They have been asking for this for a while. Obama went with a surge, but didn’t give them enough troops to do it. They are spread thin in Afghanistan and shit has been bad for a while.
This is screwed up. They have been requesting troops increases for a month or two now.
Obama blasted Bush for not focusing on Afghanistan and he pulls this shit?
Deep rifts at the heart of Western policy on Afghanistan were laid bare yesterday when President Obama’s top military adviser challenged him to authorise a troop surge that his most senior congressional allies have said they will oppose.
Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that more US troops as well as a rapid increase in the size and capability of the Afghan army were needed to carry out the President’s own strategy for prevailing in Afghanistan as the eighth anniversary of a debilitating war approaches.
His remarks to a Senate hearing came as Bob Ainsworth, the British Defence Secretary, said that the Taleban had proven a resilient enemy. “We’re far from succeeding against them yet but I reject that we’re not making progress,” he said at King’s College London.
Mr Obama also rejected claims that Afghanistan was turning into a quagmire akin to Vietnam, but his immediate dilemma is political: approving a surge could trigger a high-level mutiny within his own party. Making matters worse, a new poll showed that public support for the war has slumped since April.
“Each historical moment is different,” Mr Obama said in an interview published yesterday. “You never step into the same river twice, and so Afghanistan is not Vietnam.”
The call for more troops is supported by military commanders and Senate Republicans, including Senator John McCain, who warned yesterday that a “wait and see” approach to a surge risked repeating the “nearly catastrophic mistakes” that the US made in Iraq.
General Stanley McChrystal, in charge of US and Nato forces in Afghanistan, is expected to make specific troop requests to add to the 68,000 already committed to Afghanistan within the next fortnight.
A central plank of his strategy, led by General Graham Lamb, of Britain, would be to try to induce low and middle-ranking Taleban fighters to fight for the Government, repeating tactics pioneered by General Lamb in Iraq two years ago, Admiral Mullen said. Britain has about 9,000 troops in the country. If he accepts his commanders’ recommendations, Mr Obama will have to remake the case for a war that had overwhelming public support until this year. He has a tough fight to persuade fellow Democrats that new troops are needed.
Democratic senators lined up yesterday to reject calls for more US combat troops. Senator Russ Feingold warned that he and “a growing chorus” of Democrats would refuse to back sending more reinforcements.
Calling for a flexible timetable for withdrawal, he insisted that “continuing to build up troops in Afghanistan is the exact formula to increase support for the Taleban”.
The argument was echoed in London by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, which warned that the continued presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan could be more destabilising than withdrawal.
Admiral Mullen’s appearance before the Senate Armed Forces Committee was ostensibly an uncontroversial renomination for two more years as America’s most senior uniformed officer. In practice, he had to walk a tightrope, defending General McChrystal’s recent assessment of the Afghan security situation while explaining his failure so far to state the number of extra troops he needs, and making the case for a surge without prejudging the decisions of his Commander-in-Chief.
“I support a properly resourced, classically pursued counter-insurgency strategy,” he told the committee. “You can’t do that from offshore and you can’t do that just by killing the bad guys. You have to be there.”
Asked by Mr McCain if the preferred Democratic solution of leaving security to a strengthened Afghan army would suffice, Admiral Mullen said: “No, sir.” Mr McCain then referred to speculation that Mr Obama had delayed tackling the issue of specific troop numbers because of the drain on his time and political capital caused by the healthcare debate. “I believe the President can do both,” his former opponent in the White House race said.
Yesterday the debate was decorous. It is likely to turn acrimonious in the weeks ahead as Republicans train their fire on delays that they will argue have put American lives at risk.
When Admiral Mullen revealed that General Lamb had initiated an effort to win over Taleban fighters, he was asked why it had taken so long. “It has not been an area of focus,” he said.
Asked how the Taleban could have the initiative against the world’s most powerful military despite having no tanks or aircraft, the admiral replied: “They’re very good at it. It’s their country. They know how to fight.”
