CNN's Phillips Questions GOP Candidates' Silence on Libya
On Tuesday morning, CNN's Kyra Phillips asked why the Republican presidential candidates have not been speaking out on foreign policy in Libya during the climactic battle in the country's capital between rebel and imperial forces. CNN had interviewed Republican candidate Jon Huntsman the night before, but had not yet asked him about the conflict in Libya, in the first of a two-part interview set to conclude Tuesday night.
"This week's battle in Libya, the first big chance for the GOP presidential hopefuls to show their foreign policy savvy," Phillips noted during the 10 a.m. hour of Newsroom. "Why haven't we heard from them?" she asked. Liberal CNN analyst Roland Martin subsequently hammered the Republicans as "wimps" for their silence.
[Video below the break.]
CNN prime-time host Piers Morgan had hosted candidate Jon Huntsman on Monday, but had not yet asked him about Libya. The rest of the Huntsman interview is scheduled to air Tuesday night.
Analyst Roland Martin decried the GOP silence on Libya. "They know the actions the President took was the right action, but then you have the folks on the right who say, well, like Senator John McCain, he should have done something sooner," he remarked. "But then remember you also had the House Republicans who also wanted to pass a resolution saying you should not be taking any action in Libya, and so they don't want to say anything."
"That's called weakness," Martin added. "You want to be President? Say something. They are simply wimps."
National Review's Will Cain opposed Martin's comments, noting that the President himself has been vague on the details of the conflict in Libya, namely on the ultimate goal and the timeline for American forces to leave the country.
"I'll tell you the one thing they have said, though, is they said they wouldn't go into Libya in the first place," Cain said of the Republican candidates. "And that's not just backwards-looking. That informs how they would make decisions about Syria, the Congo, and every place else in the world that's under these same, similar situations.
A transcript of the segment, which aired on August 23 at 10:30 a.m. EDT, is as follows:
KYRA PHILLIPS: First question, guys. This week's battle in Libya, the first big chance for the GOP presidential hopefuls to show their foreign policy savvy, to say what they would do. Okay. Why haven't we heard from them? Roland?
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Hmm, wimps! Because they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They know the actions the President took was the right action, but then you have the folks on the right who say, well, like Senator John McCain, he should have done something sooner. But then remember you also had the House Republicans who also wanted to pass a resolution saying you should not be taking any action in Libya, and so they don't want to say anything. That's called weakness. You want to be President? Say something. They are simply wimps.
PHILLIPS: Will?
WILL CAIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Boy, Roland, you're going to die on your own words with that. You mean these Republican candidates haven't said what the goal is in Libya? They haven't said how long we'll stay? They haven't said when we'll get out and under what conditions we'll get out?
MARTIN: They have said nothing, Will.
CAIN: Which would make them very similar to the President of the United States of America.
MARTIN: They have said nothing.
CAIN: Isn't that interesting? I'll tell you the one thing they have said, though, is they said they wouldn't go into Libya in the first place. And that's not just backwards-looking. That informs how they would make decisions about Syria, the Congo, and every place else in the world that's under these same, similar situations.
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
There is not any reason we
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 7:22pm.
There is not any reason we should have been involved. There was no national interest at stake and we had no dog in the hunt.
Irony
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 7:26pm.
When Reagan supported the Nicaraguan contras back in the '80s and hastened the end of the Sandinista regime, the MSM portrayed it as bad foreign policy.
When Obama backs the Libyan rebels against Gadhafi -- to what end we don't know -- we're supposed to cheer it as brilliant foreign policy.
good observation
Submitted by lrgon on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 12:45pm.
what is sauce for the goose...?
Security briefings
Submitted by jon_torlin on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 7:34pm.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but because they are presidential candidates, and no single one has been picked out yet, do any of them get any security briefings? I'm sure Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann might be aware of some details, but I thought that candidates would stay informed so as to say what decisions they would make if they became president.
