Is the right also torn about escalating in Afghanistan?

Well Jay, the surge won’t work. And what’s really the issue here is this: why is Obama so intent on killing our troops for oil?

Better yet, what happened to all the “war protesters”…seems they disappeared since January of this year?

Of course, all the libs on this lame little blog will dismiss these concerns with a wave of the hand…afterall, war is okay…as long as the Prez has a “D” after his name.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m no conservative , nor do I play one on tv, but no – no more troops – in fact, bring the ones home – even the couple of hundred I saw at Hartsfield on Thursday.

• Link
• Report this comment

Whiner, if the war was still winnable, I’ be there with you, but it’s not winnable anymore in a conventional warfare sense. Let’s live to fight another day.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hope and change, guys.

In other words, Obama wants to change the troops from Iraq to Afghanistan and hope you don’t notice.

Dunno why he’d care though…since you all just live to make excuses for the bum and his thug wife.

• Link
• Report this comment

No, bring them home.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bring them home.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay: the answer is NO.

Unlike Iraq, there seems to be no clear, winnable goal.

Furthermore, since Bush had zero support from Dems during the Iraq mission…and liberals like MrsGodzilla were protesting in the streets carrying signs of Bush dressed like Hitler…I can’t really stomach being behind Obama on this potential fiasco.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK

please forgive me……never meant to incite crimes of fashion.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mrs G –

“please forgive me……never meant to incite crimes of fashion.”

I mean … plague and pestilence have their uses … but white pumps??? (the horror!!!)

• Link
• Report this comment

NRB

No my signs had this picture

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Qvti2ehEQ8k/R7P35h5HeeI/AAAAAAAABOQ/r5fJ4iLPUIA/s400/13_kiss_bush-arab_1302_430xx.jpg

• Link
• Report this comment

Matilda

Well Said!

• Link
• Report this comment

White Pumps??? What? Fire pump? Water Pump? Fuel Pump? What???

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, the Republican congressmen are clearly waiting for word from their armchair generals back home to give them a majority sign as to how to proceed with the politicization of the Afghanistan conflict. Will more troops equate to more GOP votes or not. Inquiring minds in DC need a poll that they can trust on this issue. They yearn for soundbites from the tea partiers. Do they want war and are they willing to be taxed in order to pay for it and will they support a draft in order to get the troops needed for such a fight. Where is FOXY news on this issue and who will bow before Limbaugh if the wrong call is made. So, I can understand the hesitancy to commit from the right wingers.

• Link
• Report this comment

Matilda 9:10

An observation: our current evangelical president is a leftie, not a rightie.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,

“We did, it worked”

Really? Did I miss that news conference?

• Link
• Report this comment

mrs g -

“wasn’t that a chubby checker tune”

I think it was the Beatles …

• Link
• Report this comment

Come on Jay. The Right has been torn about Afghanistan since before day one of US Troops arriving there.

It was the Left that was in total agreement that Afghanistan was the place where we should be fighting. The only place where war made any sense.

• Link
• Report this comment

NRB

September 29th, 2009
9:01 am

You’re wrong. Many Democrats have spoken out against the escalation. But others have been willing to give Obama a little more time. I look for a change in strategy (again) and a condemnation of the government Bush installed.

• Link
• Report this comment

Agnes

September 29th, 2009
9:22 am

Not total. I was against it and have the documentation to prove it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul, you mean the “right” doesn’t OWN Jesus Christ? What a stunning revelation! (Do Rush, Beck, Hannity, and the morning crew on Fox & Friends know?) Mr. Bookman asked the righties to clarify their perspective today. I certainly hope y’all have something more to offer than presumptions about what “lefties” think. We’re listening.

• Link
• Report this comment

Agnes,

“It was the Left that was in total agreement that Afghanistan was the place where we should be fighting. The only place where war made any sense.”

Yeah, as opposed to Iraq? WTF?

• Link
• Report this comment

BTW, Jay, since none of the wingnuts can define what “winning” is nor what “victory” would entail, other than “We’ve got to stay until we WIN!” or “We can’t pull out before VICTORY!”, then I also vote “NO”.

• Link
• Report this comment

I Report/ Vast White Wing Conspirator (-: You Whine )-:

September 29th, 2009
9:01 am

I think you’re misunderestimating Onama’s competitiveness.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay

Sorry, didn’t answer the question.

I have deep reservations about our alignment with the current gov’t. Over a million fraudulent votes… but now a call for a run-off election. Can they have a semi-honest election? Even if they can, we’re still putting a lot of stock in our central democratic government model. Can we do the other things we want to do absent that element? It may be possible. But it won’t happen in months, as it did in Iraq. And that’s the other great weakness.

So do I support 40k more troops in pursuit of a strategy I think has a serious long-term flaw? No. (Could the strategy work? Yes. Could it work in the time Americans – let alone NATO – would be willing to give it? Doubtful).