Senator Lindsey Graham, one of an influential cross-party trio likely to frame the congressional response to Mr Obama’s next move on Afghanistan, alluded to a new CNN poll showing a 14 per cent drop in public backing for the war. He asked Admiral Mullen: “Do you understand that you’ve got one more shot back home?” The admiral said that he did.
WTF is wrong with these people?
Democratic senators lined up yesterday to reject calls for more US combat troops. Senator Russ Feingold warned that he and “a growing chorus” of Democrats would refuse to back sending more reinforcements.
Calling for a flexible timetable for withdrawal, he insisted that “continuing to build up troops in Afghanistan is the exact formula to increase support for the Taleban”.
The reason Bush’s surge worked so well is that he increased the number of troops drastically.
And Congress was actually laughing at what he did say. The laugh line was classic – “Now, a lot of details still need to be worked out.”
Well, the Democrats/Liberals wanted a novice because they thought that he wasn’t “tainted” by the ways of Washington – and a novice they got.
I saw that Obama had lunch with Clinton when he was in NYC yesterday. I bet Clinton told him to take whatever he can get and claim victory and then start to triangulate in order to save his Presidency. There is a reason why, as Obama mentioned during his speech, that so many Presidents have proposed a government takeover of health care and have failed – the people don’t want it.
President Obama’s long, hot summer is about to turn into a chilly fall.
A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken after the president’s dramatic address to a joint session of Congress last week shows Americans almost evenly divided over passing a health care bill and inclined to think it would make some of the system’s vexing problems worse, not better.
Six in 10 say Obama’s proposal, if enacted, would not achieve his goals of expanding coverage to nearly all Americans without raising taxes on the middle class or lowering the quality of health care. For the first time, a majority disapprove of the way he’s handling health care policy.
Milton Downing, 51, a teacher from Wilmington, Del., is a Democrat who says Obama is doing an “awesome” job, but he worries the legislation might upend the coverage he has. “How would it affect me right now and in the future?” he asks. “I don’t have enough facts on what it might do to my family.”
The findings underscore the steep climb ahead for the White House in trying to push a health care plan through the House and Senate during the next few weeks. Some major provisions, including how to pay for it and whether to include a government-run plan as an option, haven’t been settled.
The president’s speech apparently failed to galvanize public opinion in the way the White House had hoped. While it drew a national television audience estimated by Nielsen at more than 32 million people, there’s little evidence in the survey that it changed minds.
Obama’s approval rating is 54%, the same as in two USA TODAY polls in August; 43% disapprove, the highest of his presidency.
“There’s no doubt people share the president’s objectives,” says White House counselor David Axelrod, citing steps to control costs and ensure coverage when workers change jobs. “There’s just profound skepticism about the ability to achieve them. That’s our opposition here.”
He said the White House could address those qualms by delivering on promised reforms.
At stake is the future of what has been Obama’s signature domestic initiative since he launched his campaign for the White House.
“They’ve pushed all the chips into the middle of the table on this,” says Ed Gillespie, a top adviser in the Bush White House. That means success or failure is likely to shape perceptions of Obama’s presidency and affect the prospects of future initiatives.
The approval rating for congressional Democrats is a dismal 36%-61%. It’s even worse for congressional Republicans: 27% approve, 70% disapprove.
No one deserves this political spanking from the voters more. He’s a national disgrace, and a great source of shame and humiliation for the people of Nevada. At least he won’t be around stinking up the place in the summers anymore.
In what is currently a difficult political climate for Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid trails two potential Republican challengers seeking to unseat him as he faces reelection next year in Nevada.
The first Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of the 2010 race shows Sue Lowden beating Reid by 10 percentage points, 50% to 40%. Lowden is chairwoman of the Nevada Republican Party and the preferred candidate of the Republican party establishment.
GOP hopeful Danny Tarkanian beats Reid by seven points, 50% to 43%. Tarkanian is a former basketball player for the University of Nevada-Las Vegas and the son of a legendary college basketball coach.
They got caught again for a third time in NY helping form a prostitution ring made up of illegal alien children.
They don’t get any more funds to “advise” people on getting loans through HUD AND they are OUT of the upcoming Census counting.
