E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Washington Post front-pages the risks for Obama regarding Iraq. “President Obama is promoting the decision to end the U.S. combat mission in Iraq on Tuesday as a fulfillment of his campaign promise to draw the war to a close. But some of the president's detractors are using the same moment to question the wisdom of doing so - noting that Iraq is still afflicted with violence and has yet to form a government.”
USA Today: “President Obama heads to Fort Bliss in Texas today to thank troops for their service before addressing the nation from the Oval Office tonight about the end of combat operations in Iraq… Today's task: trying to convince a skeptical public that a war he didn't start and didn't support ended as well as it could have on his watch. A recent USA TODAY Poll found that 60% of Americans do not believe the situation in Iraq warranted sending troops into battle.”
More: “In marking the transition from combat to a role supporting the Iraqis, Obama will not make the ‘mission accomplished’ declaration that was on a banner hanging near President George W. Bush when Bush declared that major combat operations were over in Iraq as he spoke aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003. ‘You won't hear those words coming from us,’ White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday. Instead, in the second Oval Office address of his presidency — the first was June 15 on the BP oil spill — Obama will discuss ‘what does this drawdown now mean for our national security.’”
The New York Times says that Obama “will still strike a promises-kept theme, aides said, even as he seeks to reconcile his opposition to the Iraq war — and his opposition to the so-called troop surge, which Republicans and many military officials credit for the decrease in violence in Iraq — with his role as a wartime commander in chief seeking to credit his troops with carrying out a difficult mission. The president, his aides said, will seek to honor the American soldiers who served in Iraq.”
The BBC: “Iraq's prime minister has said the country is ‘independent’ as the US formally ends combat operations. Nouri Maliki said the country's security forces would now deal with all threats, domestic or other… ‘Iraq today is sovereign and independent,’ Mr Maliki told Iraqis in a televised address.”
“We’re going to be just fine. They’re going to be just fine,’’ Vice President Biden said in Iraq yesterday, per the Washington Post.
In Afghanistan, meanwhile: “Five U.S. troops were killed by roadside bombs and insurgent fire in southern and eastern Afghanistan on Tuesday, the latest casualties in a particularly bloody spell that has left 12 service members dead in two days, and 19 since Saturday.”
Per NBC’s Athena Jones, Obama will host a series of bilateral meetings on Wednesday with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority President Abbas, Egyptian President Mubarak, and Jordan's King Abdullah. Obama will likely deliver a statement on the Middle East peace process some time late on Wednesday afternoon.
The New York Times writes up Obama’s remarks on the economy yesterday. “He chided Senate Republicans for engaging in ‘pure partisan politics’ by holding up a jobs bill that would offer tax breaks to small businesses and ease credit with a $30 billion initiative to channel loans through community banks. ‘I ask Senate Republicans to drop the blockade,’ Mr. Obama said. The president also said he and his team were ‘hard at work in identifying additional measures,’ including extending tax cuts for the middle class that are scheduled to expire this year, increasing government investment in clean energy and rebuilding more infrastructure.”
Leave a Comment:
Dems are in deep doo doo for November.
“House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi”
Yeah, I like the sound of that.
From Politico:
Public sours on health care reform
By: Jennifer Haberkorn
August 31, 2010 06:37 AM EDT
A new poll shows that public support for health care reform dropped sharply in August – a dagger in Democrats’ hopes that their landmark legislation will help them in November’s midterm.
The Kaiser Health Tracking Poll has support for the bill dropping seven percentage points in August – down to 43 percent – while opposition rose 10 points to 45 percent. That’s the weakest showing since May – and a far cry from the bump proponents had hoped to see as some of the law’s more consumer-friendly provisions kick in.
Democrats said throughout the year-long debate on Capitol Hill that support for the overhaul would increase once the bill passed and Americans were able to take advantage of some of its benefits. But it appears voters’ opinions of the legislation were set more firmly than anyone thought during the bruising political fight.