Would I support more troops in pursuit of a modified strategy involving a far smaller footprint aimed at making Afg inhospitable for AQ? Yes. (but the idea the practical differences between AQ and the Taliban are slight to none is troubling).

No one said this was simple or did not have great risks. Or involve factors (such as the election, regardless of how predictable that was) that can change perceptions overnight.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And, yes, we need to cut a deal with factions of the Taliban and let them fight over the country after we’re gone.”

Amen. Oh, sorry Paul- So say we all!

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, according to THE commander, 40,000 more troops wouldn’t be nearly enough.

USinUK

September 29th, 2009
9:03 am

Originally winning would have been annihilating al Qaeda, but now it includes the Taliban. It was a law enforcement problem that the military had a covert role in. Bush overreacted and escalated it into an unwinnable war. But I think Obama will be able to exit with honor, if not victory.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,

Let me reiterate: I guess I missed the victory parade.

“Minimize AQ?”

They are still there – and all over the world – did that surge minimize global AQ? No.

“Give the gov’t time to, if they chose, to put in place actions to stabilize their country? ”

The government will be stable over time, it’s inevitable – but 5, 10 years down the road – who knows what their government will be like, and for all we know we could have someone 100 times worse than Saddam. Saddam, like most ME dictators like to talk big while grabbing themselves as a testament to their power – he was no threat to us.

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh my, I must have touched a nerve. I think I will wait to see if Jay has a position on the Left’s support of Afghanistan, particularly over the last 2.5 years.

As far as the the Right’s less than total support of Afghanistan, I was not for putting troops there. And my guess is that others who post here from the Correct side did not support a ground war in Afghanistan.

• Link
• Report this comment

“and liberals like MrsGodzilla were protesting in the streets carrying signs of Bush dressed like Hitler…I can’t really stomach being behind Obama on this potential fiasco.”

So NRB’s political leanings won’t allow him to support the troops?

Why does NRB hate American Soldiers?

ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

• Link
• Report this comment

TnG –

to me, it all boils down to why the taliban rose to power in the first place: they brought order and security in a country that had been ravaged by war for more than 2 decades

“In the villages near the southern city of Kandahar, Omar and his small but growing band earned a reputation for standing up to corrupt warlords, rescuing local village girls from soldiers who kidnapped them for sex, and reopening roads that were controlled by local commanders demanding exorbitant “tolls” from anyone who passed.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A38162-2001Sep15

I remember reading an article similar to this one that talked about villages where the bodies of people killed by warlords would lie in the streets and be eaten by dogs because people were too afraid to leave their houses to do anything about them.

If the US could do something to destroy the poppy crop and provide some kind of stability to the country, then I would support an escalation of troops. If all they are going to do is swat at the Taliban, then they’re just going to swarm back in after we leave and it will be a wasted effort.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Afghanistan is Obama’s war.”

Can you explain exactly why it’s Obama’s war?

Last I knew we were attacked from Afghanistan soil.

Perhaps if the greatest hero President ever (where’s GEORGE AMERICAN when you need him?) George W Bush, had not of allowed OBL to escape at Tora Bora, we wouldn’t even be discussing this…

• Link
• Report this comment

JAY –

can you please de-moderate my comment??? there is nothing in there that is illegal, immoral or fattening …

• Link
• Report this comment

Why does NRB hate American Soldiers?

Same reason the sociopath hates American Toddlers, presumably.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul, fair enough re: Obama’s use of the moral imperative. But I don’t think it’s fair to say he’s using it “a whole lot more than his predecessor.” Bush invoked the Christian faith when it suited him — fundraisers mostly, and pandering to the relgious vote — but conveniently omitted it when the teachings of his faith conflicted with his public policy, especially re: the poor. Amost every political figure is going to do this to some degree. Personally, I appreciate when Democrat attempts to dispell the myth that so many (at least on TV) seem to hold that the Republican Party has exclusive rights to JC the Almighty. NOBODY has exclusive rights, but I rather think that our actions and deeds mean more in this regard than whom we condemn in His name. Just my opinion.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK,

Did you ever read that book, “The Kite Runner” – that book gave me bad dreams, but I remember a part of that book talking about how the Taliban would shoot people who attempted to remove the bodies off the street. I haven’t had the guts to read Hosseini’s other books or see that movie.

• Link
• Report this comment

jt –

“Instead, send 1,000,000,000 cheap televisions. Bombard the afgans 24- seven with American television shows and “news”. After 90 days of Kate plus eight, Ghost-Hunters, Couger, SpongeBob, Cnn, Fox, etc….,,,, the Afgans will lick the hand that feeds them.”

I thought you were going to say “show them a non-stop loop of Jon and Kate + 8, 24/7 – they’ll be jumping off cliffs before we know it!”

