I know all you splendid readers think the hardworking staff is a noodnik for following Peggy Noonan’s Wall Street Journal Declarations, but here’s a question from her current column about “the decision to become involved militarily in the Libyan civil war” that’s actually worth considering:
I cannot for the life of me see how an American president can launch a serious military action without a full and formal national address in which he explains to the American people why he is doing what he is doing, why it is right, and why it is very much in the national interest. He referred to his aims in parts of speeches and appearances when he was in South America, but now he’s home. More is needed, more is warranted, and more is deserved. He has to sit at that big desk and explain his thinking, put forward the facts as he sees them, and try to garner public support. He has to make a case for his own actions. It’s what presidents do! And this is particularly important now, because there are reasons to fear the current involvement will either escalate and produce a lengthy conflict or collapse and produce humiliation.
Isn’t that a reasonable expectation? And if not, why not?
Your answer goes here.