Meet the new boss:

Just like the old boss.

“Next year we’ll see how many share your view.”

Hey, I just live here. If people want President Huckabee and Tea-Party majorities in both chambers of Congress, so be it. I’ll just shift my investments to a safer haven and enjoy the entertainment. The one Republican with the credentials and smarts for the job is the conservative governor of Indiana, but he’s too mellow and pragmatic for the Right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya

Congratulations on your high level of confidence in our leader.

Next year we’ll see how many share your view.

“All oil is fungible.” True, but that doesn’t change my main points. First, if oil is the goal, you stick with Ghaddafi, not the rebels. He may be horrible, but the oil part has been working just fine under his dictatorship. Second, Libya is not Saudi Arabia. The volume does not influence the global markets much. Therefore, I conclude that Obama’s actions are not driven by oil, even though other U.S. actions and policies in that part of the world have been thusly driven.

As for the other, I’m confident Obama is too smart, politically and geo-politically, to get sucked into a full-blown on-the-ground war in Libya. And I’m even more confident the public would not stand for it. There’s little to gain and much to lose.

“We would have had to send in significant ground forces and kept them there in extremely hostile battle conditions for god knows how long.”

And what makes you so confident that we won’t be doing that in Libya?

Whatever it is, I’d like to have some of it.

Fair question, wrong answer.

If oil was a factor in deciding what to do or not do, then the smartest thing would be to let Ghaddai crush the rebels and get back to business as usual. It’s the rebellion that could interrupt supplies, especially since most of the oil is in the rebel-controlled East.

Also, Libya is a relatively small producer in the global oil market (ranks 17th), and estimates are that the U.S. buys only 2-7% of Libya’s oil exports — only 79 thousand barrels a day according to one estimate. China and Europe are the biggest customers.

On the other hand, it seems safe to say that oil was a big consideration in dealing with Iraq in both Gulf Wars.

Doing something about those other African genocides (assuming you think of Libya as “African” rather than Arab) would have required a lot more than a No Fly Zone and Tomahawks. We would have had to send in significant ground forces and kept them there in extremely hostile battle conditions for god knows how long. After our experience in Somalia, there’s little stomach for that. One thing Bush 43 did right was build good will in Africa with substantial assistance to fight AIDS. That (along with the work of the Bill and Melinda Gates, Carter, and Clinton foundations) is a lot more in our national interest than getting involved in African wars.

Could it be because those countries don’t have any oil?

Waldobama is a big hypocrite.