When did the Left turn into war hawks?

The hypocrisy is astounding.  The party that opposes capital punishment for convicted killers who survive 10+ years of appeals cheers the killing of a U.S. citizen without a trial.

Now Hillary Clinton mocks the death of Gadhafi, laughing and saying, “We came, we saw, he died”  (See the link for the video.)

Gadhafi was a bad man, but what makes Obama & Co. so sure that the replacement government will be an improvement?  How is this better than President Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” moment?

This is pure “might makes right” reasoning from the Left.  I realize that consistency isn’t their strong suit, but this is getting bizarre.

TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons) via Peace Prize? | RedState.

More hypocrisy: Obama raised more money from rich bankers than any Republican candidate.  Not just in the 2008 election, but this year!  Shhhhh . . . don’t tell the Occupiers!

Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.

. . .

As a result, Obama has brought in more money from employees of banks, hedge funds and other financial service companies than all the other GOP candidates combined, according to a Washington

From the “You’ll wish this was an April Fool’s day joke” file

More bizarre scenarios driven by the administration’s Random Foreign Policy Generator (RFPG): Voting Present on Steroids: The Obama Administration Prepares to take Both Sides in the Libyan Civil War | RedState.

In other words, we’ve apparently (finally) learned enough about this group of rebels/al Qaedaterrorists/rapists-and-indiscriminant-killers/who-knows-what-else that we’ve been fighting alongside (primarily from 15,000 feet and up, of course) that the Obama administration is now ready to fight them, as well – an action which would, amazingly and dumbfoundingly, make the U.S. a participant in both sides of an Arab civil war being fought in the desert of North Africa.  Just amazing.

The realization of who it is they rushed into war to support must be hitting Samantha Power, President Obama, and their band of merry humanitarian interventionists pretty hard.  This is worse than waking up and finding the person you brought home last night required beer goggles about eighteen bottles thick to seem attractive. Rather, it’s akin to bringing home the already-not-so-hot girl who was hanging out alone in a dark corner of the bar, only to find out shortly after leaving with her that she’s actually a hairy-backed man man named Steve (or, in this case, something more like Abdul Hakim al Hasadi).

. . .

We bombed Qaddafi’s forces because they were killing civilians. So Qaddafi’s forces began dressing like civilians. So the rebels began killing civilians. So NATO is warning the rebels not to kill civilians, otherwise NATO will bomb the rebels. But the rebels are dressed like civilians.So NATO may end up killing civilians.

In other news, the administration continues to debate arming the rebels who are dressed like civilians. But Qaddafi’s forces are also dressed like civilians. So we may be arming Qaddafi’s forces who are killing civilians while we also bomb the rebels who are killing civilians and bombing civilians who really are civilians but look like Qaddafi’s forces who are killing civilians.

Who’s on first?

. . .

Meanwhile, as the Obama administration is warning those on whose side we’ve been fighting in this Libyan civil war that we may start bombing them, too, just for good measure – and as his administration is warning Congress it will ignore any bills they pass to restrict U.S. involvement in Libya, and as the Secretary of Defenseclaims we’re about to withdraw our fighters from combat and “hope” our allies will pick up the slack – calls are increasing for a full ground invasion of this North African desert country.

You only wish it was a 4/1 joke or an Onion piece.

Quick thoughts on Libya

The administration’s Random Foreign Policy Generator is getting a workout lately when it comes to Libya.

[Spins dial.  Lands on “Do nothing”] Yea!  That was easy.

[Problem doesn’t go away. Spins again: "Furrow brow and talk tough"] OK, that doesn’t sound so bad.  Where’s my teleprompter?

[Problem still doesn’t go away.  People complaining. Spins again: “Launch bombs”] Well, that’s the opposite approach of what I’ve aggressively preached about for the last decade, but whatever.  As long as I can get back to golfing, being entertained and watching the NCAA tournament.

[Repeat . . .]

1. From the Bumbling Genius, Relax, It’s OK, Obama Is A Democrat

If anyone is having difficulty reconciling the war-is-not-the-answer’s dream president with Obama’s war and his American bombs falling in Libya; don’t feel alone. The only thing I can come up with as to how this could be is that he is trustworthy to do such things because he is a Democrat because he is an intrinsically good person. So, being a Democrat, we can trust his bombs will never kill Libyan children with flying shrapnel; or make Muslims want to blow American infidels up indiscriminately. But even if such horrors do happen don’t worry, the media will make sure you don’t hear about it; and that’s the same as it not happening.

2. With Libya, the Left’s Anti-War Hypocrisy is Complete – the title says it all.

3. Fish Wrap’s Ross Douthat Finally Figures Out The Liberal Spin On Libya

Bush was just plain silly in not going to the Congress, getting a resolution, not going to the United Nations, getting resolution 1441 (after 16 other UN resolutions), not laying out the rationale for military action in Iraq in speeches over long months, including the State of the Union, and not putting a coalition of over 40 nations together, not to mention not giving Saddam numerous chances to work with the weapons inspectors.

4. And from samples of the false teacher department, we’ve got this from the Sojourners’ Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis: Nothing.

And we have this beautiful piece of self-parody by Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie, Why I Can Support The Strikes Against Libya As A Christian: “The United Nations, not a U.S.-led coalition under cover of a UN mandate . . .”  Oh, well since it is led by the UN and not just under their mandate then that changes everything.  And you know Currie would have had the exact same views had it been President Bush in office.

Note to Liberals: Consistency — You’re doin’ it wrong.