“Public opinion on health reform has been stuck in a fairly narrow band and is not changing dramatically,” said Drew Altman, president and CEO of the Kaiser Family Foundation. “And with concerns about the economy and jobs dominating the public’s agenda and local issues always so important in midterm elections, it is not clear that health reform will play a significant role at the polls in November.”
Respondents listed health care as the third most important factor in deciding how they’ll vote this fall — behind the economy and “dissatisfaction with government.”
Good spin Joe, to you as long as the country fails your happy. BTW I was a participant in one of those polls, here's how it went, the questioner said he wanted to ask me four questions, he ask if I was a registered voter, I said I was, he then ask if I was a Democrat, republican or Independent, I said I was a Democrat, he said think you and click, at that point he didn't figure he was going to get the answers he wanted, I suppose I was counted as an undecided. So see Joe your polls you tout so much really don't mean anything. But by all means keep relying on them you'll be sorely disappointed come November. Remember they did such a good job in 2008 (sarcasm).
Mo, I don't think that was a pollster. The vast right wing conspiracy is probably compiling a list of Dems so they can round them up and put them in jail once they regain power.
LMAO@U!!!!!
Yea Joe that's what most people do when their scared or worried, they try to laugh. But remember November is closer than you think. Just a little over 2 months to laugh, then the crying starts. Have a good day Joe, you have so few good days left.
I find it reprehensible President Obama is attempting to bolster his flagging poll numbers at Iraq and our Military Troops expense. Let's make something clear here folks! President Obama moved the troops out of Iraq to Kuwait for re-assignment to other areas in the region. President Obama has already stated, "troop re-assignment in Iraq may be necessary in the future." This is nothing more than splitting Apple's and oranges." President Obama needs the "appearance of fulfilling his campaign promise" at the expense of Iraqi citizens and the new fledgling government. Our troops should have been slowly pulled out over the next 12-24 months. This would have allowed the New Iraqi government and it's "green" military to slowly take over, what our troops have been maintaining. We now have a Iraqi citizen's in a panic and fleeing the country. What President Obama has done is destabilize the Iraq region for political gain; and, make a sham of every fallen American soldiers sacrafice to the region. I hope all you Obama Supporters remember this moment and these words six months to one year from now, when Obama is on the campaign trail and makes such flourish regarding troop reassignment to Iraq. I hope you can hold your head up high then!.........
First Read used to be a place for ideas to be bandied about with civility. Recently, it has become a free-for-all of vicious name-calling and bullying. Free speech is not welcome here anymore, it seems, when comments can be collapsed by five people who disagree with you.
You who are deliberately doing the collapsing...are you afraid to let voices that differ from yours be heard in the marketplace of ideas? Is this what the first amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing free speech means to you?
With free speech comes responsibility. Newsvine has a Code of Honor, and when we sign up with Newsvine so that we can post on First Read, we all have to agree to follow that code. The first pledge we make is to:
"Above all else, respect others. Address issues and arguments and refrain from making personal attacks. If you see something disrespectful or inappropriate, report it - rather than further inflaming the situation.
1. Adding a personal attack to an otherwise valuable comment or article serves only to
render that contribution invalid in its entirety. Such content is subject to
moderation.
2. Harassment and/or intimidation of others on Newsvine will not be tolerated, and
patterns of such behavior may result in account cancellation."
Furthermore, "recurrent counterproductive behavior or negative contributions - even if not specifically addressed in the Code of Honor or the User Agreement - may still warrant removal of that person from the Newsvine Community."
We now have a moderator, Tyler, who is monitoring our behavior on First Read. Based on the Code of Honor, Tyler is empowered to ban you from First Read for a day or ban you forever. If we value the privilege of coming here to present our views and read others' views, I suggest we take the Code of Honor seriously.
This should go without saying. We're all adults here. People of integrity can discuss and disagree respectfully. We can make First Read one of the best blogs around, or we can ruin it.
