What? Obama OKs 17,000 More Troops for Afghanistan

WASHINGTON (AP) – Obama has approved adding about 17,000 U.S. troops for the flagging war in Afghanistan, administration, defense and congressional officials said Tuesday.

The Obama administration is expected to announce on Tuesday that it will send one additional Army brigade and an unknown number of Marines to Afghanistan this spring and summer. Officials spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of the official announcement.

About 8,000 Marines are expected to go in first, followed by about 9,000 Army troops.

The new forces represent the first installment on a larger influx of U.S. forces widely expected this year. Obama’s decision would get several thousand troops in place in time for the increase in fighting that usually comes with warmer weather and ahead of national elections in August.

The additional forces partly answer a standing request from the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, who has sought as many as 30,000 additional U.S. forces to counter the resurgence of the Taliban militants and protect Afghan civilians.

The United States has slightly more than 30,000 troops in Afghanistan now.

The new units are a Marine Expeditionary Brigade unit from Camp Lejeune, N.C., and an Army Stryker brigade from Fort Lewis in Washington state.

Ahead of his first foreign trip, Obama told a Canadian news organization that the United States will seek a more comprehensive, diplomatic approach to Afghanistan, where the U.S. has been engaged in war since 2001.

“I am absolutely convinced that you cannot solve the problem of Afghanistan, the Taliban, the spread of extremism in that region solely through military means,” the president said in a White House interview with Toronto-based Canadian Broadcasting Corp.

Obama is scheduled to make a quick day trip to Ottawa on Thursday.

Way to go Obama – keep pissing people off.

Reply Letters from Sen. Jim DeMint and Rep. Joe Wilson

Earlier this month I, as did millions of other Americans, contacted my U.S.  Congressmen about the Democrats’ pork-laden socialist spending bill that they were ramming through to Obama.  Just the hypocrisy of the thing was obscene . Obama and the democrats LIED, that’s right, LIED to America when they promised transparency, no pork barrel spending, bipartisanship, and every other talking point they used. Here are two of the replies that I received….

Dear Mr. Yon,

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to H.R.1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. I share many of your concerns and appreciate having your input.

I voted against this legislation because it will add nearly $1 Trillion to our nation’s already unprecedented deficit, direct billions of taxpayer dollars to political pet projects, and further encumber future generations of American taxpayers with a punishing debt burden. Simply put, it is bad policy that will not work.  Even the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects the long-term effect of this “stimulus package” will be a slight decrease in gross domestic product.  Unfortunately, as you know, Congress approved this legislation with almost no bipartisan support and the President signed it into law on February 17.

If government spending created jobs and prosperity, we’d have the best economy in our nation’s history right now.  I believe private citizens and businesses, not politicians and bureaucrats, will turn the American economy around.  That is why I offered a common sense alternative during the Senate’s debate on this bill to have Americans keep more of their own money instead of Washington taking it to waste on inefficient government programs.  My plan for job growth and economic stability focused on decreasing taxes for all individuals and businesses to reward work, productivity, and growth.  My plan would create millions of new jobs to benefit all Americans and provide particularly important tax relief for low-income families.  Unfortunately, my alternative was not adopted by the Senate.

Please know that I will continue to fight for fiscal responsibility and smaller government.  I believe America’s best course of action to correct the ongoing financial crisis is one that nourishes small business growth, keeps hard-earned money in the hands of American taxpayers, and encourages employment and investment through lower tax rates.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future with any issue important to you or your family. It is an honor to serve you and the people of South Carolina.

Sincerely,

Jim DeMint
United States Senator

and

February 12, 2009

Mr. Robert D. Yon
3840 Overbrook Drive
Columbia, South Carolina  29205

Dear Mr. Yon,

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding H.R.1, the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.”  I appreciate your taking the time to write.

I understand your concerns and welcome your interest in this matter. On January 28, 2009, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1 by a vote of 244-188.  On February 10, 2009, the Senate passed this measure by a vote of 61-37.  The bill will now proceed to a conference between the House and the Senate to reconcile the differences with the two bills.

I originally voted against this legislation because with the South Carolina unemployment rate continuing to rise, this bill did little to create jobs and grow the economy in the immediate future.  It is clear that this spending package has become a one stop shop for every item on a spending agenda – a massive and unprecedented spending bill aimed to bypass the normal appropriations process and subsidize a broad range of existing and new government programs. It passes massive debt onto our children and could mean future tax increases on hardworking Americans as well as hyperinflation.

