They tell us we're dropping about $10 billion a month in Afghanistan so we can catch that Bin Laden guy...but eventually, we're gonna catch him, and as soon as we do you can imagine that folks will be wondering why we're still over there - and I gotta tell ya, I'm one of those people.
I mean, we're over here talking about how we're so broke that we have no choice but to cut a couple of billion from heat assistance for the poor, and a billion-and-a-half from the Social Security operations budget, and money from food stamps and childcare assistance and tornado forecasting in Alabama...but every single month, just as regular as clockwork, we seem to be able to find another $10 billion to spend in Afghanistan, even as we have an economy that could badly use another round of truly productive stimulus.
And I don't think y'all even realize just how much money $10 billion really is - but today we're gonna see if we can't fix that with a bit of a thought exercise.
Imagine if we set up a program that took that Afghanistan money and spent it right here at home for a year or two - and it was spent in the form of a lottery, where we stimulate the larger economy, help fix the mortgage crisis, and create a more energy-independent nation, all at the same time.
I got all we need except a catchy name; with that in mind let's move on to the description of how the Happy Super Fun Day Peace Lotto Stimulus Thingy works.
("Clear Skies," "Healthy Forests" and Pete Hoekstra as the ranking member of the "Intelligence" Committee... - promoted by PerfectStormer)
CQ Politics is reporting that Michigan's own West Coaster Pete Hoekstra (intel guy!) Twittered details of a supposed-to-be-secret Congressional visit to Iraq.
"Just landed in Baghdad," messaged Hoekstra, a former chairman of the Intelligence panel and now the ranking member, who is routinely entrusted to keep some of the nation's most closely guarded secrets.
Before the delegation left Washington, they were advised to keep the trip to themselves for security reasons. A few media outlets, including Congressional Quarterly, learned about it, but agreed not to disclose anything until the delegation had left Iraq.
Nobody expected, though, that a lawmaker with such an extensive national security background would be the first to break the silence. And in such a big way.
Apparently, Mr. Hoekstra not only Twittered about trip itself, but he also provided real-time updates on the delegation's itinerary.
I somehow doubt that Hoekstra will get a chewing-out from his fellow Intel Guy Mike Rogers (MI-08)for this display of idiocy... much less face any penalties for a pretty severe security breach. So far, the delegation is safe -- guess this means that al-Qaeda in Iraq isn't follwing Hoekstra on Twitter...
You never know when you'll bump into a long-distance Facebook Friend.
While attending the Popular Conference for Palestinians in U.S. in Chicago last month, I ran into activist Dr. Dahlia Wasfi, who was representing the Wheels of Justice touring program. Over a year ago, Dr. Wasfi visited the Lansing, Michigan peace community and brought her unique perspective and analysis of the conditions in Iraq under the U.S. occupation.
At the time of her Lansing visit, I missed her presentation because I was making a 12-hour drive from the upper upper reaches Michigan's Upper Peninsula. I heard rave reviews of her presentation and her friendly, personable nature. Later, she was gracious to accept my request for Facebook friendship.
So it was a surprise to bump into her in Chicago. As any friend would do, I asked Dahlia for an on-camera interview for the Peace Education Center. We talked about a wide-range of topics. The interview is below. (As a warning, there is some sound distortion in parts of the recording.)
This is my first blog post so please bear with me...
What Liberals and Democrats should be saying about the connection between the Russian invasion of Georgia and the War in Iraq:
Russian foreign policy, specifically the recent military invasion of the sovereign nation Georgia would not have been possible in 2002. However, since the full scale invasion of Iraq- a sovereign nation- the united States adopted a strategy of preemptive war, opening the door for other nations to follow. And follow they did:
On October 9, 2003, Putin said that Russia "retains the right to launch a preemptive strike, if this practice continues to be used around the world." Defense Minister Ivanov said Moscow can use preventive military force in cases where a threat is growing and is "visible, clear, and unavoidable". Ivanov added a key detail, saying that military force can be used if there is an attempt to limit Russia's access to regions that are essential to its survival.