Let's do the former, shall we?
Iraq has been nothing but a total waste of American blood and treasure. War Criminals Bush and Cheney sure lied to us telling us their big fat lie that this war would pay for itself. Oh and where's the Democracy we supposedly brought the Iraqis when almost 6 months after their elections in March there still hasn't been a victor announced and al Maliki still clings to power even though he came in second.
More American blood and treasure is being wasted in Afghanistan as more troops get killed. A real shame that War Criminals Bush and Cheney cut and ran from Afghanistan before finishing the job properly, nope they just declared premature victory and lied us into invading Iraq. We've been in Afghanistan too long and it's time for Obama to stop listening to the self serving generals who only want to keep up this phony war for their own purposes.
Nice to see Obama getting the Israelis and Palestinians get down to negotiating Middle East peace. Now we can only hope that both sides be reasonable, especially the Israelis who want way too much for giving up way too little.
It's scary to think there are people like you out there calling themselves Americans. You might recall that "Bush's War" (as you slimy Libs call it) received the votes of Senators Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy, Reid, etc who were acting with the same information that was available to the White House.
As to the Iraqis...I'm pretty sure they are happy to at least have a vote in national elections rather than the dictatorship they had with Saddam...
Eric in Salinas, Ca, where to begin. First and foremost, perhaps a lesson in history will educate you to a few facts. After 9/11, President Bush and Vice President Cheney had no choice but assign troops to Iraq.
(a) Saddam Hussein was threatening missile strikes against the U.S. It doesn't matter if "Weapons of Mass Destruction" have actually been found or not, our President at the time, couldn't take the chance that Saddam Hussein's threats were a bluff.
(b) Saddam Hussein was effectively wiping off whole tribes of people in his country; via the genocide he was effecting. Originally, it wasn't just the U.S. Troops assigned to Iraq to stop this senseless slaughter; it was UN sanctioned troops from other countries as well.
(c) Once the Hussein Regime was taken down, Al Qiada terrorists flooded the region attempting to force their control over the citizen's of Iraq. Most of these terrorists, came from Iran, Afghanistan, Syria and other neighboring terrorist supported nations. Our troops had no choice, but, to maintain police action in order to fight these terrorists, and, allow the Iraqi people and its fledgling military an opportunity of establishing a true, free, Democratic nation.
(d) President Obama needs the "appearance of fulfilling his campaign promise" at the expense of Iraqi citizens and the new fledgling government. Our troops should have been slowly pulled out over the next 12-24 months This would have allowed the Iraqi military the opportunity to take over, what our troops have been maintaining. What we have here is Iraqi citizen's fleeing the country in a panic.
(e) Barack Obama has already stated, "troop re-assignment in Iraq may be necessary in the future." What we have here, is a President who has destabilized the Iraqi region for political gain. President Obama's poll numbers are flagging and he needs the "appearance of fulfilling his campaign promise" at the expense of Iraqi citizens.
In effect, what President Obama has just done is make a sham of every fallen soldiers sacrifice to the region and undo all the progress the Iraqi nation has created. I hope you remember this moment when President Obama, on the re-election trail, makes such a flourish about Troop Re-Assignment to Iraq.
Perhaps, in your mind Former President Bush and other acted hastily. However, with what was going on at the time; there was really no other alternative. However, President Obama's actions to our military troops and Iraqi government and citizen's is nothing short of reprehensible.....
TheresaINNV,please explain to me,and the world,just how in the hell was Saddam going to strike the US with a missile,what was he going to deliver it with.
The following appeared in the NY Times yesterday, in an article about Gen. Odierno (and quoting him).
“We all came in very naïve about Iraq,” he said.
“We came in naïve about what the problems were in Iraq; I don’t think we understood what I call the societal devastation that occurred,” he said, citing the Iran-Iraq war, the Persian Gulf war and the international sanctions from 1990 to 2003 that wiped out the middle class. “And then we attacked to overthrow the government,” he said.