It is my hope that Congress can work in a bipartisan manner to bring forward legislation that will stimulate more jobs for South Carolinians.  A targeted stimulus package of tax relief and assistance for small businesses would fuel this nation’s entrepreneurial spirit and help private industry and individuals create jobs.  Our focus should be on growing the American economy-not on growing our already massive government.  Additionally, I believe Congress can promote job growth through legislation that reduces the corporate tax rate and eliminates the capital gains tax.  Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as the debate on the economic recovery package moves forward.

It is an honor to represent the people of the Second Congressional District of South Carolina, and I value your input.  If I may be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very Truly Yours,

Joe Wilson
Member of Congress

Thank you Sen. DeMint and Rep. Wilson for recognizing this thing for what it is.

Obama Hosting Pricey Party in Hard Times

WASHINGTON – Unemployment is up. The stock market is down. Let’s party.

The price tag for  Obama’s inauguration gala is expected to break records, with some estimates reaching as high as $150 million. Despite the bleak economy, however, Democrats who called on President George W. Bush to be frugal four years ago are issuing no such demands now that an inaugural weekend of rock concerts and star-studded parties has begun.

Obama’s inaugural committee has raised more than $41 million to cover events ranging from a Philadelphia-to-Washington train ride to a megastar concert with Beyonce, U2 and Bruce Springsteen to 10 official inaugural balls. Add to that the massive costs of security and transportation — costs absorbed by U.S. taxpayers — and the historic inauguration will produce an equally historic bill.

In 2005, Reps. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., and Jim McDermott, D-Wash., asked Bush to show a little less pomp and be a little more circumspect at his party.

“President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake,” the two lawmakers wrote in a letter. “During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified.”

The thinking was that, with the nation at war, excessive celebration was inappropriate. Four years later, the nation is still at war. Unemployment has risen sharply. And Obama pressed Congress to release the second half of a $700 billion bailout package in hopes of rescuing a faltering banking industry.

Obama’s inauguration committee says it is mindful of the times and is not worried people will see the four days of festivities as excessive.

“That is probably not the way the country is going to be looking at it,” said committee spokeswoman Linda Douglass. “It is not a celebration of an election. It is a celebration of our common values.”

Douglass said the campaign sought to keep costs down by having the same decorations at each of the 10 balls, eliminating floral arrangements and negotiating prices on food.

“Those at the Obama administration are trying to be reflective of the climate,” McDermott’s spokesman, Mike DeCeasar, said Saturday.

The festivities began Saturday with a speech at Philadelphia’s historic 30th Street train as Obama’s trip began.

Sunday’s concert at the Lincoln Memorial includes performances by Sheryl Crow, Stevie Wonder, Garth Brooks and others. Denzel Washington and Queen Latifah will read historic passages. HBO paid $2.5 million for the exclusive rights to broadcast the concert.

Monday, the inaugural committee is hosting a national day of service, followed by three “bipartisan dinners” and a concert at the Verizon Center honoring military families. The Disney Channel will broadcast the concert, which includes performances by teen stars Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers, as part of a $2 million deal that also gave ABC the exclusive rights to broadcast one inaugural ball.

The television deals allowed the committee to recoup about $5 million of the $15 million production costs for the televised events, Douglass said.

Security and transportation costs are being paid by taxpayers. And with millions of tourists expected to descend on Washington for Tuesday’s inauguration ceremony, Bush declared a state of emergency, allowing the district to recover some costs for the event.

The inauguration committee is paying for 10 stadium-style screens to broadcast the inauguration ceremony on the National Mall. It is also hiring garbage and recycling services and renting thousands of portable toilets for what one supplier called “the largest temporary restroom event in the history of the United States.”

Obama has pledged transparency in his inauguration fundraising. He has disclosed inaugural donors as the fundraising continued, though he is not required to do so until after the ceremony.

Many of the fundraisers are well-known moneymen and women in Democratic circles. Those leading the list raised at least $300,000. They include two of Obama’s top campaign fundraisers: Louis Susman, who retired this month as vice chairman of banking giant and government bailout recipient Citigroup, and billionaire Hyatt hotel heiress Penny Pritzker.

Taking Obama at his Word on Gun Rights

By David Jeffers

To the great chagrin of gun shop owners, ammo suppliers, and those nefarious gun show peddlers, there is no longer a need for Americans to stock up on weapons and ammunition.  What has been an incredible boon for the weapons market, the fear of citizens losing the right to bear arms is unfounded.  The President-elect has spoken.

Knock off the snickering I am serious.  President-elect Obama at a press conference December 7, 2008 assured folks that he isn’t taking away their guns.  It was somewhat notable that he did not mention their Bibles but since he is a Christian and the Bible was not a subject of the discussion we Bible-thumpers should have nothing to fear either.