Or is that too early? I thought that might be why they haven't said anything, other than the obvious illegality of Soetoro's actions regarding Libya and being directly involved with the MB.
-Jon
good points
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 10:14am.
jon
Don't worry CNN we're waiting for the even bigger media blackout
Submitted by lsudolemite on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 7:41pm.
that will occur once the latest Islamist hellhole is firmly entrenched in Tripoli.
Obambi caught him around the 9th hole....
Submitted by Tomorama on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 7:42pm.
Wow, when he said BOY in the same paragraph with Rotund as in Boy, Rotund....
I thought the card was coming out.
So almost a trillion dollars spent and we have what exactly Rotund?
The Boston Globe praised and gushed over Obambi's leadership as he found a suit to put on and make a speech BEFORE visiting with the head of MessNBC....
Anyone notice that the comments made by Maxipad Waters was NOT NOTED in the LSM. .
Am I wrong NB staff???????
Dean mentioned Romney this morning.................
Submitted by Tomorama on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 7:44pm.
And actually, ROMNEY DID COMMENT on this when he correctly asked for the caracas of the mass murderer, the Lockerbie bomber????
Damn facts and Rotund don't get along, neither does a salad.....
Isn't.....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 10:17am.
Isn't "caracas" the capital of Venezuela? :-)
The true hypocrisy here is on
Submitted by Reaver on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 8:00pm.
The true hypocrisy here is on the part of these media shills. For months now they have been the ones who were silent about Libya, to the point that someone who only gets their news from them would be hard pressed to tell if we were still fighting over there. Now that it appears Kaddafi might be ousted the usual suspects are desperate to give their favorite president a win. They completely ignore that Obama’s original statements said that our involvement in Libya would be measured in days not weeks, that we would turn over the conflict to NATO and they would continue the conflict on their own. When that strategy failed miserably and it became clear the conflict would stretch into months the media’s blackout began. Also don’t forget that these same people gave Obama a complete pass for ignoring the war powers act when we got to the three month point in this non war “kinetic military action”. The chances of a republican president getting away with the same thing are virtually nil. No surprise now that they are desperate to declare this a win for the president at a time when he desperately needs something in the win column and months down the road when the situation deteriorates and Libya seems destined to become a Muslim theocracy the blackout will be back on.
From what I have gleaned from
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:04pm.
From what I have gleaned from the news, the reason the rebels have done so well is NATO member's special ops.
Phillips wants Candidates to talk about Libya
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 8:06pm.
At a time when the US is drowning in debt, the president is on an out-of-control spending binge, ObamaCare is threatening everyone's health care, there is massive unemployment, Gov. regulations are paralyzing employers, inflation is setting in, confidence is scraping the bottom,...
Let's assume Phillips isn't a complete idiot and knows that Libya is not what is occupying voters and candidates. Why ask? It is to try to keep candidates from talking about the economy where Obama has completely flunked out. He has gotten an F-.
Look at my left hand.....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 10:18am.
Look at my left hand. Never mind what my right hand is doing. Look over there...over there.
It's not the GOP candidate's silence that is my concern
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 8:41pm.
It's the silence on the part of the already elected GOPers who continue to sit there like frogs on a log and watch as Obama repeatedly uses the Constitution for toilet paper.
This has to be the most impotent and spineless congress in history, and when Libya gets taken over by the true-believers and joins the offensive against Israel, they will share part of the blame with Barack Hussein Obama.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Libya and sharia
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 8:52pm.
I read somewhere today that the rebels are planning to use Sharia Law as a guide in making Libya's new government. So let's hear how wonderful it was that we replaced one thug with a new thug government. The book hasn't been closed on weather or not this was the right action to be taken. It's going to be like helping the Al Quida get rid of the Russians. It'll come back and bite us in the @$$.
Not really earth-shattering, Rad.
Submitted by UpNorth on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:46pm.
