Obama, Libya, and political approval

OBAMA, LIBYA, AND APPROVAL: Argues E.J. Dionne in the Post, in terms of policy on Libya (or anything else, for that matter). He offers some advice. "What should Obama take from this? He needs to learn the difference between middle-ground policies, which flow from his natural instincts, and soggy, incoherent compromises with opponents who will say he’s wrong no matter what happens. [...] Obama should remember that steady moderation is very different from continually looking around to see if he can accommodate opponents who won’t be happy until he’s back teaching law school." Dionne makes a few good points. Doyle McManus speculates on whether or not the recent events in Libya will result in a bounce for Obama. "When he faces the voters next year, Obama can make a credible argument that in foreign policy, he's done most of what he promised. He said he would wind down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and U.S. troops are slowly disengaging from both countries. He promised to maintain the war against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups; he's done that. And he promised to renew U.S. alliances so we could draw on more help from others; the NATO campaign in Libya, with much of the burden borne by Europeans, is proof that the doctrine can work. Obama's foreign policy has fallen short of its goals on other counts, most notably in Israel and Iran, but on balance, it's not a bad record."