The same went for the country’s ethnic and sectarian divisions, he said: “We just didn’t understand it.”
To advocates of the counterinsurgency strategy that General Odierno has, in part, come to symbolize, the learning curve might highlight the military’s adaptiveness. Critics of a conflict that killed an estimated 100,000 Iraqis, perhaps far more, and more than 4,400 American soldiers might see the acknowledgment as evidence of the war’s folly.
Asked if the United States had made the country’s divisions worse, General Odierno said, “I don’t know.”
“There’s all these issues that we didn’t understand and that we had to work our way through,” he said. “And did maybe that cause it to get worse? Maybe.”
There is no discussion of WMDs, nothing about Al-Qaeda, and an admission that the Army was sent in unprepared, without an understanding of the people and the society. If this is the best the military could do, it is time to rethink our engagement and involvement in conflicts around the world.
Idiot in Chief George W Bush has left some much crap for the next incumbent that even a Saint following his time in office will look like Lucifer...
Leaving a country in a worse condition than it was when you entered is never a "Mission Accomplished". Obama is right not to take credit for a win were one is not possible. Iran fed us intelligence lies about Iraq. Bush/Cheney bought them and toppled an unpleasant yet stable government Now Iraq is ripe for the plucking by Iran. Obama also realizes it is not possible to win in Afghanistan. However, I believe Afghanistan will be better off when we leave than it was when we arrived thanks to Obama trusting his military leaders to get the job done right without political interference such as that of Rumsfeld with Iraq.
Time for the President to focus completely on the economy and have the senate work 24/7 to pass another stimulus. Let them whine! Non have a chance of reelection if they don't get something done quickly!
They've done about all the damage they can do already. The country would be better off if Congress just went home until after the election. Obama is a one-termer but it will probably take the next Republican president two terms to reverse the damage he has done...
osamaobama
What damage would that be?
I mean you know it took 8 years GWB to flush the country down the toilet and you guys expect President Obama to get things up and running in 18 months.
Oh but there's nothing like the good old party to mess things up.
Osamaobama,
What country do you live in? Not the U.S.A. This president is a God sent compared to Bush. Unless he does something illegal or immoral, I plan on voting him back in to keep correcting all of Bush's mistakes.
What's worse than a lemming? A blind one! My gawd, what a mental midget. "Time for the President to focus completely on the economy?" What do you think he has been doing. He's been focusing on destroying the economy, just like the Marxist playbook calls for him to do. As Saul Alnsky's son said, Obama "has learned his lessons well". What higher praise can you get from an avowed Communist then to have his son commend you for a job well done (though not "accomplished").
Anna, unfortunately Presidents don't run the country anymore. Now lobby's run the country. Presidents just sign things for the lobby's. For the most party lobby's write the bills and Congress just gives them a "marketing" spin with catchy names as they shove 2000 pages of pork into it for their other lobby's.
Anymore just look at a party and candidates lobby list. That is who you elected to run the country. The politicians have made lobby money the primary factor in getting elected and cannot do anything but pay them back once in office. If they don't the lobby's won't contribute and they won't get elected to stay in power. They want to help the country but they are career politicians first and country helpers second. They always cater to the lobby's and throw the country under the bus so they stay elected.
Otherwise just sit back and watch the circus as we ping pong from party to party and president to president getting screwed by their lobby's. The primary, and really only, concern for both party's is satisfying their lobby interests. That is why nothing is changing. We could die of old age watching Obama try to change the country and satisfy his party lobby's. There simply is not enough time for either and trying to do both is an exercise in futility.
Darn, bet 'ol B-O can't WAIT to strut that "Mission Accomplished" banner he saved from Bush's pre-mature end to the Iraq war.... you watch... B-O will shove this banner in the face of the American people (which he's NOT) and take All the claim and glory for "ending" a war that will never end.