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay,

You know wingnuts can’t put together a cognizant thought without hearing it first on one of their favorite shows.

The only thing they know to do is attack the left. They can’t think for themselves.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch

that book made me cry……glass on the kite strings…..

• Link
• Report this comment

It looks like the majority here says no to the surge and it seems that most of them are in favor of bringing them all home. Every day I have been posting MR. PRESIDENT, BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW! here and on the White House site, but we all need to do that. Everyday send your message. It is time, it truly is.

• Link
• Report this comment

Matilda

I think playing to an audience for raising cash or securing their support to get elected (remember all those articles about how the religious right felt betrayed by Rove and the Bush Administration when the election was over?) is on a different level than using one’s faith principles to justify one’s public policy initiatives (Pres Obama on health care, for example).

There is a difference, I think, in having religiously-based principles that might guide one’s actions in a broad sense, and keeping that private, than expressing one’s religious views to support one’s legislative agenda.

[[but conveniently omitted it when the teachings of his faith conflicted with his public policy, especially re: the poor.]] Remember that oft-cited example of committing hundreds of millions of dollars and saving literally millions of lives? Congruent with Pres Bush’s religious beliefs, but not explicitly stated? Pres Bush is a very popular figure in Africa (as I believe the Obama team was surprised to discover during his recent tour).

• Link
• Report this comment

As a conservative from Canada, I am turning very skeptical about this war. I understand the moral aspect of it, the idea that we are going to try and liberate the afghan people from the taliban is praiseworthy. I understand the security of it as well, I remember Sept. 11th and take the threat of subsequent attacks seriously. However I am starting to doubt the wisdom of the campaign there. These people do not seem to have a culture that could support democracy and as long as the border with pakistan stays open, there will be a constant supply of extremists. Demographically, there is no contest between us and them, the birth rate in afghanistan and western pakistan is through the roof so they can lose lots of young men without it mattering much, especially given the popularity of polygamy there. We on the other hand are expending a very very precious demograpic, we don’t have enough young people as it is. Furthermore, even if we did stabilize afghanistan, we would still have west pakistan, somalia, sudan, gaza, south lebanon and now maybe yemen as potential terrorist bases. The arc of instability is simply too wide that plugging a small part of it wont necessarily make another attack less likely. I think we need to solve this problem by changing our immigration systems and keeping people from areas which have large numbers of islamic extremists out of western countries. Pull our troops out and stop immigration from these places. Our number one ethical priority is to keep our citizens safe and that extends to our soldiers; if people from these countries want to live in a liberal democratic society, they are welcome to build one.

• Link
• Report this comment

“V” I remember a mini series in the late ’70s, early ’80s called that. About aliens who supposedly looked like us and were “visiting” to bring us peace and happiness, but they were really lizards and they brought a Hitler type regime to the world. It was quite good as I remember…

• Link
• Report this comment

Wow. Bruce is my new hero.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,

I did. I don’t remember it, but I’m skeptical of ABC doing a good job (although Lost is good, but it’s gotten freaky). When does it start?

And, “a 40 audience share” what is that strange language you speak?

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul…Zing!!!!!

Thank you sir! I tend to the support side of this question, precisely BECAUSE of my belief that if the Afghans wanted us out we’d be on our way by now.

I think at this point they are more afraid of the Taliban coming back in power than they are angry at being “invaded.” Even in the most conservative parts of the country.

Again, yet again, they have proven they are capable of driving even a “super” power out of their country if they want to. They have not, or not yet, reached that stage with THIS super power. I interpret that as support for our presence and for that reason I think we owe them the support we have NOT given them for the past 8 years.

A “holding” action for 8 years does NOT constitute success…not in my eyes anyway.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bruce

[[the idea that we are going to try and liberate the afghan people from the taliban is praiseworthy.]]

I believe we took down the Taliban government of Afghanistan because they were providing sanctuary to OBL and AQ and would not turn them over to us. Before their alignment with AQ we didn’t really care what they did within their own borders.

Normal

I saw a preview for the new series. 21st century computer generated effects for space ships are great.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think most conservatives think the Generals know better than anyone else how many resources are needed, and within reason they should be given broad leeway in these decisions. This is especially true now that we have learned that Obama, the commander and chief, has only spoken to his General once since his appointment, and this by phone.

• Link
• Report this comment

The American Association of Board Certified Hookers has rallied to teabag outside of Senate Finance and cheer the Repubozo Hookers on. The only argument the hookers have and this will be hilarious so adjust your TIVOs and DVRs is that “We’re hookers and we make millions from our johns. Hooking is a well established legal business in the US Senate. Leave us alone and quit interfering with our whore business. We’re Republican whores for insurance companies and we’re proud. Screw American health and screw that our bill would bankrupt middle America. Give us your forced 20% of income now or we will have the IRS arrest you. This is the default Blue Dog Repubozo bill.