The Dems in the Senate pretty much had to go along with this. They see the painting on the walls.
how do the acorn-defenders spin this one?
They did nothing wrong! they just lost all funding because…?
A poverty-rights group that has drawn the ire of conservatives suffered another setback in Washington on Monday when the U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly to deny it access to federal housing funds.
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which helps poor people fight foreclosures and fix tax problems, has received more than $53 million in U.S. funds since 1994, but conservatives’ charges of widespread fraud have begun to impact its reputation in the capital.
Last week, the U.S. Census Bureau told the group it did not want its help boosting participation in next year’s census.
The Senate measure, which passed 83 to 7 in the Democratic-led chamber, was included in a must-pass spending bill that funds housing and transportation programs for the fiscal year that starts October 1.
“This is an opportunity for the United States Senate to stand up and say ‘Enough is enough’ just as the Census Bureau did,” said Republican Senator Mike Johanns, the measure’s sponsor.
Apparently some Democrats initially resisted de-funding ACORN until it was clear things weren’t going to go their way:
At the beginning of the vote, it appeared that Democrats might resist. Initially, a half-dozen Democrats cast votes in opposition to the amendment. A few more cast votes against it as the rest of the Senate voted, but the tide appeared to shift. More and more Democrats signed onto the amendment, and votes started changing. One male voice could be heard in the chamber saying, “I want to change my vote!” Among those who changed their votes: Tom Udall (D-NM), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and Herb Kohl (D-WI).
Here are the videos if you have not seen them yet.
God asks for only 10% of your money.
God gives you freedom to live your life as you choose.
God’s plan to save us is actually written down for people to read.
Both require people to have lots of faith.
Liberals love Obama.
Excellent commentary on why people are losing faith in Obama. The cliff notes version if you don’t want to read the whole piece is that people don’t believe Obama because he’s a hypocritical liar.
Mitch McConnell, the taciturn Kentuckian who leads Senate Republicans, usually resembles Samuel Beckett’s character Watt, who “had never smiled, but thought he knew how it was done.” Last week, however, careful observers detected a trace of a hint of a shadow of a smile. Congressional Democrats were still at daggers drawn with one another, and the president’s rhetoric was becoming CPR for the Republican Party.
On the 233rd day of his presidency, Barack Obama grabbed the country’s lapels for the 263rd time—that was, as of last Wednesday, the count of his speeches, press conferences, town halls, interviews, and other public remarks. His speech to Congress was the 122nd time he had publicly discussed health care. Just 14 hours would pass before the 123rd, on Thursday morning. His incessant talking cannot combat what it has caused: An increasing number of Americans do not believe that he believes what he says.
He says America’s health-care system is going to wrack and ruin and requires root-and-branch reform—but that if you like your health care (as a large majority of Americans do), nothing will change for you. His slippery new formulation is that nothing in his plan will “require” anyone to change coverage. He used to say, “If you like your health-care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period.” He had to stop saying that because various disinterested analysts agree that his plan will give many employers incentives to stop providing coverage for employees.
He deplores “scare tactics” but says that unless he gets his way, people will die. He praises temperate discourse but says many of his opponents are liars. He says Medicare is an exemplary program that validates government’s prowess at running health systems. But he also says Medicare is unsustainable and going broke, and that he will pay for much of his reforms by eliminating the hundreds of billions of dollars of waste and fraud in this paragon of a program, and in Medicaid. He says Congress will cut Medicare (it will not) by $500 billion—without affecting benefits.
He says the nation’s economic health depends on controlling health-care costs. Yet so important is the trial bar in financing the Democratic Party, he says not a syllable in significant and specific support of tort reforms that could save hundreds of billions of dollars by reducing “defensive medicine” intended to protect not patients from illnesses but doctors from lawyers. He has said he will not add a dime to the deficit when bringing 47 million people into government-guaranteed health care. But Wednesday night, 17 million went missing: “There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.” Almost 10 million of the uninsured are not citizens, and most of them are illegal immigrants. Presumably the other 7 million could get insurance but chose not to. Democrats propose fines to eliminate that choice. He suggests health-insurance companies are making excessive profits. But since 1996, profits of the six such companies in the S&P 500 have been below the 500’s average. He says a “public option”—a government insurance program—would not be subsidized to enable it to compete unfairly with private insurers. (The post office and the government’s transportation -”public option,” Amtrak, devour subsidies.) He says the public option is vital for keeping health insurers “honest”—but that it is only a wee “sliver” of reform. About that, Nancy Pelosi -disagrees.
