the subject.

"Losing Patience, Obama Challenges Egypt's Leaders -- Showing deepening dismay, President Barack Obama is questioning whether Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's promised transfer of power has any credibility or meaning.

"As a defiant Mubarak stayed in office, Obama challenged the autocratic Egyptian government to explain its path toward democracy to its people and the world." So Obama was furious. I mean, these guys were humiliated by Mubarak yesterday. Obama goes out and looks at that silly, childish, self-centered, narcissistic, immature campaign speech in Michigan trying to make what's happening in Egypt really an extension of his own campaign of 2008. So Obama was furious that he got slapped around, the media was furious that they got slapped around, because their demands haven't been met. But here's my question: Isn't this the same Barack Obama and the same news media that claimed the United States has interfered with other countries for far too long?

Isn't this the same Barack Obama who said, "Now that I'm here, the world's gonna love us. The world is going to respect us, and we're no longer going to impose our way on people. No more of this cowboy foreign policy." I don't know about you, ladies and gentlemen, I definitely remember Obama all through his campaign. The left constantly has, throughout my entire life, said, "We can't impose our way on the rest of the world. It's none of our business," blah, blah, blah, blah. In fact, most of the time the left has contests with itself to see who can get us out of various parts of the world. I'll never forget during the '84 Democrat presidential primary, Gary Hart(pence) was seeking the Democrat nomination against Walter F. Mondull, and they got into an argument over who could get us out of South Africa first, and then that elevated into who can get us out of there, over there.

"I'll get us out of there!"

"I'll take us out of there, too."

Now all of a sudden we are demanding -- Obama, his regime and the media are demanding -- that Hosni Mubarak do what we say. Haven't these people complained? Didn't they complain during the 2008 presidential campaign, "We are too arrogant as a country. We are too arrogant a people. We practice cowboy diplomacy. It's none of our business. We're not gonna impose our views on other governments," but the first time things don't go Obama's way, he becomes angry, petulant, apoplectic. "Without naming Mubarak directly, Obama issued a written statement on Thursday night in which he criticized the leader for a lack of clarity and direction." Boy, you -- you talk about the pot calling the kettle half black?

[Oh, no he didn't say that, did he? What a pointed, and unnecessary, reference to Obama's origins. Sheesh. But I'm sure he'll just say he said it to "tweak" the media.

Because there's probably a few uber-senstive folks out there who want that saying, "pot calling the kettle black," eradicated from the English language for being racist, even though - when properly said - it isn't. (Just as some congressman was offended by another congressman using the term "black hole," apparently not being at home to Mr. Astronomy.)

But although it's not a racist reference when used 99.9% of the time, for Rush to say it his way, "calling the kettle half-black" certainly references Obama's race, and does make it about race. How unnecessary.]

I cannot believe that. Getting on Mubarak's case for lacking clarity and direction? "That assessment came after Mubarak surprised those protesting in Egypt's streets by saying that he would shift powers to his vice president but remain in charge." Why was anybody surprised? We know people were surprised because the media was reporting all day yesterday that Mubarak was gone. "In mere moments, he's going to make speech! In mere moments! In mere moments Mubarak will address the people, and all of their concerns will be met, all of their demands." This was the media. And, by the way, it was our media that provided the source information for our CIA director and for our president and the people on the ground in Egypt.

So listening to the media, the US media and the rest of the media, Mubarak was gone. "Be patient, here. Just a couple minutes here. In a couple of minutes he's gonna show up, he's gonna speak, and he's gonna give you what you want and he's gonna leave. He might even commit suicide for you! He's going." Well, that didn't happen, and so who were they mad at? Mubarak? But Mubarak was never the source authority for the fact that he was leaving. "He had been widely expected to step down on Thursday, as even the CIA chief had suggested was in the offing." (snorts) Now, this is AP. They did not include that Panetta said this because he had seen it on CNN. Why are we paying Leon Panetta? Why do we have a CIA?

Anybody can turn on CNN and learn what's going on. Look, I would just as soon use StratFor.com as I would CNN to figure out what's going on in American policy. So, anyway, there's that. They're all upset. If Egypt, my friends, has made anything clear (and this is not necessarily good), it is that Obama has no idea what's gonna happen five minutes from now. He's flying by the seat of his pants. You don't go out and make speeches based on information you're getting from television, from the media. Triumphant? "Ding-dong, the witch is dead" kind of speeches? And trying to make the events in Egypt an extension of your own campaign from 2008? The sad reality here, folks, is that events around the world continue to slap Obama upside the head.