Iraq, Afghanistan, and most ME countries' laws are based on Sharia. Turkey being one exception I know about.
What's far more troubling, is I heard tonight, on Fox, that Libya has a large store of mustard gas, that is, so far, unaccounted for. No one knows where it is, or who has control of it. However, the "rebels" have seized control of some of Col Muammar's gold plated AK rifles. Not to mention, some of his rugs. I'd bet that the Muslim Brotherhood and AQ are looking for it, unless they've already found it.
Not earth shattering to conservative thinkers..
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:52pm.
But I wonder what people like Roland Martin and Don Lemon will say when the heads of homosexuals start rolling in the stadiums. And of course the plan is to spread the "Arab Spring" and it's consequences beyond the Arab world.
And yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir.
Sharia and the Libyan FEMALE population
Submitted by dreamsincolor on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 12:45pm.
I have been searching for evidence -any- evidence that the women of Libya are looking forward to a Constitution written based on the Sharia.
I'll bet it's going to be a long time before I see any.
Right, Reaver
Submitted by deadeyedan on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:06pm.
And add to your commentary the fact that we still have a LEGAL war against terrorism, and the rebels, being Al-Qaida, are therefore the real enemy.
With Obambi's "actions" having no Constitutional basis, he has lined up with an evil adversary and these drunken "journalists" just don't get that.
Liberalism - government of the people by the theories and for the ideologists
Roland likes it both ways
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:26pm.
Truth is, Obama surrendered control of US forces to commanders more capable than he. If that is what Rollo Martin wants applauded, well, All righty then!
Man's got to know his limitations. Let's be happy this President knew he was ignorant and loved golf.
We only have one President at a time, and he's playing golf!
Submitted by Injest on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:31pm.
"Why haven't we heard from them?" she asked. Liberal CNN analyst Roland Martin subsequently hammered the Republicans as "wimps" for their silence.
Ahhhh, cuz “We only have one President at a time”
Nov 7, 2008 – PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. ... Now, the United States has only one government and one president at a time, .... But I have to reiterate once again that we only have one president at ...
Nov 26, 2008 – We have "only one President at a time," Barack Obama said in his debut press conference as President-elect. Normally, that would be a safe
Nov 12, 2008 – "We recognize that we have only one president at a time," John Podesta, co-chairman of Obama's transition team, said Tuesday at a media ...
Nov 14, 2008 – The real president?Right now, the US may have two of them ... Barack Obama isn't president. His supporters in the United ... "While we must recognize that we only have one president at a ...
Needless to say this has been the standard reply with any international problem that pops up near an election/campaign.
Safe to say had any Republican been dumb enough to take the lefts bait here, there would be condemnation cuz “we have only one president at a time”.
And if you want to ask Obama about the situation, you can find him on a golf course somewhere.
Here's what I wish one of them would say:
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 9:39pm.
The rebels maybe drafting a constitution based on Sharia.
So, Mr. President, how's that "Arab Spring" working out???
Until we have an honest media.......
Submitted by Herbster on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 10:16pm.
Goebbels lives on in the whores and whore-ettes that live today in the swamp called the "Mainstream Media." They are nothing more than shills for all things democratic. They are propagandists - and not very subtle ones at that. Journalism is totally dead. I fear the influence these know nothings have on the Oprah/View/Dr.Phil/Dr.Oz worshippers. They are easily swayed by the latest "Poll," and will vote in lockstep in place of casting an informed vote.
Personally, I read the foreign press to find out what is happening in my own country.
As an aside......a two night interview with Huntsman? The man who got 0% of the vote in Iowa two weeks ago? The synchophantic media is pushing as the voice of reason.....and he speaks Chimese. Wow! Am I impressed. Next time I order takeout, I'll let him phone in the order.
CNN
Submitted by philkerner on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 10:48pm.
They have every right to ask the GOP candidates about Libya.