Some may marvel at my calmness at the President-elect’s assurance but the following statement is the genesis of my serenity:

“I believe in common sense gun safety law, and I believe in the second amendment and so, lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I’ve said that throughout the campaign. I haven’t indicated anything different during the transition, and I think that people can take me at my word.”

What could possibly make one question the President-elect’s word?  It should be considered old news that Mr. Obama was completely surprised by Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s hateful statements from the pulpit of the Trinity United Church of Christ*, of which the President-elect was a member for nearly twenty years.

It would be a stretch to call it a lie by Mr. Obama when back in 2004 he said “Look, I can unequivocally say I will not be running for national office in four years.”   How could a man say no to his country when it is obvious that he was the hope we have been waiting for, even though he said we were actually the hope.  We knew what he meant.

As for the petulant political left, how could they be upset at their anointed one for changing from promising to bring an end to the Iraqi War on day one to designing  “a plan for a responsible drawdown,” after all the President-elect has begun receiving daily intelligence reports.  One should understand that reality is becoming real to Mr. Obama.

Now it is understandable those counting on fleecing the rich folks are upset at Mr. Obama’s deciding to not immediately roll back tax cuts for the rich and instead choosing to allow them to end in 2010, but how many times can a man hear that you do not raise taxes during a recession before he begins believing it?  Ditto for the windfall profit tax on Big Oil!

The biggest misunderstanding of Candidate Obama was his foreign policy stance on meeting with rogue leaders and setting no preconditions for such meetings.  Not only did John McCain jump on this seeming naïveté, but so did Mr. Obama’s Democratic primary opponents.  That was such a misunderstanding of what was explained as “a nuanced stance on diplomacy.”

Finally, even the most skeptical of skeptics cannot imagine that Mr. Obama had any knowledge of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s despicable auctioning of the President-elect’s vacant Senate seat.  Mr. Obama stated clearly on December 9, 2008, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.” And please do not try to parse Mr. Obama’s words “so we were not, I was not aware…” as some Freudian slip.  Everyone knows Mr. Obama is not as clearly spoken as when speaking from a teleprompter.

Now before anyone throws up the Rahm Emanuel link understand that it is mere speculation to try to attribute any of Mr. Emanuel’s actions to the man for whom Mr. Emanuel acts as chief of staff.  Clearly there are times when one keeps things from one’s boss, even if it is something as important as naming the successor to his vacant Senate seat.

And Mr. Obama’s hesitancy to speak of the Emanuel connection is prudent “because…it’s an ongoing…investigation.”   The President-elect advisably stated “it would be inappropriate for me to, you know, remark on the situation beyond the facts that I know. And that’s the fact that I didn’t discuss this issue with the governor at all.”

All the above listed reasons for caution are easily swept away by simply listening to the President-elect.  Mr. Obama believes in common-sense gun safety laws, and while his stance on gun control is unclear, who can argue with common sense?

And besides, the President-elect believes “that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms,” even though he also believes that “just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right.”

Okay, that is a little confusing, but he has been saying the same thing about gun control throughout his campaign and transition and I think I can take him at his word.

After all, he told me I could.

Democrats Try to Lower Expectations

Even as they depict a massive stimulus package as indispensable to turning the economy around, Democrat leaders are aggressively lowering expectations that the package will yield dramatic accomplishments quickly.

Rep. David Obey, who is playing a key role in assembling the stimulus plan, which is expected to approach $800 billion, said recently that an infusion of federal spending is “the only game in town.” But the Wisconsin Democrat, who is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, was careful to add: “The downward momentum appears too strong to end the recession anytime soon.”

 House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s office said recently that “Congress needs to pass an economic recovery package to prevent any further decline in the economy” — but cautioned, “recovery will not be immediate.”

The expectations game is always tricky in politics. To win power, candidates promise to enact sweeping change. But once victory is in hand, they often scramble to lower those expectations so they won’t be perceived as falling short.

Democrats are facing an especially precarious version of that dilemma. In crafting a package that will sink hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into the economy, they are apprehensive about the fallout if the economy merely continues sputtering along for several years.

And lawmakers are already mindful of how they will face voters less than two years from now. The ruling party almost always loses seats in midterm elections, and that trend could be exacerbated for the Democrats if voters think they threw billions of dollars at the economy with little to show for it.

“Elections are run in two-year cycles, and we’re in an economic cycle that we can’t turn around in two years,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.). “It’s a political problem. But I don’t know that there is a way out of it.”

