Have you had enough of Tiger and his wreck? How about the stick blonde that sneaked her way into the WH party? Then come with me and we shall return to reality…no not a show on TV…… but rather the real thing….
Obama is wrestling with what to do in Afghanistan….do we need more troops?….do we need an exit strategy?…Just what is our best form of reaction to the newest requests by the military in the country?……..The Pres will give a speech outlining what the direction will be…..but in the early days of yore…the days of wine and terrorists…..the biggest screw up of all times happened all in the name of WMD…..
I am personally weary of the Repubs trying to shift the blame from their moronic actions unto another President…..they do not want the responsibility for their screw ups…..
What are those screw ups?
World’s most wanted terrorist Osama bin Laden had written his will as US troops closed in on his hideout in Tora Bora mountains of Afghanistan in December 2001, but walked out “unmolested” after American military leaders decided not to send reinforcements to pursue him. The US military “could have captured or killed Osama bin Laden in 2001 if it had launched a concerted attack on his hideout in Afghanistan,” according to a damning Congressional report that comes on the eve of unveiling of a new Af-Pak policy by the Barack Obama Administration.
The 49-page report “Tora Bora Revisited: How we failed to get Bin Laden and Why it Matters Today”, prepared by the staff of the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and released today, points finger at then Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his top military commander Tommy Franks for turning down requests for reinforcements to pursue Laden.
Laden, trapped in the rugged mountainous area in eastern Afghanistan, expected to die and had even written a will, said the report, commissioned by Committee Chairman John Kerry.
“Fewer than 100 American commandos were on the scene with their Afghan allies and calls for reinforcements to launch an assault were rejected. Requests were also turned down for US troops to block the mountain paths leading to sanctuary a few miles away in Pakistan,” it said.
The vast array of US military power, from sniper teams to the most mobile divisions of Marine Corps and the Army, was kept on the sidelines, the report said adding that instead, the US command chose to rely on airstrikes and untrained Afghan militias to attack bin Laden and on Pakistan’s loosely organised Frontier Corps to seal his escape routes.
The decision not to deploy American forces to go after bin Laden or block his escape was made by Rumsfeld and Franks, “the architects of the unconventional Afghan battle plan known as Operation Enduring Freedom,” the report said.
The report said the escape of Laden was a lost opportunity that altered the course of the war and paved the way for insurgencies in Afghanistan and in Pakistan. “Removing the al-Qaeda leader from the battlefield eight years ago would not have eliminated the worldwide extremist threat,” it said.
The people doing the loudest bitching about the “dithering” of the President are the people that REFUSED to commit to eliminating the bad guy back in 2001.
Personally, I think it is time for these a/holes to shut the f*ck up! If they want to keep their mouths and lips moving then why not make them come to Washington and answer questions for the American people of WHY they allowed the most wanted terrorist go…..
If the conservatives want to find someone who is aiding and abetting the enemy, as they have accused Obama of doing, then they need to look no further than the last admin, the one of GW and his merry band of pricks, to include robo-VP Cheney and Rumsfeld…..
We have all heard the horror stories of the power that lobbyists have in Washington…they represent every industry and spend oodles of money with lawmakers…but is there anything that can be done?
Lobbyists have been furiously lobbying the Obama White House to oppose restrictions on their ability to lobby.
The kafuffle began on September 23 when special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform Norm Eisen wrote that “the White House has informed executive agencies and departments that it is our aspiration that federally-registered lobbyists not be appointed to agency advisory boards and commissions.”
How many Industry Trade Advisory Committees — ITACs — are there?
The Washington Post says the system of these committees is “so vast that federal officials don’t have exact numbers for its size; the most recent estimates tally nearly 1,000 panels with total membership exceeding 60,000 people.”
Sixteen lobbyists who chair ITACs — including executives from Boeing, Harley-Davidson, the International Association of Drilling Contractors, Fanwood Chemical Inc., IBM and others — wrote to the president to protest the decision.
In another letter to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and US Trade Representative Ron Kirk, the lobbyists said that a “quick review of the impact of this new policy suggests that dozens of the most active — and most knowledgeable — Committee members who generate many of the documents needed by the Committee and our trade negotiators will be dismissed once the new charter term begins. This occurs because individuals who specialize in trade policy matters in their particular sectors often find that such specialization and expertise pushes them above the 20 percent lobbying activity threshold that triggers registration under the Lobbying Disclosure Act” or LDA.
“We explained to the ITAC chairs that this issue is not about the few corrupt lobbyists or specific abuses by the profession, but rather concerns the system as a whole. For too long, lobbyists and those who can afford their services have held disproportionate influence over national policy making… we decided that while lobbyists have a right to petition the government, it would best serve the interests of a fairer and more representative democracy if we limited their ability to do so from special positions of privileged access within the government. The result will be a Washington that is more reflective of all of America.”
These people have way too much pull on the Hill and with the President….somehow and somewhere limits have to be formed…….second only to Wall Street is the lobbyists, garnering much hate from the people of the country….
Personally, I like the idea that a Congress person can NOT become a lobbyists for at least 5 years after leaving the public trough……
I recent wrote a post that praised Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour on his call for an end to the “purity” purgers in the GOP….as I have said….I am not one of Barbour’s biggest fans….I have criticized him on just about every turn….and I knew it would not be long before he did or said something that would make me regret my “atta boy”…..I did not have to wait long…….he has a new plan for the black universities in the state of Mississippi….as reported in the Jackson Clarion-Ledger:
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour on Monday proposed combining the state’s three public black colleges into one of the institutions, Jackson State University. While Barbour said that campuses would continue to exist at what are now Alcorn State University and Mississippi Valley State University, the proposal marks the most dramatic state challenge in recent years to the continuation of some public black colleges — and the move comes in the state whose higher education system was the subject of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that governs college desegregation.
Chambers noted that mergers of black educational institutions in the South have not historically gone well for black students and educators. “What happens to the faculty at black colleges” when programs are consolidated? he asked. And if the consolidations result in smaller branch campuses where Alcorn State and Mississippi Valley are now full institutions, “how do you ensure that the same number of minority students end up in college? Why aren’t they asking questions about minority enrollments?”
Merger of black colleges has long been a fear of advocates for black students in many Southern states. Periodically, legislators propose such mergers, but in recent years, before this one, these proposals have not had much momentum.
Any merger of black colleges in Mississippi would have particular political significance because of United States v. Fordice, a 1992 Supreme Court decision that found Mississippi had failed to desegregate its higher education system. The decision specifically encouraged the state to consider mergers and to cut down on duplication of academic programs as a means of desegregating — but the decision did not order mergers.
(BTW, Fordice was yet another Repub governor of the state of Mississippi)
The theory behind these suggestions is that duplication of academic programs at historically black and predominantly white institutions encourages white students to enroll at one set of institutions and black students at another — and that the elimination of these choices will lead to a situation where black and white students enroll at the same institutions.
See what I mean? I keep saying that racism is NOT dead in the South….at least it is NOT dead among the generation of the segregation days……the grumpy old white guys….the heart of the GOP…..