Nice going Repubozos.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch

It’s the number of the audience who watch a show. If there are 100 households watching tv at 8 and 40 of those households watch V, then the audience share is 40.

(Normal, too) of course, the other great V of filmdom was the Melanie Griffith wholesome hooker character in Milk Money.

Bosch

Maybe ABC’s having their own surge. Catch ‘Modern Family’? Ed Bundy married to Sofia Vergara? With a married gay son who’s just adopted a child? And a daughter (Julie Bowen) with a modernly normal disfunctional family? Or Flash Forward? There is hope…

DoggoneGA

Yeah, that gets back to what I wrote earlier. The Taliban of today may not be the Taliban of 8 years ago. But what to do about it, that’s the conundrum.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul and Bosch –

speaking of Flash Forward, did it just start there in the US? I don’t mean a new season, did the show, itself, just start over there???

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,

“If there are 100 households watching tv at 8 and 40 of those households watch V, then the audience share is 40.”

I’ve always wondered how they know that. I always picture some secret TV ninja guy dressed in black peering through my windows to see what’s on.

• Link
• Report this comment

Where are all you Repubozos and Blue Dogs from? Aren’t you from tiny states in rural America?

“No. We’ve renounced our citizenship. We’re from the Republic of Insurance Whoreville. Screw the people we represent. We’re here to turn tricks for money period.”

Rockerfeller: “How our insurance companies sharing in the cost of reform–that’s question #1?

Answer. They’re contributing $20 billion while making trillions with the 30 million new forced customers.”

Question 2: What controls the contining raised premiums over future medical care or pre-existing conditions where they raise their rates three times as much?

Answer 2: “We’re whores. It’s our job to make money for our johns on the backs of middle America who sent us here and pays us a handsome salary so that we can afford a choice of cadillac aka porche plans.”

• Link
• Report this comment

@I Report

You do not know whether to scratch your watch or wind your hip.

• Link
• Report this comment

A little reading on the subject

The Velvet Junta

here:

http://zenhuber.blogspot.com/2009/09/velvet-junta.html

“McChrystal says he sees no sign of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. So, his argument goes, in order to disrupt al-Qaeda terror network, we need 45,000 more troops to occupy a country al Qaeda is not in to make sure it doesn’t come back. And what exactly is this al-Qaeda juggernaut we’ve come to quake in fear of? As former CIA officer Philip Giraldi recently noted, “An assessment by France’s highly regarded Paris Institute of Political Studies [suggests that] Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda has likely been reduced to a core group of eight to ten terrorists who are on the run more often than not.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch-You to can be part of the Nielsen Ratings family.Just sign up via the web and they’ll be happy to send you a little box and notepad to document you and your families tv watching habits.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ C-Span 1–At no time in your adult life has the Insurance Hooker Senator relationship been more clearly on display. Rockerfeller is doing a great job of exposing it–doing what the press does. You’ll see very very little mention of this relationship on the editorial pages of the AJC. I only know of two who would be likely to get into it, and so far they have not–that’s Bookman and Tucker. Tucker doesn’t like links.

The AJC outside of the editorial pages has not covered the huge gift that Senate Finance is trying to deliver for their insurance johns. It seems not to enter the AJC’s mind nor the mind of the Republican Coz Board who has installed themselves into the newly minted Conservative Insurance Supporting newspaper.

• Link
• Report this comment

david wayne osedach

September 29th, 2009
9:43 am

Yeah, Obama was on duty on 09/11 and gave the Taliban 26 days to turn over UBL.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccYpf11AzJ8

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch –

“Bosch-You to can be part of the Nielsen Ratings family.Just sign up via the web and they’ll be happy to send you a little box and notepad to document you and your families tv watching habits.”

this is your chance!!! you want more football (sorry, soccer) on the teevee??? you want better programming than “I had a scadzillion kids – gimme a camera and watch the madness”??? be a nielson viewer!!! seriously, we gotta do something about the LCD programming on teevee (LCD = lowest common denominator)

• Link
• Report this comment

Truthfully supporting Obama with regard to anything is probably a bad decision due to him being such an illegitimate president and in general just a bumbling fool.

Obama is nothing more than, for the most part, a divider, a community organizer, a dasher of dreams, a stealer of hope, a harbinger of hopelessness, a hapless idiot, a stumbler, a fumbler and a dumbler. A court jester, an uncle fester and an financial molester. A clown, a frown and be bringin everybody down. A fool, a tool and breaking all duh rule. A pointer, a fointer, an economic double-jointer. A King of nothingness, a ruler of pettiness and overall a mess mess mess.

• Link
• Report this comment

Rockerfeller has established now that the National Association of Insurance Regulators would be left to establish all regulations for this mandated insurance by Baucus’ Default Bill.