Russia also indicated it would act to defend regions beyond its own borders, encompassing large parts of the former Soviet Union, now the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Defense Minister Ivanov has said that, in case of "instability in the CIS" or a "direct threat" to Russian citizens, Russia can "hypothetically" use force if other means of coercion, like diplomatic and economic sanctions, fail.
So, what is clear is that in reaction to the unilateral unprovoked invasion of the sovereign nation, Iraq, Russia decided to follow suit. It is obvious he is speaking of the current administration when saying, "if this practice continues to be used around the world," as the United States is the only nation to use preemption without a nod from the Security Council. What is more telling is the next part of the article.
The notion of preemption - the use of military and / or covert force to disarm an enemy before it can launch a strike of its own - has resurfaced since President Bush declared it a viable approach to the war on terrorism. Only the US has recently made use of first-strike military action, or "preemption", against emerging threats abroad - an explicit part of its foreign policy - in Iraq.
Russia now seems to follow the US' lead and reserve the same preemption rights. What remains to be seen is whether proliferation or the escalation of preemption could eventually ensue.
Well it has ensued, regardless of whether the author could have seen the approach five years ago.
Another important aspect of Russia's foreign policy, post Iraq- dubbed the Ivanov Doctrine- is in another article published around the time:
Defense Minister Ivanov also attempted to explain Russia's position in remarks on 6 October. Speaking at a news conference in Reykjavik, Ivanov said Moscow can use preventive military force in cases where a threat is growing and is "visible, clear, and unavoidable."
Ivanov added a key detail, saying that military force can be used "if there is an attempt to limit Russia's access to regions that are essential to its survival, or those that are important from an economic or financial point of view.
So, economic reasons are a motive for preemptive war as well.
It is important to bring up the fact that the Iraq War has laid the ground work for the current situation in Georgia and that Bush foreign policy is continuing to destabilize the world. It appears as though we failed to ask the most critical question in the lead up to war: what if other nations act in the same way.
Relatives of Mahmoud Jassim remove his body from a hospital after he was killed in Baghdad, Iraq, Sunday, Aug. 10, 2008. Jassim died when a bomb exploded as an Iraqi army patrol passed by in Baghdad's central Khillani square, killing a soldier and a civilian and wounding nine other people, a police officer said.
U.S. Rep. Candice Miller, once a fervent supporter of the Iraq war, says it's time for U.S. combat troops to get out of Iraq.
Miller, a Harrison Township Republican, said the United States has done all it can by toppling Saddam Hussein, providing the Iraqis the opportunity to create a constitution and elect a parliament, and training a competent Iraqi military force to provide security.
Recent statements by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that he wants U.S. forces to leave under a gradual timetable provide an opportunity for the end of U.S. combat operations, Miller said.
"We ought to take him up on his offer," she said. "It's been (President) Bush who keeps saying that they are a sovereign government and that we should do what they say. If they tell us to go, we'll go."
Miller, serving her third term in Congress, first made her new position known in a letter to the editor in last Sunday's Macomb Daily. The lawmaker said that the United States' continued financial support of Iraqi reconstruction must end, especially now that Iraq has posted a $79 billion deficit.
"We've done everything and more that can be expected of us. Iraq should provide their own security and ensure their own freedoms," the lawmaker said.
According to the Associated Press, two Iraqi officials say the U.S. and Iraq are close to a deal under which all American combat troops would leave by October 2010, with remaining U.S. forces gone about three years later.
Miller said she would have to review terms of the agreement before passing judgment but she said 2010 seems like a reasonable withdrawal timeline. The congresswoman, who had opposed withdrawal timetables in the past, said that she favors leaving some U.S. troops behind to train Iraqi security forces and protect U.S. diplomatic and military officials.
Miller, who gave up her seat on the House Armed Services Committee in March, said the troop surge has successfully changed the landscape in Iraq. A supporter of the 2002 congressional resolution backing the war, Miller is not ready to call the initial invasion - designed to confiscate weapons of mass destruction - a mistake.
But she is highly critical of former Defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld's refusal to heed calls for more troops and equipment in 2003-06. "History will be harsh" on Rumsfeld's prosecution of the war, she said.