She is liberalism’s Dolores Ibárruri, a.k.a. La Pasionaria—the Passion Flower. An anti-Franco orator during the Spanish Civil War, Ibárruri gave the Loyalists their battle cry, “¡Nopasarán!”—”They shall not pass!” Franco’s forces did pass, but Pelosi has vowed that a reform plan lacking a public option shall not pass the House. But Montana Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, says a public option cannot pass the Senate.
McConnell of the Mona Lisa smile says Congress will pass something because Obama will sign anything. McConnell notes, however, that never in his 25 Senate years have Republicans polled close to Democrats when the question is: Which party do you trust most to deal with health care? Until now. Last week’s polling: Democratic Party, 41; Republican Party, 39—a statistical dead heat. On a generic ballot question—which party do you intend to vote for?—the GOP has gone from down 12 points to dead even since November. Independents defected in droves from the GOP in 2006 and 2008, but today only one third of them view Obama’s handling of health care favorably.
He says “the time for bickering is over.” Presidents of both parties disparage as mere bickering all inconvenient arguments about what government can and should do. Americans “didn’t send us here to bicker,” said George Herbert Walker Bush, in the first 15 minutes of America’s most recent one-term presidency.
The President easily vanquished many strawmen arguments, and outright called opposing positions false and lies. He basicly promised to do all the good things imaginable about healthcare reform, with no downside at all- no increase of our deficit, no coverage extended to illegal aliens, no coverage for abortion under the cover of healthcare. And claimed that he is trying to achieve bipartisan legislation passed for the benefit of all. He said the other side has no new ideas or plan. In the midst of the presidents narrative of the evil conservatives position, Joe Wilson shouted out “YOU lie!”- and of course all the democrats were flabbergasted that anyone could ever openly, publicly, and in formal setting disrespect the office of the Presidency.
And a contrast of the treatment of President Bush by democrats during his 2005 SOTU address, where he discussed the undeniable impending collapse of Social Security and the need for reform- reform which was opposed by democrats.
Id like to address some of President Obamas statements with actual goings on in congress to see where reality settles.
Obama says he wants bipartisanship in his speech, but…
Boehner: GOP leaders haven’t met Obama for health talks since April
By Molly K. Hooper – 09/09/09 11:09 AM ET
The ball is in President Obama’s court to reach out to Republicans if he wants a bipartisan bill on healthcare reform, House GOP Leader John Boehner (Ohio) said Monday morning.
Boehner told reporters that the president has not invited House GOP leaders to the White House for meetings on healthcare reform since the end of April.
Earlier this year, GOP leaders sent a letter to the president in May stating that they would like to work with the administration to find “common ground” on healthcare reform.
But the administration responded with a tersely worded letter indicating that they had healthcare reform under control.
But, it isnt just republicans that have been completely shut out from working on the legislation, but centrist and conservative (Blue Dog) democrats as well…
45 Centrist Democrats Protest Secrecy of Health Care Talks
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: May 11, 2009
WASHINGTON — Forty-five House Democrats in the party’s moderate-to-conservative wing have protested the secretive process by which party leaders in their chamber are developing legislation to remake the health care system.
The lawmakers, members of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, said they were “increasingly troubled” by their exclusion from the bill-writing process. …
The objective CBO standard challenges Obamas predictions of the cost of healthcare reform- which is fairly par for all government spending programs that end up costing many times more than projected.
White House, CBO debt forecasts challenge Obama
Tue Aug 25, 2009 5:27pm EDT
By Alister Bull and Andy Sullivan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. national debt will nearly double over the next 10 years, government forecasts showed on Tuesday, challenging President Barack Obama’s economic and healthcare overhaul agenda.