That’s as clear a fox-hencoop paradigm as you’ll ever see in your lifetime.
in
Rockerfeller summed it up as “Junk Insurance” and he’s perfectly accurate.

The Repubs here want to shove junk insurance down your throat and bankrupt many of you charging you 13-20% before you pay one penny for your doctor’s copay or your deductible and your medicine co-pay. That’s what conservatives are pushing for.

That’s not the medical care you envisioned when you first learned what a doctor was.

• Link
• Report this comment

Actually the people of Afghanistan prefer the Taliban to the United States. Even in the most LIBERAL portion of the country. The Taliban COULD NOT control the majority of the country without the approval of the country. The idea that the people are in some way unable to FIGHT anyone they do not approve of it absurd. Even the simplest peasant farmer in Afghanistan is as well armed as any Taliban fighter. Armed to the teeth. Every Afghani is basically a tribal warrior no matter where he lives. Its their culture.

Who they are afraid of are the Northern Alliance people the United States have put in charge. These people are even more FUNDAMENTALIST than the Taliban is, and that is why the Taliban was put in charge in the first place. Karzai makes a very pleasant front man for the western media, but those who make up his government, civil service and military are more fanatically fundamentalist Muslim than the Taliban is.

As interviews with both Pakistani and Afghani’s this morning stated. After the American leave, we have to live with what America leaves behind. Which was the reason everyone interviewed gave for not resisting the Taliban. They outright stated they are more afraid of the conservative clerics of the Northern Alliance than of the Taliban.

More fools listening to foolish chatter in the United States

Same goes with Iran. The Iranians constitute a threat to no one, not even Israel. The U.S. wants their oil which is cheaper to process than any other oil in the world. Best light sweet crude on the planet.

And the United States is backing up governments that discriminate against their Shi’ite minorities worse than Saddam discriminated against his. And Israel is America’s base to support the Arabs of the Gulf Kingdoms, who treat the Shiites only slightly better than the Nazi’s treated their minorities. The Saudi’s and Bahrain government have been soundly condemned for it by the United Nations and Human Rights Watch, but the U.S. has VETOED any sanctions against our oil supply.

The Iranians have no interest in Israel. It has no historical significance to them or their religion. Jerusalem is not a Shiite holy city, nor do they have any reason to support or back the Sunni Palestinians who have also discriminated against Shi’ites for centuries. It would be like Jews backing the Nazi’s The only reason for their anti Israel rhetoric is Israels support of the nation that protects the the governments that persecute Shiites and even for all of the rhetoric, Israel and Israelis are doing business with Iran every day. Israel does NOT do business with Saudi Arabia or any of the conservative states of the Gulf.

Its all about oil. Nothing more, nothing less.

The Taliban had nothing to do with the events of 9/11. They do have the best and shortest pipeline route from Central Asia though.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,

I knew it! Damn Orwellian Marxists freaks!!! (Mrs. G – I think we may have to switch plans now that Paul has exposed us. Dammit Paul !!!!!! [as I shake my fist in the air while screaming your name] – All that work last week…..ruined!).

But……Battlestar? Six? [As breathing and heartrate increase].

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

September 29th, 2009
10:44 am

Yeah, Onbama got Pakistan motivated.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul –

“Yeah, Flash Forward just started. Don’t tell me that’s another original, enthralling, series we ripped off from the Brits?”

hahaha … no (although it does star Sir Ranulph Fiennes’s son and Ralph Fiennes’s brother). I was just wondering because it premiered last night here, as well – we usually have to wait MONTHS before US shows air here. (case in point … I’m going nutty waiting for the new season of Mad Men)

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch

That was you and Mrs. G?!!? And I ruined it for you?!!? Ah well, at least BSG and Six provides redemption!

For you, a pleasant memory: http://www.rhymeswithorange.com/?date=20090820&view_comic=Get+Comic

USinUK

Whew. I wondered how a show that has such promise could be another American ripoff from the Brits. We don’t usually do well with the adaptations.

• Link
• Report this comment

TnG –

“You’ve got it, but rather than destroy the poppy crops why not buy them, or pay them market value not to grow the stuff. What do they eat?”

I agree on subsidizing them to grow something else – (I think we talked about this last week, in fact). We need to do something that will help them stand up to the Taliban.

as far as what they eat – I think their food is similar to pakistani/indian/moroccan food – relying on yogurt, grains, lamb, pomegranates, dates, etc …

(uhoh … is it getting near lunch time??? do we need to start our food chat???)

• Link
• Report this comment

Regarding the Afghan poppy crop: official position of the Obama Administration is: it’s a nonissue. It does not provide a significant source of Taliban or AQ funding. We’re not going to do anything about it.

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLR127167

But we will go after the drug lords.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK

Ummm, that’s what I said. We don’t have the best record when it comes to adapting the Brit shows.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul and Bosch

I only do Orwellian Marxism on Thursdays.