"Her views have evolved over time" the report says. Allow me to translate this. As it became safer within Miller's party to break from the neverending war on terror status quo, she finally began to come around to the calls from the majority of Michiganders who wanted an end to the soldiers coming home to Michigan in caskets, an end to the neverending supply of cash going to Iraq with little to no accountability, and an end to US participation in the violence in Iraq that has left that nation in ruins with millions of its' citizens still living as refugees in other nations, or make-shift refugee 'camps' on Iraq's borders.
He's wickedly funny, sharp as a tack, manages to make Republicans look like bumbling fools on national TV, and now he's exposing The Real McCain.
He's Cliff Schecter, and if you're a regular viewer of CNN, MSNBC, or even Faux News, chances are you've probably seen him in his element taking on the Republican mouthpieces, making you laugh and them cringe. I've been lucky to have him as a mentor and now as a friend, and for me, he's one of those people that I want to be more like when I "grow up".
This blogger turned author is also the same guy who brought you the now-infamous Republican Sexcapades on Air America. His first book recently released is very appropriately titled The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don't Trust Him, and Why Independents Shouldn't and it's the perfect book to read, and then pass around to the poor confused souls in your life. Chances are they'll thank you afterwards.
I got the book shortly after it was released and couldn't put it down. I could try some fancy prose to describe how good it really is, but I think Sam Seder of Air America hit it spot on -
"Cliff Schecter is either the funniest smart person or the smartest funny person. Either way, this book is exactly America needs. A laugh-out-loud map of McCain's Straight Talk Express - complete with swerves, u-turns, and dubious pit stops."
Cliff's book is one of the many books that will be available for purchase at this Saturday's MI Policy Summit. While Cliff's busy schedule wouldn't permit him to join us, he was kind enough to answer a couple questions about McCain and Michigan, blogging, the real truth on how angels get their wings and the book that will live in Dubya infamy - My Pet Goat. (I told you this guy was funny!)
On Thursday's Ebling and You (heard from 5-to-7 pm on WILS AM 1320 in Lansing), Jack talked with Michigan State Senators Valde Garcia (R-Howell) and Mark Schauer (D-Battle Creek) about a bi-partisan bill that can void soldiers' useless cell-phone contracts.
Jack also spoke with Anita Salustro, associate state director of AARP, on the dangers of using reverse mortgages for investments.
Bill Richardson’s former friend James Carville coined the phrase some 16 years ago.
Today, it’s just plain stupid.
As we remember the contributions of Dr. Martin Luther King and recall where we were when he was slain in Memphis, Tenn., many things have changed in 40 years.
This much has not: King’s call for justice was more than a plea for fairness. It was a warning that nothing can change without increased economic opportunity.
As the chasm between haves and have-nots widens, there’s more disturbing news this morning in America.
An estimated 80,000 jobs were lost in March. Coupled with the 76,000 that disappeared in January and 76 thou that vanished in February, we’re 232,000 jobs poorer that we were just 14 weeks ago.
Happy New Year, indeed.
With the unemployment rate hitting 5.1 percent and the underemployment rate much higher, no wonder a record 81 percent of Americans are upset with the direction of the country. At a time when we needed at least 100,000 new jobs just to keep pace with a growing workforce, it’s time for some simple accounting _ Eblingomics 101.
We can’t afford to fight a war that kills us all in so many ways. Until this administration _ or more likely, the next one _ pulls its collective head from its colon, things will only get worse.
Until we foreclose on Iraq, we’ll never have the fiscal clout to clobber our economic problems.
And until we commit to the future _ education, energy, infrastructure and health, in alphabetical order _ we’ll always under-perform.
Dr. King realized that. He tried to warn us. He preached empowerment, not politics for the preservation of power.
That’s not a partisan whine. The “r” word is recession, not Republican. The “d” word is downturn, not Democratic.
It’s time to take off the blinders and accept the fact that we’re in this together _ blacks and whites, rich and poor, young and old.
Otherwise, we’ll keep spinning four-wheelers in a bog we refuse to leave. We’ll keep blaming the other guy (or gal, Hillary) and wondering why gas is $3.30 a gallon.