One aspect of the Democrats’ strategy is to stress that the recession was the Bush administration’s fault, not theirs. “President Bush will leave behind a legacy of debt, transforming the biggest surpluses in history into the biggest deficits and affecting our ability to confront the current economic crisis,” Rep. Hoyer’s office said recently.

They take some hope in that regard from the performance of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to whom they are increasingly looking as a role model. Mr. Roosevelt didn’t rapidly end the Great Depression, but voters supported him because he seemed to care so deeply, taking aggressive action and trying everything at his disposal.

That’s what this is really all about isn’t it? Roosevelt’s plan kept the democrats in power for 54 years. The primary reason for anything that the democrats do is to give themselves a little more power and to hold on to that power. If something good does come out of it, then that’s a plus.

No tax cut for you !

Obama has shelved a proposal to slap the oil and gas companies with a new windfall profits tax because oil prices have dropped so much in recent months, the transition team confirmed today.

“President-elect Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel,” a transition aide said. “They are currently below that now and expected to stay below that.”

Asked whether the energy rebate plan had likewise been put on hold, the transition aide said the rebates were included in a middle class “rescue plan” Obama released last month.

That plan calls for a permanent tax cut of $500 for a worker or $1,000 for a family, with the Internal Revenue Service using 2007 tax returns to send out the checks. Tax cuts also would be extended to seniors.

The policy shift came to light after officials at the American Small Business League noticed that the windfall profits tax language had been removed from the transition team’s Web site in what the group called “an unceremonious and abrupt manner.”

—Well, here you go…wonder what’s next?

Michelle Obama’s $30K thank you

As American’s cut back the Obama’s are going all out on a ring made of the world’s most expensive metal.

Soon to be first lady Michelle Obama is getting a big thank you gift from her husband.

The specially ordered Harmony ring is made of rhodium – the world’s most expensive metal –and encrusted with diamonds. The $30,000 gift is being hastily made by Italian designer Giovanni Bosco in time for January’s inauguration ceremony.

Only about 25 tons of rhodium are mined each year, mostly in South Africa, and as a result its price is typically around $10K an ounce.

A spokesman at Giovanni Bosco said: ‘Our American distributor has contacted us and has asked us to provide details on the Harmony ring.

Does anyone remember the Obama campaign’s contrived Palin wardrobe controversy? Is Michelle going to donate this ring to charity? Just how much would $30K help a struggling family in America? You know, the ones who Obama is going to save.   We should not give the Obamas a pass on this one.

Obama defends his “nochange” policy

As he unveiled another component of his strategy to lift America out of the “worst economic crisis since the Great Depression”, Obama appeared defensive Wednesday against questions that he is recycling too many Washington insiders into his new economic team.

“The last Democratic administration we had was the Clinton administration,” said Obama. “So it would be surprising if I selected a Treasury Secretary who had had no connection with the last Democratic administration, because that would mean that the person had no experience in Washington whatsoever. And I suspect that you would be troubled and the American people would be troubled if I selected a Treasury Secretary or a chairman of the National Economic Council, at one of the most critical economic times in our history, who had no experience in government whatsoever. What we are going to do is combine experience with fresh thinking.”

Obama’s getting another free pass from the media here. He’s directly contradicting all of his promises of hope and change and for the most part it goes unreported. What troubles me is that Obama keeps picking Clinton people. Out of all the thousands of federal and state government employees across this country, the best people for these jobs are Clinton people. The only change here is the change back to the Clinton administration.

Obama’s official limo gas guzzler

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama promised to get a million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015. His own new presidential limousine will be far from green, however.

The Obamobile being prepared is said to be a monster gas-guzzler made by General Motors. It will look like a black Cadillac but is built like a tank. A spy photographer who tracks down future car models for magazines snatched pictures of the heavily disguised first-car-in-waiting when it was being road-tested last summer.

The armor-plated car, which has a raised roof, windows up to 5in thick, extra-strength tires and a body made of steel, aluminium, titanium and ceramics, is thought to be based on a GMC 2500 truck that gets less than 10 mpg. Three cars are believed to be in production so that two can serve as decoys.

While security is paramount – the car is built to survive roadside bombs as well as gunfire – there are hybrid four-wheel drives on the market, such as Ford’s Mercury Mariner, which some critics believe could have been adapted for the president.

What does this say for Obama?  Did he lie to the tree huggers? Is he not willing to set the example? Or does the secret service just not trust a puny, lightweight, fold-up, greenmobile. I have to say, this is one Obama move I agree with. The thing is this though – we all should have the freedom to choose our own cars without government interference or restrictions. Every freedom we surrender, no matter how small or insignificant, brings us closer to being a fascist state.