And Bosch….

don’t sweat the security breach, I always thought double dawg secret plan B-Pi was going to be so much more fun…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Bribe them and then get out like Iraq.

• Link
• Report this comment

What’s at issue is not whether the right supports any initiative by O, but O’s inability to have garnered said support. He sold you libbies on his super-natural powers of persuasion to create bi-partisan unilateral coalescense. Hell, he doesn’t even have that within his own party. Where’s the love? Let’s face it he’s a great campaigner, a quintescential showman, but a terrible leader, so far. Slow down O, kick Rahm to the curb as well as the never let a crisis go to waste mantra. Focus on one issue at a time. Accomplish something.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hef –

“EXTREMELY BEAUTIFULL” – she’s so full of teh pretty, she gets 2 L’s!!

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK,

“how you guys could ruin Life on Mars is beyond me ”

Yeah, but somehow we managed. I loved the Brit show but always fell asleep during the US version.

Mrs. G.,

Yeah, you’re right – the fire balls and hydrogen tanks…..that’s way cooler – oops!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Unfortunately Obama was stuck with the mess that Bush left him, probably purposefully. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a terrible economic situation, and a tattered health system.

Suggest he simply ignore the economy to deal with Afghanistan. Or do you suggest he simply stop arming the troops in Afghanistan and try to get home on their own?

Actually Obama has overwhelming support within his own party. There are at best, a handful of conservative Democrats who are not fully in support of him, and its always conservatism that gums up the works.

• Link
• Report this comment

Focus on one issue at a time. Accomplish something.

AMEN, jasper!!!!

Far too many campaign promises, few of which he’s kept. There’s the Cap & Tax thingy which, once the cost begins to impact middle-class Americans, will prove disastrous. Al Gore, however, is thrilled with the financial prospects coming his way.

TnG:

50 years? An uptick in Pakistan’s attacks on militants began with General Kayani under the Bush administration.

In Pakistan, missile strikes from C.I.A. drone aircraft have taken a steady toll on Al Qaeda and its Taliban allies since the Bush administration accelerated these attacks last year, a policy reinforced by President Obama.

Once again, Obama follows Bush’s lead even though, during the campaign, he said drone attacks, were driving the insurgents and should be used sparingly. Obama commits himself to nothing and everything all at the same time.

Back and forth…back and forth. I suspect he operates that way so that no one can pin him down on any one decision.

I find him very frustrating.

• Link
• Report this comment

Asa far as public support for health reform, whenever CBS or ABC or the Kaiser foundation comes out with a report showing massive support for it Rasmussen, basically a Republican who served on the administration of a Republican president, immediately puts out a poll showing the opposite, but his polls seem to be outliers of all the others. A new one taken after the most recent polls released today shows considerable support for health reform:

Poll Finds Public Support for Health Reform Rising
Posted by: Cathy Arnst on September 29

The public’s support for health care reform is rising after a summer slide, according to the latest tracking poll from the non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation. The poll, released today, found that 57% of Americans now believe tackling health care reform is more important than ever, compared with 53% in August.

The poll also found that the public overwhelming supports several provisions that are facing stiff opposition in Congress: 68% of Americans back a mandate that all adult citizens be required to buy insurance, 67% want an employer mandate requiring companies to offer insurance to their employees, and 59% would support “having health insurance companies pay a tax for offering very expensive policies.”
The Kaiser poll contradicts a New York Times/CBS News Poll released last week, which found public support for universal health insurance declined to 51% in September from 55% in July and 64% in June. In the NYT/CBS poll, which also surveyed opinions on a number of other policy issues, only 33% supported guaranteed health insurance for all if it meant an increase in the federal budget deficit, and 40% said it is not the federal government’s responsibility to provide health insurance for all Americans. But opposition to universal health insurance declined to 29% percent when respondents were reminded that 46 million people would continue to be without health insurance.

The Kaiser poll’s far more detailed questions about health care found that the share of Americans who think their families would be better off if health reform passes rose to 42% in September, from 36% a month earlier. Those who think the country would be better off with reform increased to 53% from 45%. Nevertheless, 47% of the public would prefer a bipartisan solution to health reform, even if it slows the process down, compared with 42% who would prefer to see Democrats to move faster on their own. And 68% seem to think a solution is possible, characterizing themselves as “hopeful” about reform, although 50% are also “anxious” and 31% “angry.”

http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/money_politics/archives/2009/09/poll_finds_publ.html

• Link
• Report this comment

It is the job of the American government according to our constitution, to create a balance between interests. When monied interests abuse their powers in ways that harm others, it is the JOB of government to regulate as well as tax to prevent them from doing so. The founders would not have given the federal government these powers and given them in such a vague and broad way if they had not intended them to be used that way. One clause in the constitution known as the “elastic clause” basically gives the federal government to violate all other portions of the constitution if it is deemed necessary. It is also called “The Basket Clause” the “Co-Efficient Clause” and the “Sweeping Clause”. It is officially known as Article I of the Constitution.