If you’re doing well this week, congratulations. You’ve probably had a break or 10 and pushed doors open along the way.
But take a look around you today. Then, realize you could become a victim, too.
If we don’t do that as a nation, if we sit back say, “What’s wrong? Things aren’t that bad,” they could be worse before we know it.
This much, we do know: James Earl Ray or whoever shot Dr. King on that balcony couldn’t kill his dream.
Next week, General David Petraeus will travel to Capitol Hill and make his report to Congress on the war in Iraq. If, as expected, he announces a pause in the withdrawal in troops from Iraq, our Congress must say "no" for the sake of our military and of our servicemembers.
We can not pause the withdrawal of our troops because we are seeing, everyday, the absolute devastation our wars, with frequent, long, often extended deployments, are having on our men and women in uniform.
How can we constantly churn our troops like this? How can we consciously compound the wounds of war? We are sending men and women back for fourth and fifth tours of duty when the Department of Defense, by its own estimation, says that with each additional tour, troops are 60% more likely to develop severe post-combat mental health issues.
Over the next few days, the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. will be covered at length. His most famous moment of course remains his triumphant "I Have A Dream" speech given at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. His "Mountaintop" speech given on the eve of his death is another often talked about. Both rightly have their place not only in Civil Rights and American history, but in the entire history of mankind.
However, in my opinion, the greatest of all of Dr. King's messages was the one that he gave at Ebenezer Baptist Church on April 30, 1967. His stance that day against the Vietnam War and his rightful joining of that struggle with the anti-poverty and Civil Rights movements was a mighty message. It was a three-pronged message and movement that had to be snuffed out before it gathered momentum.
I'm not going to fool anyone and try to convince you that news is more fun than sports.
I know the stuff I often write about on this site is uncomfortable for some folks to think about. And I know that tomorrow is Michigan State's Sweet Sixteen game. I am looking forward to it and will be watching and enjoying it like many of you.
However, right now I ask that those of you reluctant to hear, read, or watch another story about Iraq, Iran and/or the War on Terror; just take a few moments before MSU takes the court this weekend to read the following two articles.
The first article is by William S. Lind. Lind has been a guest on Ebling and You (WILS 1320 AM in Lansing) twice in the last year. A graduate of Dartmouth and Princeton, Lind served as a legislative aide for the armed services for Senator Robert Taft, Jr., of Ohio from 1973 through 1976 and held a similar position with Senator Gary Hart of Colorado from 1977 through 1986. He is the author of the Maneuver Warfare Handbook (Westview Press, 1985) and co-author, with Gary Hart, of the recent book, America Can Win: The Case for Military Reform.
Lind, a staunch conservative, has been an opponent of the Iraq War from day one. On his visits with Jack, they have talked about that issue at length as well as the Iranian questions. Lind has been sounding the alarm of the dangers and possible dire consequences if our already overstretched U.S. military is forced to attack Iran.
HERE is a recent article by Lind at CounterPunch.org where he lays out his concerns about an U.S./Iranian war once again.
After reading the above article, please read this ARTICLE by Robert Bryce in the March 10, 2008 edition of The American Conservative.
Oh, and one more thing. Make sure that you enjoy watching the Spartans this weekend too, win or lose. Iraq, Iran and war are serious, the NCAA tournament isn't.
Saturday, March 15 - 12:00pm
Heartside Park
Downtown Grand Rapids
(just south of the corner of Ionia and Cherry)
Join ACTIVATE (Grand Rapids SDS) for a march demanding an immediate end to the United States' occupation of Iraq. We'll highlight connections to local institutions that sustain the occupation. Bring signs, banners, drums, noisemakers, etc.
For information on why ACTIVATE calls for an immediate end to the occupation of Iraq:
Please pass this announcement along to your friends, your groups, or other contacts. We have flyers below that we encourage people to print and distribute, as well as a graphic suitable for posting on MySpace, Facebook, and other such sites:
What happens when you deploy troops who have seen high intensity combat time and time again with inadequate dwell time between tours? You see skyrocketing mental health issues.
