I think it is simple to see that due to lack of experience and reliance on advice from a staff with little executive experience Obama makes poor decisions or none at all.
What ever personal traits he exhibited that lured many to vote for him, he had and has none of the experience and traits needed to be President.
I see this as a very very simple problem, solution wait 2 years and elect a qualified President even if he is not likable.

It's not at all clear to me why you say, Dr. Feaver, that Mr. Carney was determined to say nothing about Libya. His role in these briefings is to answer questions, and he answered a number of questions about Libya.

He noted that Obama was to speak on this later in the day - as he did - and that Obama and Mrs. Clinton had already condemned the violence.

I don't doubt that it may be satisfying to grandstand on an issue like this - the violence being perpetrated against protesters in Libya is truly appalling. What is less clear (and what you don't specify in your post) is what the speak-loudly approach (is this what you mean when you refer to 'Bush-like response[s]'?) should be expected to accomplish. US policy - that violence against peaceful protesters is unacceptable - is perfectly clear, and does not require belligerent comments or threats of military action.

The president noted that protection of US citizens is his paramount responsibility, and he clearly is carrying this burden on his shoulders - a burden that I am not convinced is fully appreciated by one who sees threats to citizens first as a means of avoiding the need for Security Council authorization.

I'd be interested to know who among President Obama's advisers is pressing him to respond in a "Bush-like" way to events in Libya. It would just be interesting to read the reasoning behind advocacy of sending an army to Libya and getting it stuck there for ten years.

Obama's first responsibility in this situation is to assure the safety of American nationals in Libya. Until facts about them are fully determined, it might well be that administration statements will walk on some rhetorical eggshells. Obama's weakness for prissy words like "unacceptable" when describing outrages against civilians makes this awkward but unavoidable situation sound worse than it needs to; he expresses outrage like a fussy restaurant customer sending back a lukewarm plate of soup.

The question his administration really needs to answer is how the Libyan situation is most likely to develop, and how the United States and its allies may be called upon to respond. Qaddafi is not going to end his career as the dictator of Tripoli if he can help it. His opposition is not strong enough to throw him out, and he may not command enough loyalty from the Libyan armed forces to take back the ground his regime has lost. Ideally, someone or some group within his regime would remove him. But suppose that doesn't happen. Suppose he is Qaddafi is able to gather his forces and mount an effort to take back the eastern part of the country. Suppose he is not able to do this, but is able to mount harassing attacks on Libyan civilians or foreign nationals. What do we do then?

Ferry with Americans aboard finally leaves Libya (AP)

"After three tense days stuck in port, a ferry carrying Americans and other foreigners finally left the Libyan capital on Friday despite choppy seas that stranded thousands of Chinese workers back on land. Tens of thousands of foreigners are trying to flee Libya, with Turks and Chinese climbing aboard ships by the thousands. Europeans are mostly boarding evacuation flights while North Africans have been racing to border crossings in overcrowded vans. A U.S. government-chartered aircraft was expected to leave from the Mitiga Air Field near downtown Tripoli for Istanbul later in the day."

Peter Feaver,

You must be a smart guy. Explain to me why it matters how quickly and what exactly Obama says about Libya? Will it make you feel better or something?

I don't understand the critism with Obama taking his time to make a measured statement on Libya. Why does he have to act like a cowboy and shoot from the hip with some BS? Like say a George Bush.

Whatever he says will not make one bit of difference!

It seems to me that Obama has been smart. You can see they held back on forceful comments until the ferry with Americans left Libya. Obama also smartly did not mention Qaddafi by name, as to not make this a U.S. versus Qaddafi issue. Better to talk about the Libyan government more broadly, to also direct the comments to Qaddafi's inner circle. Qaddafi is irrelevant at this point and it is only peeling off the inner circle that matters.

I know it must get guys like you and the MSM very excited and some how stroke your American exceptionalist ego if Obama makes big cowboy like statements, but what exactly will that really accomplish? What is going on in the Middle East has nothing to do with the U.S.

By MAGGIE MICHAEL, Associated Press
"The European Union has slapped an arms embargo, visa ban and other sanctions on Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's regime. British Prime Minister David Cameron told British lawmakers Monday he is working with allies on a plan to establish a military no-fly zone over Libya. France is sending two planes with humanitarian aid, including medicine and doctors, to Benghazi, the opposition stronghold in eastern Libya. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called for Gadhafi to step down."

By Jonah Goldberg, USA Today, March 1, 2011

"Another oddity, particularly given Obama's high regard for the power of his own rhetoric, is that you'd think he'd be looking for ways to take credit for, and guide, the forces of reform in the region. Some of his defenders have tried to make the case that Obama's famous Cairo speech in 2009 fueled this year's 'Arab Spring.' That would be more plausible if Obama weren't in a defensive crouch. In fairness, the White House did step up its game after the hapless ferry it sent to rescue Americans spent three days parked at the docks because of bad weather. The president dispatched Hillary Clinton to Geneva to rally the diplomatic corps, a move that no doubt stewed Gadhafi's bowels with fear. And since the weekend, the administration committed, finally, to ousting Gadhafi."