It allows the government to do ANYTHING it seems fit, violate states rights, the works, to enforce the rights granted to the federal government. While conservatives yell and scream about stuff , particularly social benefits being “unconstitutional” the Supreme Court often and repeatedly rules them constitutional based on this clause.

• Link
• Report this comment

that’s right – who needs banking regulations!! who needs insurance regulations!! who needs health and safety regulations!! who needs child labor laws!!! every man, woman and child for himself – I bloody well got mine …

How has your “regulations” and “laws” worked for you USin UK?

I heard the green police in the UK are sifting through citizen’s garbage cans. There were over 10,000 rules and regulations on banking before 2003. Insurance regulations are uncountable.

“Every man for himself” mentality will do more for prosperity than any one thousand political crooks can do with guns.

Read and heed your history.

• Link
• Report this comment

Far too many campaign promises, few of which he’s kept.

Fact-checking @@ is a dirty job, but I guess somebody’s gotta do it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Scooter –

“Serious question here! If we were to bring all of our troops home from Afghan, how could it affect the US economy? Good or bad or what? ????”

well, from an employment standpoint, it wouldn’t make a difference as these men and women would still be employed by Uncle Sam

from a defense spending standpoint, I don’t think it would make that big of an impact. I’ve had this discussion with another poster – the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have made a minimal contribution to GDP. this isn’t WWII and the age of Rosie the Riveter where wars decrease unemployment and improve the economy.

if anything, it might destabilize the oil and natural gas market for a short while, but not severely.

• Link
• Report this comment

When the right talks about the left’s “lack of fortitude” what they are really referring to is the right’s lack of brains.

The left KNEW that BOTH wars were the wrong wars to get into without a United Nations resolution to back them up. Its the reason that the wars have not ended yet. For Iraq, Bush promised a 90 day war, and with a United Nations resolution, we probably would have had one. The French in particular have a powerful influence in their ex colonial empire, especially in Syria and Lebanon. If the French had asked, the Syrians would have done a LOT more to guard their borders. The U.S. insisted on going it alone and the French decided that they would not cover up our mistakes by assisting us.

The French warned the U.S. that the Iraq War would NOT be a short one. This fell on deaf ears, and yet the French were correct and the Bush Administration was not.

There was no reason to be in Iraq. There was no real reason to STAY in Afghanistan after December 2003, when the Al Qaeda leadership moved into Pakistan. None at all.

Any idiot who suggests it is some sort of intelligent decision to stay after your primary target has left is going to LOSE that war.

• Link
• Report this comment

oh, and jt – “I heard the green police in the UK are sifting through citizen’s garbage cans” – isn’t happening outside of the Daily Mail’s fevered imagination. but thanks for playing.

• Link
• Report this comment

@@

September 29th, 2009
11:33 am

Bush adopted Obama’s positions on Iraq and Pakistan before he left office.

• Link
• Report this comment

“the fact that walmart can’t employ 7-year olds to stock shelves is a fantastic thing”

If not for the benevolent power of government, sweatshops would rule.
Have you no shame in your lack of faith in human decency? Fascinating.

Oh well, seven-year-olds would be better served in learning about capitalism in a Wal-Mart than being nuerocratized about global-warming in a government school. Ask any Chinaman. They will soon be eating our government-subsudized lunches.

• Link
• Report this comment

Enter your comments here–

No way can we commit ant more troops under the circumstances. Obama laid out a new set of objectives, McCrystal says to meet those objectives we need 40K more troops and the Obama response is he wants to lay out new objectives. Considering the waffling by the President and the current rules of engagement which basically makes our troops unarmed targets we need to just get out of there.

• Link
• Report this comment

As Usual the Pakistani people are not all that worried about the Taliban themselves. They tolerate them, but they know that the Taliban could never make inroads among Pakistan’s very tolerant form of Islam.

The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan created a new and much larger enemy in the Taliban. Their philosophy was totally a internal one and they had no interest in attacking the rest of the world or a worldwide Islamic jihad. It meant nothing to them.

We once had an intelligent policy. We had problems with the Sudan when Bin Laden was based there and as soon as Bin Laden left, we switched our attentions to where he and the Al Qaeda leadership were, not to where they were not, and the government of Sudan does not significantly differ from the Taliban. There is no way we can remake Afghanistan into some sort of Islamic Democracy. The two go together like hot dogs and hot fudge.

Which is why small town newspapers all over the United States have editorials with titles like:

Our opinion: We can’t remake Afghanistan

And first paragraphs like:

There is a reason why George Washington warned against the United States becoming entangled in the affairs of other nations.

That reason is Afghanistan today.

The Taliban live among the people of Pakistan and Afghanistan. In every city, village and neighborhood everyone has several Taliban or Taliban supporting neighbors.