After months of investigative work, talking to our troops and veterans, we released a report on the situation at Fort Drum in Watertown, New York. Since 9/11, the 2nd Brigade Combat Team has been deployed for more than forty months, more than any other brigade in the Army, and we are seeing what is nothing short of a cry for help from the men and women on the base; a cry we will answer for the troops at bases here in Michigan as well.
A cry for help that is also coming from the leadership on the base. In a New York Times article today about our report, Major General Michael Oates, commander of the 10th Mountain Division, says: "We recognize that there is stress on our force and their families from this conflict, but until recently, we have not fully appreciated the extent of some of the mental stresses and injuries or how to best identify them." Please read the rest of the article here.
What is happening at Fort Drum -- with Soldiers still on active duty suffering from PTSD, with Soldiers and their families in need of counseling, with Soldiers literally dying while still on duty -- is going to happen all around America unless we begin to address some of the basic issues of this war. As our report explains, DoD itself has stated that the likelihood of troops having mental health problems increases by 60% with every tour of duty. So, in short, through ourdeployment policies, we are consciously compounding the wounds of war.
This is unacceptable to us. Veterans for America's Wounded Warrior Outreach Program will continue to address these problems from the bottom up.
We are going to go to as many bases as we can afford to go to, see what is happening on those bases and see how we can help. If you can help us, we would greatly appreciate it.
We are going to continue our Wounded Warrior Registry Outreach -- if you or someone you know needs help getting help with PTSD or TBI, please click here.
And above all, we are going to continue to serve and help those that serve and have served us with the same level of dedication and courage they have shown. Click here to learn more about what we are doing.
...Martin Luther King Jr. earned special ire from Paul's newsletters, which attacked the civil rights leader frequently, often to justify opposition to the federal holiday named after him. ("What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!" one newsletter complained in 1990. "We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.") In the early 1990s, a newsletter attacked the "X-Rated Martin Luther King" as a "world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours," "seduced underage girls and boys," and "made a pass at" fellow civil rights leader Ralph Abernathy. One newsletter ridiculed black activists who wanted to rename New York City after King, suggesting that "Welfaria," "Zooville," "Rapetown," "Dirtburg," and "Lazyopolis" were better alternatives. The same year, King was described as "a comsymp, if not an actual party member, and the man who replaced the evil of forced segregation with the evil of forced integration."
While bashing King, the newsletters had kind words for the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke. ...
Hillary hasn't been good on MLK issues, but Paul is much worse.
Do you want to vote for Adolf, uh, Ron Paul now? Maybe not. I hope.
There is also the ethical issue about messing with somebody else's primary; I don't really like it, any more than I would appreciate 10 zillion Repubs crossing over and making Mike Gravel the winner. Dems should vote...DEM, etc.
And finally, there is also the "dilution" tactical problem, i.e., one Dem thinks, "I'll vote for that loser Huckabee and he'll win the Michigan vote, haw haw", but another thinks "I'll vote for that loser Ron Paul and he'll win the Michigan vote, haw haw", so that the "loser" votes may be spread out too much and let Romney or McCain slip through anyway--and ALSO let Hillary slip through.
This is what professionals call A Bad Result.
...I stated a few days ago that Senator Clinton needs to say, on record, unambiguously and as Shermanesque as possible, that she will not challenge the Michigan delegate ban under any circumstances, and not accept delegate votes from Michigan under any circumstances. If she won't commit to this statement, she is patently unqualified to run in the Democratic primary to begin with, as she would be advocating the strategy of stealing an election. I spent the last day or so trying to get an answer from the Clinton campaign, and no one will commit to this statement that I've talked to so far. Which is terrifying.
Therefore, I have changed my mind about the strategic advantage of voting for Ron Paul. It is now the clear strategic advantage, if you're in Michigan, to vote "uncommitted". Voting "uncommitted" in the Democratic primary allows the delegates to be freed up to support who they like, should the convention prove a close one.
Yes, most Michigan Democrats I know still plan on staying home, or voting in the Republican primary, but I hope the word gets out in time that there is a better option. Voting uncommitted isn't the same as not voting -- it's stopping Hillary Clinton from the potential of hijacking an election with invalid delgates (should the final totals be close). And that in and of itself is even more valuable than assuring Ron Paul keeps being a pest.