I just wish they would ask the current resident in the White House the same question, along with the same raised eyebrows.
Just sayin.
This is the land of The Ends Justify the Means
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Tue, 08/23/2011 - 11:24pm.
government. I can lie, if I believe I know better. I can ignore the constitution, when I know better. Just like lying to the infidels is okay? Anybody catch the parallel philosophy here?
Which part of the Libya thing are they going to talk about....
Submitted by bigdaddy on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 12:02am.
....The violation of the War Powers Act?
...The guys scurrying around in the background of the press reports hauling off those crates of mustard gas, rockets, and AK-47s for use in upcoming attacks on our allies?
...The brilliant way the French and British military executed this operation?
..."Joe Rebel" being in Qad,Khad,Gad-afi's boudeau and scoring one of those goofy rainbow colored military-dictator for life hats?
They are wimps. Why won't they support war?
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 12:33am.
Republicans need to support this war not just war's their own party started. Democrat's like Roland Martin supported wars Republican Presidents' started.
Oh wait....
CNN contributor Roland Martin, asked about Democrats’ low poll results concerning national security on Friday’s "Election Center" program, answered using his best Barack Obama impression. "...John McCain, you're a war hero. You served. But you also voted for the war that's led to the death of 4,000 Americans. We have spent billions of dollars and, frankly, it has not stabilized the Middle East.... He's [Obama] going to put the cost of the war and how it has not done what it was supposed to on his back and say, you know what? Explain that, Mr. War Hero."
Ok. That was just a fluke. He did support a war a Republican started.
For four years, we've had to listen to Cheney, President George W. Bush and their minions constantly spin, dance around — some will just say flat-out lie — in order to justify the war in Iraq.
Wait a sec'. Lie?
Disgraced former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld...
Disgraced? Come on. Stop it.
This is why no matter what happens with our troops, nothing will change. Forget a surge. Like it or not, the Iraqis are going to have to fight this one out. And yes, only the strong will survive. It will be bloody and brutal, but history says this is how it always ends.
It just would have been smart for the Bush administration to have figured this out before 3,600 of our soldiers had to die for a terribly misguided policy.
Ah. Against the surge? The one that worked, that one?
Ok. Ok. Ok. Roland S. Martin knows something about all wars and can say sage things.... Oops.
When you make the argument that the South was angry with the North for “invading” their “homeland,” Osama bin Laden has said the same about U.S. soldiers being on Arab soil. He has objected to our bases in Saudi Arabia, and that’s one of the reasons he has launched his jihad against us. Is there really that much of a difference between him and the Confederates? Same language, same cause, same effect.
Huh? A war with American versus American and there was no difference between OBL and Confederates?
Think about it. Do we have the moral justification to explain the killings of more than 100,000 Iraqis as a result of this war? Can we defend the efforts to overthrow other governments whose actions we perceived would jeopardize American business interests?
I... Huh? You mean like Libya? Yeah, I am done with this idiot.
penalty
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 9:47am.
Excessive use of facts is not allowed under the current administration or his supporters in the media.
Excellent post
Gadhafi Still Has Chemical Weapons To Wipe Out The Cities
Submitted by Avitar on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 2:01am.
Those of us who worry about the humanity still in Libya stay silent.
An Open Letter to Kyra Phillips, Roland Martin, et al
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 9:39am.
Another open letter from my friend:
---
Dear Kyra Phillips, Roland Martin, et al,
Have you, in all your journalistic glory and splendor, ever bothered to actually ask GOP candidates about Libya? If not, then STHU!
Sincerely,
Captain Obvious
Hummmmmm
Submitted by donabernathy on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 11:50am.
Question is .... What did Libya do to America to warrant us dropping bombs on their heads.
Ya see... These guys don't have a problem with thuggery....... just as long as their guy is doing da thug'n.
roflmao
GOP candidates on Libya's current situation
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 12:28pm.