Again the war in Afghanistan created the possibility of a Taliban with nuclear weapons.

For every one Taliban killed by the occupying powers, four civilians who have NOTHING to do with the Taliban are killed by them.

The United States would understand that they cannot win in Afghanistan not in a year, not in ten years, not in 100 years. The Taliban are there and they are there to stay. They are not an anomaly in Afghani society. They are the rule. The same kind of people fought the British for EIGHTY YEARS until the British left. And the British had a far better method of creating local government. They brought their own colonial administration. They didn’t have to get the locals to accept a new ideology and then create their own version of it. They had a portable colonial administration designed to rule new areas.

There is a very good reason that Bin Laden left Afghanistan. The Taliban leaders asked him to go.

Even the ultra Conservative Cato Institute knows this:

Given the magnitude of the atrocities unleashed on September 11th, removing both al Qaeda and the Taliban regime that sheltered the terrorist organization was appropriate. But eight years later, is waging a war against the Taliban a pressing national security interest? Not really.

The Taliban, the Haqqani network, and other guerrilla-jihadi movements indigenous to this region have no shadowy global mission. In fact, what we are witnessing is a local and regional ethnic Pashtun population — divided arbitrarily by a porous 1,500-mile border — fighting against what they perceive to be a hostile occupation of their region. Prolonging our mission risks uniting these groups and making U.S. troops the primary target of their wrath.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/09/04/myth-v-fact-afghanistan/

American right wingers are simply too dumb to know when to stop looking down the wrong rabbit hole. The rabbit has left.

• Link
• Report this comment

RW-(the original)

September 29th, 2009
12:16 pm

Hello RW,long time no see! I agree with you completely.

• Link
• Report this comment

I laugh my ass off when conservatives mention U.S. subsidies of school lunches and Chinamen in the same breath. The only reason that the Chinese are whipping our asses in the global market are the huge subsidies that the government gives to support those markets. The energy subsidies are so high that businesses barely pay power bills at all. And because they are not direct subsidies to individual businesses, but blanket social subsidies, they cannot be legally assailed under international trade law and trade agreements. Every time the U.S. has tried to assail such blanket benefits in the world courts, it has not only lost, but had to pay fines.

Examples:

Huge energy subsidies fuel China steel export-study

WASHINGTON, Jan 8 (Reuters) – Massive government energy subsidies have fueled China’s transformation into the world’s largest producer and exporter of steel, according to a new study released on Tuesday.

“In 2007, energy subsidies to Chinese steel are estimated at approximately $15.7 billion, showing a 3,800 percent increase since 2000,” the study prepared for Alliance for American Manufacturing, a U.S. industry group, said.

The report provides new ammunition for U.S. steel companies that complain Chinese government subsidies are responsible for a surge in steel imports from that country. Imports totaled 5.35 million tons in 2006, more than double the 2005 level.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN0740849620080108

China Expands Government Subsidies to the Solar Energy Sector

August 18, 2009

Richard H. “Dick” Lawrence- Beijing

After announcing a subsidy program for building integrated photovoltaic projects in March 2009, the Chinese government recently announced a solar energy subsidy program, the Golden Sun Demonstration Project. Subsidies under the Golden Sun Demonstration Project are intended to support the development of photovoltaic electricity generation projects and the commercialization of related core technology.

Details of the subsidy program are set forth in the Notice on the Implementation of the Golden Sun Demonstration Project (Caijian [2009] No.397), which was jointly issued on July 16, 2009 by the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Science and Technology, and the National Energy Bureau, together with the Interim Measures on the Administration of Fiscal Subsidies for the Golden Sun Demonstration Project (the Measures).

http://www.hklaw.com/id24660/PublicationId2726/ReturnId31/contentid54372/

And of course the Chinese countered U.S. outrage about Chinese subsidies that supported business by noting U.S. subsidies to American businesses, like the auto industry

When the U.S forced Indonesia to eliminate its fuel subsidies, it softened the blow to its citizens by simply giving their people extra money to pay the increased costs with.

America, with its penchant for keeping government out of things, is falling behind China, which has no problems with keeping government intimately involved.

• Link
• Report this comment

I am even listening to an analyst right now, discussing Taliban reports captured by the U.S. recently indicating that the Taliban is immensely unhappy with Al Qaeda. This is a much unreported section of the McChrystal report.

Afghanistan historically has the same endemic corruption that exists in Mexico. We have slim chance, almost non existent, of rebuilding Afghanistan from the ground up, both systemically and politically. Military defeat even if possible, will change nothing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tactics, grand strategy and volumes of policy papers on guerilla warfare mean naught when a democracy by its very core nature is incapable of winning a couterinsurgency war; the American people just don’t have the staying power and as sad as that is you know in your heart it’s true.

• Link
• Report this comment