As for Hillary, by the way: congratulations on her slim 2-point victory over Barack in NH last night, although Barack's 9-point Iowa victory over her was proportionately more impressive.
However, as Maureen Dowd notes in Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?,
...Gloria Steinem wrote in The Times yesterday that one of the reasons she is supporting Hillary is that she had "no masculinity to prove." But Hillary did feel she needed to prove her masculinity. That was why she voted to enable W. to invade Iraq without even reading the National Intelligence Estimate and backed the White House's bellicosity on Iran. ...
Hillary sounded silly trying to paint Obama as a poetic dreamer and herself as a prodigious doer. "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," she said. Did any living Democrat ever imagine that any other living Democrat would try to win a presidential primary in New Hampshire by comparing herself to L.B.J.? (Who was driven out of politics by Gene McCarthy in New Hampshire.)
Her argument against Obama now boils down to an argument against idealism, which is probably the lowest and most unlikely point to which any Clinton could sink. The people from Hope are arguing against hope. ...
Hope against hope. Heh.
And with Hillary confirming in her victory speech that she'll get us out of Iraq "the right way", it implies she knows better than other Dem candidates what to do there. Which she didn't when she voted to send us to war there, causing far more tears in the families of our dead soldiers than she herself has shed recently; and I don't think she knows better now about Iraq, either. So much for Hillary.
So if you want a viable change candidate like Barack Obama (cf. the other poor man's Mich Lib, the Huffington Post, Obama Wins Key Support Of Nevada's Largest Union today) or John Edwards to win--and no lawsuit knocks over the primary, and if you don't want to boycott the primary, and maybe even if you like Richardson--, vote "uncommitted" and make sure all your friends do, too, and spread the word the best you can. --Kucinich is campaigning here, so he's violating the pledge not to campaign, maybe? and who wants to vote for a dishonest candidate? And Dodd is out. And Gravel...is Gravel, God bless him.
Ironically, then, if you are COMMITTED to change, you may have to vote UNCOMMITTED on 1/15. Funny, I know, but that's life.
Whether you make claims in federal court re takings, substantive and/or procedural due process, equal protection, 1st and 8th amendment stuff re making it a misdemeanor for journalists/folks to discuss the voter lists, ...not to mention equities/issues like
1) the county clerks saying they can't get out the absentee ballots on time (disenfranchising our SOLDIERS IN IRAQ, for cripes' sake),
2) the fact that the Democratic vote will be disenfranchised as a whole with a 1/15 primary (since it violates DNC rules and the delegates won't even be counted at the national convention...and there are few candidates on the ballot as well)--and don't forget the implementation challenge to be filed against the MDP for the MDP disenfranchising Michigan Dems!--,
3) the waste of public money on such a primary (as Speaker Andy Dillon has mentioned),
4) the interest in settled, fair decisions and procedures, not rush jobs like the State of Michigan is shoving down people's throats;
or other claims entirely: there may very likely be some powerful way or ways to challenge any arbitrary, capricious, and/or just plain stupid Michigan state government or court decisions recently made. So I hope you challenge, as soon as possible.
Even if you're not successful in the end (God forbid), you will at least have educated the public further about the extent to which their government is willing to steal from them, play with their votes (including soldiers' votes from abroad) and silence/criminalize free speech (again, the misdemeanor about discussing voter lists). So, it's more than worth the shot, any way one looks at it.
Moreover, you will be giving a great Thanksgiving present to the public by doing so, since someone should be protecting the people of Michigan from thievery, disenfranchisement, and bullying by a shady governmental apparatus. And people will give you thanks for doing it. I know I will.
Godspeed! We know you can do it! And have a great Thanksgiving, everybody!!
(Cross-posted from Daily Kos at the request of Liberal Lucy.)
I've been asking myself a question for quite awhile, "What drives Pete Hoekstra's desire for eternal war?