These people have hated and murdered for 3,000 years now.... you think some STINKIN' "president" named B-O is gonna end it all ???? I don't think so....
IMPEACH OBAMA AND PELOSI NOW !!!!!!!!!!!
Eric, since in your opinion both attempts to go after Al Qaeda in Iraq or Afgahnistan were ill-conceived, how and where would YOU have responded to the attacks on 9/11/2001?
Kate, please tell me how you can determine the successful outcome of a war before you enter it? Do you think any war this country has fought including the Revolutionary War had a predetermined outcome? Did we EVER know everything we needed to know before waging ANY war we've ever participated in or did we always have to learn and adapt along the way? The Muslims countries we find ourselves at odds with today are mostly closed and isolated and no one had a complete understanding of them prior to getting boots on the ground. It is unrealistic to think that our military is going to know everything it needs/wants to know before going into action. Not to mention that our military and intelligence agencies had pretty much been gutted by the Clinton Administration leading up to 9/11, pretty much guaranteeing they would be clueless and unprepared for any type of conflict. As Donald Rumsfeld inferred, you don't always have the luxury of going to war with the military you'd like, just the one you've been handed. As a result of Clinton's (and now Obama's) disdain for the military and intelligence communities, the U.S. was at a HUGE disadvantage going into this. We were forced to unnecessarily rely on foreign intelligence sources because we didn't have enough resources of our own in place. You can imagine the surprise to find out that intelligence given to us by European countries and others was pretty much bogus and completely inadequate. The lesson here is if you want it done right, do it ourselves.
David, the intelligence given to us by other countries was correct -- OUR hubris in the certainty that there were weapons of mass destruction was wrong. One does not determine the outcome of a war, but one does and should determine an objective. At the time of the Civil War, the objective was to prevent the South from seceding. At the time of the Revolutionary War it was to gain independence from Great Britain. What was our objective in Iraq? Finding WMDs? We found out years ago that there were none. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein? He has been gone for several years. FInding the bases from which Al-Qaeda attacked the US? It didn't happen in Iraq. The entire idea of a war in Iraq was based on faulty premises. In the first Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush was criticized for carrying out his objective (getting Iraq out of Kuwait) and then leaving. People wanted him to carry on and topple Saddam Hussein. He was right not to do that, and his son and advisers were wrong to take up arms against Saddam Hussein in 2004.
What? No swaggering across the deck of an aircraft carrier in a flight suit? Aw, man....
This is just the next stage in an imperialistic invasion of another country. Iraq was changing over its oil exchange from US dollars to Euros, which would have taken hundreds of billions a year out of the pocket of our money printer the Federal Reserve. This is the activity Ron Paul wanted audited every year to so see what the Federal Reserve is doing with our currency internationally. They also use our currency to "shore up" their other European centralized banks and Congress lets them. All this is run on a second set of financial books we never see.
You also have to understand the same people who own the Federal Reserve own both Standard Oil and BP Oil. Now after invading Iraq the Federal Reserve was able to keep the dollar as the exchange currency for every barrel of oil bought as well as kept them from competing as an independent oil supplier with their little oil monopoly called OPEC.
We also took over their banking industry and installed a new centralized bank in Iraq which was one of the few countries left managing their own currency. So now the Federal Reserve owners control all of Iraq's oil, what they do with it and how it is sold. They also control their entire financial system through another debt incurring fiat money supplied centralized bank. Mission accomplished in Iraq.
We have become the private pit bull mercenary force for the banksters and oil kings. That is why we have 50,000 troops left in Iraq. To make sure all this is not taken back over by the people. Sure Sadam was an as*#@%# but that had nothing to do with why we invaded and there are 100 more just like him and always will be.
We could care less who is in charge and what they do to the people of Iraq. They just have to play ball with the financial kings of our time or face US military occupation. Afghanistan is the same story with a little different twist. It is the only land that makes sense for a pipeline to transfer the massive land locked oil deposits from Central Asia. This same idea bankrupted Russia. Afghanistan is also another of the few countries who manage their own currency. We are installing a centralized bank along with a favorable puppet government there as we speak. We will leave troops their forever to guard these.