The White House midsession budget forecast and the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office both forecast that government revenues will be crimped by a slow recovery from the worst recession since the 1930s Great Depression, while spending on retirement and medical benefits soars.
The White House projected a cumulative $9 trillion deficit between 2010 and 2019, while the CBO pegged the total at $7.1 trillion because it assumed higher revenues as tax cuts expire.
The spending blitz could push the national debt, now more than $11 trillion, to close to $20 trillion. The debt is the total sum the government owes, while the deficit is the yearly gap between revenues and spending.
“If anyone had any doubts that this burden on future generations is unsustainable, they’re gone,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, adding that economic stimulus funds should be diverted to pay down U.S. debt. …
As for funding abortion:
Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah quietly asked the necessary questions. Pointing to the language mandating that health insurers participating in government “gateways” must include “essential community providers,” Hatch asked: “Would that include abortion providers? I mean it looks to me like you’re expanding it to where you—well, say for instance, like Planned Parenthood. Would that put them into this system?”
Mikulski was evasive.
“It would include women’s health clinics that provide comprehensive services, and under the definition of a women’s health clinic it would include Planned Parenthood clinics,” said Mikulski. “It does not in any way expand a service. In other words, it doesn’t expand, nor mandate an abortion service.”
“No,” said Hatch, “but it would provide for them.”
“It would provide for any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate,” said Mikulski. …
On funding to cover illegal aliens:
Well, Mr. President, that idea must have been tucked under a stack of background briefing papers over there in the corner of the table because the Congressional Research Service (CRS) says this about H.R. 3200, the Obamacare bill approved just before the recess by the House Energy and Commerce Committee chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA:
“Under H.R. 3200, a ‘Health Insurance Exchange’ would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.”
CRS also notes that the bill has no provision for requiring those seeking coverage or services to provided proof of citizenship. So, absent some major amendments to the legislation and a credible, concrete enforcement effort in action, looks like the myth on this issue is the one being spread by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, et. al.
also, here the democrats vote against restricting confirming citizenship status of illegal aliens enrolling for taxpayer funded healthcare…
Public healthcare for illegals is latest hidden mandate in House reform bill
Friday, July 31st, 2009
Several weeks ago, The Huffington Post published an article by Deepak Bhargava decrying Congressional Democrats for excluding undocumented immigrants in their plans for healthcare reform. At the time, I accused the left-leaning blog of being out of touch with the mainstream liberal movement. Polling data demonstrates that 80% of Americans oppose providing government healthcare coverage for illegal immigrants and 70% say they would not support healthcare reform that included such a provision. Somehow that message has been lost on House Democrats debating healthcare reform in the Energy and Commerce Committee.
In a 29-28 vote last night, Democrats defeated an amendment proposed by Energy and Commerce Republican Nathan Deal requiring states to take steps to keep illegal aliens off the taxpayer subsidized Medicaid dole. Only 5 of 34 Democrats joined Republicans voting in favor of the provision. …
And the President himself has been seeking coverage for the 47 million uninsured in our country (which includes 10-12 million illegal aliens)- as we have discussed in this forum already. As well, that figure also includes several million young and healthy people that choose not to pay for health insurance- that they could afford.
And heres part of the republican plan, in addition to the biggest idea of allowing people to buy across State lines, and to drop State mandated coverage (lobbied for by healthcare industry) for such specifics as hair transplants, IVF and other fertility treatments, drug and alcohol rehab, gender reassignment, and other issues that most people do not need or want to pay for.
June 17, 2009 12:45 PM
House Republicans Offer Health Care Plan
Posted by Jill Jackson
House Republicans unveiled a plan today that they say would solve the nation’s health care crisis.
…
The four-page Republican health care outline lays out a plan that would allow states, associations and small businesses to pool together to offer health insurance. It would give tax credits to low and modest income Americans to help them buy health insurance. It would also let dependents under twenty-five stay on their parent’s health insurance.
Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the top Republican on the House tax-writing committee, said that provision alone would “cover seven million people in America.” …
So the existence of such facts as this should cause most reasonable people to call out Obamas blatant bullshit or lies for what they are.