Is it possible that the infinite statements from Pete Hoekstra (Lying Dutchman MI-02) like this:
"Our nation faces a serious and ongoing threat from radical, militant jihadists. I fear that some believe that by pushing a date certain for withdrawal
"As the radical Islamists themselves have made clear, it will not, and we need to from Iraq we will somehow make the radical jihadist threat just go away.remain engaged to counter this threat."
might have something to do with this little fact:
Before the run-up to the Iraq War the lying Dutchman hadn't received campaign contributions from the Defense industry. However, starting in 2003 that all changed.
In fact, Hoekstra's list of campaign contributors changed a LOT...
I am a Vietnam veteran who relied on the G.I. benefits when I came back from Vietnam. I had a wife and baby to support while I went back to school at the Univ. of Miichigan. Even with this support and a part-time job, we still had to resort to food stamps. However, compared to what the new veterans now receive, we were wealthy.
This is cross posted at The Huffington Post and posted here for your convenience in case you missed it yesterday.
Truly ending the war in Iraq will only come about when our troops are no longer targets. That is why Governor Bill Richardson believes that we should not leave behind any of our troops. --Joaquin H. Guerra, Bill Richardson for President.
It's Time to Make a Choice in Iraq
By Governor Bill Richardson
Yesterday,twelve former Army captains wrote that short of reinstating the draft, "our best option is to leave Iraq immediately." In an extraordinary editorial in the Washington Post, these captains--all of whom served in Iraq--made it clear that we need to end this war and we need to end it now. They wrote that a " scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition."
I strongly urge every American to read this important report from those who served in the failed conflict in Iraq. Army captains are the staff officers who plan operations against insurgent strongholds. They are the company commanders who lead our soldiers through the streets of Baghdad. And they are the soldiers who will direct our withdrawal from Iraq.
These men and women know the score. They know that we must leave Iraq. As they put it, "It's time to make a choice." Americans are fed up with the President's stalling and Congressional failure to act. Frankly, it is well past time we make a choice. And the only responsible choice left to us is to get all of our troops out of Iraq, with no residual forces left behind--no combat forces, no non-combat forces. As President, I will do it. I will get all of our troops out within a year after I take office - sooner if we can get it done safely.
The other major candidates in this race have said--again and again--that they will not. Senators Edwards, Obama, and Clinton have all refused to commit to getting all of our troops out of Iraq by 2013. None of them are willing to be clear about removing all troops - combat and non-combat. It's unbelievable. Are they looking at the same war the rest of us are? Furthermore, they are all advocating precisely the sort of scaled withdrawal that these twelve captains are warning against. It doesn't make any sense. Real leadership is about making the tough choices, and knowing when it is time to make bold moves. Now is the time for action, not hesitation. Ending this war requires real change, not more incrementalism.
Ending this war is the most important issue of our time. And it is the fundamental difference between me and Senators Edwards, Obama, and Clinton. I will end the war; they will not. I will get all of our troops out; they will leave troops behind indefinitely. I will order a safe and rapid withdrawal and have our troops out within a year. They have proposed a long, protracted withdrawal that will only increase the danger to our fighting men and women and drag out the war.
2013 is six years from now - six years. In six years, will we have lost 6,000 men and women in Iraq? 10,000? More? In six years will this be a $2 trillion mistake? Or $3 trillion? The war has been going on for four and half years already. Six years from now, we will have been there for more than a decade. Are you okay with that? I'm not.
The choice in Iraq is clear. We need to get all our troops out quickly. We need to end this war for real. Go to getourtroopsout.com to join Americans across the country in calling for a quick, clear, responsible end to the war in Iraq.
Despite everyone's best efforts, despite the facts, despite the reality of millions of uninsured children, it's not likely that the House will get enough votes to override the Bush SCHIP veto today.
I won't rehash the lies misstatements that Mike Rogers and the other anti-family politicians used to defend their votes against SCHIP. Suffice it to say, they seem to think that non-stop parroting of Bush talking points served as some sort of protective charm against hideous liberal plots like affordable vaccinations for children.
Mike Rogers doesn't appear to be a terribly introspctive person. He is the kind of guy who keeps moving ahead & isn't too worried about what's already happened.
So here's the question: what do YOU think will be Roger's Next Big Issue?