In the moment, GOP candidates would be ill-advised to be speaking out on the situation in Libya. It is in a state of flux in the moment. Not a soul has anything other than a foggy understanding/guess as to how this may turn out. Absolutely, all are hopeful for the best. What are they to say?
Conversely, many months back when they - and everyone else - were speaking out on Libya, it was because, at the time, it was a very controversial decision (be it right, or wrong). There was much debate about if we should get engaged in this military action, and if we did - to what extent? There was the need (still is) for the President to go to Congress and obtain their vote - War Powers Act. He did not. Thirty days later found us at another critical point in the requirement for congressional authorization for the President's actions.
At the same time, as it remains so today, the President was not laying out a clear case to the American public as to what our goals were.
Summary. Once again, the national MSM turns out to be the wimps and the lubrication for anything that this President does, or does not do.
(;~> gary
Not all GOP candidates are mum on Libya
Submitted by lrgon on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 12:58pm.
Kyra Phillips stupidly or ignorantly asks "why the Republican presidential candidates have not been speaking out on foreign policy in Libya during the climactic battle in the country's capital between rebel and imperial forces."
What a crock of baloney.
CNN's Piers Morgan should interview Paul. The congressman has said over and over that the Libyan 'mission" is not in the US's interest and he alos pointed to a glaring unconstitutional unilateral act by Obama regarding taking us into another war.
Paul has not been quiet on this issue at all. Anderson Cooper asked Paul about this: News.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV31uMjDxkc
IF this turns out well...
Submitted by sherlock1 on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 1:00pm.
IF this turns out well, which is always a longshot, it will be spun as a triumph for Obama, who was tentative on getting involved, and eager to move the US to the background, at least in the public eye.
But is actually an example of how US power can be projected to good effect, if the effort is united and sustained. But the simple reality of US politics is of course that while Republicans will support a Democrat President in the use of military force if there is any resonable benefit for the US or the world in general, Democrats will not do the converse.
Sure there was grousing from both sides in Congress, much of it principled, not political, in that Obama ignored the War Powers Act (now belately discovered by the media to be merely a "resolution")!
But the ONLY reason that the US was able to give any military support to the Libyan rebels is that there was a Democrat in the White House. Had there been a Republican President, even with a strong Republican presence in Congress, it would have been impossible to mount and sustain the effort that looks now to have been successful.
Why? Firstly, as mentioned above, Democrats are willing and eager to play politics with military interventions, as they have shamefully demonstrated in the case of Irag, where they originally offered support in the aftermath of 9-11, and then withdrew that support (to the extent of even denying it ever existed) when the hoped-for cakewalk did not materialize. This in the face of the fact that the Republican President in question had sought and received approval from not only Congress, but the UN. There has been much re-writing of history and splitting of hairs after the fact, but this is a pretty good description of what actually happened. The bottom line is that Republicans can be convinced to put country ahead of party in situations where there is political risk that a President of the other party will be positively strengthened, while Democrats will not be.
Secondly, the mainstream media effectively acts as the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party. Had the Libya intervention been considered under the aegis of a Republican President, there would have been the necessity of observing the War Powers ACT. Had it been satisfied, a doubtful proposition, the coverage of the military operation would have been unremittingly negative, and would likely have resulted in the US being unable to sustain the effort to a successful conclusion (still assuming it eventually does so).
This is something Republicans candidates for President need to confont, as it is a fundamental constraint on the world power of the United States that all citizens must understand, and hopefully NOT accept: Democrat Presidents can succeed in military interventions and bring US power to bear swiftly and with great effect. Republicans however cannot, and the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with the leadership of the CiC, or the justness of the particular cause - it is because of pure politics, played by cynical politicians who put party first, period.
This is yet another reason why I want to see a Republican run head-on against the media instead of trying to "get along" or look for "fair treatment" from a declared enemy institution - I am sick of living in a country (mis-)run by them in their quest to turn it into a one-party state.