Sorry for the long post. Seeing this crap about terrorism when we have wide open borders and 20 million foreign invaders jumping back and forth across the border like jumping beans just chaffs my hide. They sent out $17 billion alone under the radar through Western Union and nobody give a crap where it is going or what it is funding. Only a fool would believe this is about terrorism and domestic protection.
Of course Obama's mission isn't accomplished yet, he hasn't totally collapsed the economy yet. You would think that Americans would be smart enought to see that the annointed one is attempting to turn the United States into a Western Eurpoean socialist state. Even Vladamir Putin, Russia's Prime Minister, can see where Obama is "leading" us and said the US should take a lesson from the pages of Russian history and not exercise"“excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence”. He went on to say “In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute,” Putin went on to say, “In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”
So, for all of you mental midgets who were educated in our famously failing public school system, pull your head out and wipe your eyes off. Even our former arch enemy can see where Obama is taking us and Russia certainly doesn't want our economy to fully collapse due to there recent surge in exports to us.
Mental midgets huh...
Maybe you should study a bit more history... Every Empire on the planet that has ever become a supper power for it's era had a strong government with vast amounts of Oversight. The Babylonians had building codes for example, the Egyptians had massive public works projects, the Greek government used religion to decide everything from war to harvest Times, The Romans built massive road networks and public aqueducts, and the list goes on and on and on.
Oversight and regulations are important to keep things even keeled. Other wise you revert back to serfdom where the rich control everything, the middle class is non existent, and the poor take it or die. Capitalism with out regulation is bound to lead to one outcome, a monopoly. A monopoly of power, resource, and wealth which even my crappy public school education taught me is a bad thing.
Now if you sighting the whole GM fiasco and stating that is an example of going socialist then think of it as more of a national defense bill. GM is one of the largestest manufacturer in the nation. We need manufacturing capacity to insure our ability to produce weapons in the event of a large scale war. In world war II for instance we did not out maneuver the Germans we out produced them.
You really need to look at the bigger picture, before you blindly cry wolf, and as for Russians Prime minister... I am sure he has Americas best interests in mind, haha, and from what I've seen of he seems a bit off his rocker anyhow.
Now I'm not saying I agree with Obama on everything, but what I am saying is that not everything he dose is to destroy America, and quite Frankly he inherited quite a mess from the last few administrations and the fact that the economy is not still in total free fall is a miracle as far as I am concerned.
I am getting truly sick of all the crap so many choose to spew forth, because it's as if people can only remember what was on the evening news last night. Either that or they choose to ignore what is right in front of their eyes. Obama has not destroyed the economy. Regan, Bush Sr., Clinton, and good old Jr. did a fine job of that with horrendous economic policy's that are all now culminating into this nightmare we see today.
To me it seems that people will find a sticking point and bitch just to bitch. Health care refrome is my favorite one though. If people would just stop to think about the ridiculousness of complaining about trying to insure Americans in the grand scheme of things. For instance some simple math here, with rough estimates, but accurate enough to get the picture.
Cost of Iraq & Afghanistan Wars To Date 1.1 Trillion For about 10 Years (Much Higher In All Probability)
Cost of Health Care Reform 940 Billion For Ten Years (Again Much Higher In All Probability)
Approximate World Wide Deaths From Terrorism Per Year 1465
Approximate Deaths In US Alone From Lack of Health Care Per Year 45000
It dose not take a rocket scientist to figure out what the better investment is when it comes to protecting American Lives. Yet we have wasted ten years and countless Americans Lives trying to ram "Democracy" down "Iraqistans" throat.
Basically what I am saying is quit looking at things from party lines and try to be more objective for a change, because I can guarantee that Obama is not destroying America. America & it's ludicrous party politics are destroying America!