What's he doing?

03/26/09 WASHINGTON – Concerned about the faltering war in Afghanistan, President Barack Obama plans to dispatch thousands more military and civilian trainers on top of the 17,000 fresh combat troops he's already ordered, people familiar with the forthcoming plan said Thursday.

03/27/09 WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday ordered 4,000 more military troops into Afghanistan, vowing to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat" the terrorist al-Qaida network in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan.
In a war that still has no end in sight, Obama said the fresh infusion of U.S. forces is designed to bolster the Afghan army and turn up the heat on terrorists that he said are plotting new attacks against Americans. The plan takes aim at terrorist havens in Pakistan and challenges the government there and in Afghanistan to show more results.

C'mon man, we can not win this thing. There will be no surrender, we're not going to kill them all, and we're not going to win their hearts and minds with military force. Is there an exit strategy? What's to keep the Tali Ban or Al Qaida or the terrorists from regrouping after we leave? We can not prevent terrorists from setting up training camps. If we clean out Afghanistan they'll set up shop in Pakistan, If we clean up Pakistan, they set back up in Afghanistan. Or move to any one of a hundred other places around the mid east. Jesus, this is a dumb idea! Remember what happened when Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, the Persians, the British empire, and Russia invaded Afghanistan? They all lost.
Damn it all I thought you were smarter than this. I still believe you are smarter than this, I voted for you man. You were a breath of fresh air. I hope and pray that this thing isn't your Viet Nam. We're just going to get our guys killed, kill countless numbers of Afghan civilians, turn hundreds of thousands of Afghans against us, re-enforce the hatred that many Middle Easterners have against our foreign policy, all while spending billions and billions on a complete waste of time in a time. If we're going to invest so much blood and treasure on this endeavor lets do it on nation building and not a man hunt with our military. A large part of the reason that Hamas won in Palestine was due to the fact that they poured money into medicines and healthcare for the people as well as school construction. That's how to win the hearts and minds. America should do the same in Afghanistan. Since we destroyed large parts of it lets help rebuild it. This will not only make the Afghans happy but, our military industrial complex as well. After all, part of the reason we blow things up is so we can have our contractors rebuild them. So let's have less destruction and more construction. Roads, sewers, electricity, and so on. Let our foot print be a positive and not a negative. It's not going to win over everyone but, nothing will win over everyone. At a time when our economy is on the verge of imploding and if we're going to deficit spend in a foreign country anyway why not do it in a constructive way. It certain;y beats the shit we keep piling on the heap that is our national debt.

And along the lines of our horrible economic situation. What's with the Geithner and Summers recruitment? As I'm sure you are aware these two were major players in the chicanery that got us into this mess. What made you go with these two? Did they have a sudden come to Jesus moment? What's wrong with some fresh faces and some new ideas? Is Geithner going to hold his old running buddies to account? I doubt it seriously. An administration official said the Treasury Department did its own legal analysis and concluded that those contracts could not be broken. Oh really! When the major airlines broke all those contracts with their pilots and attendants forcing them to take a cut in pay nobody from the government said it couldn't be done. When the major auto manufactures break contracts with the Unions, for some strange reason congress and the senate give their blessings. Does anyone else see a pattern here? Geithner, Summers, and their ilk are holding the world economy hostage and demanding ransom from the US tax payer. If we don't meet their demands they'll crash the economy. It's all a confidence game. When things go their (Wall Street and global corporation's) way the stock market goes up. Whenever Labor and the Unions triumph, (which is a rare occasion indeed) the power brokers will drive the market into the toilet.

And finally,from the UK Telegraph 03/26/09
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged $80 million (£55m) to Mexico to acquire Blackhawk helicopters to fight drug gangs threatening the country's stability.

We're going to give Mexico $80 million so they can buy helicopters. Why don't we just give them to Mexico? I guess once you've sanctioned the printing of a few trillion un-backed U.S. dollars by the Federal Reserve another 80 million is chicken feed. So, let me get this straight: we're going to give $80 million to the Mexican authorities who will in turn buy Blackhawk Helicopters from us in order to better fight the drug cartels. Are you kidding me? I don't know who is advising you on these matters but maybe you aught to fire them and get someone else. Most Mexican police officials are bought and paid for buy the drug cartels. The Mexican government much like our own is corrupt and can't compete with the drug cartels deep pockets. Most of the police are bought and paid for by the same cartels they are hired to fight.

The US secretary of state also acknowledged America's "inability" to stop weapons being smuggled across the border from the US and being used by the drug cartels in a bloody turf war.

Yes it's true illegals give a legal a few hundred $ to go into 1 of 2000 or more gun shops located along the Mexican -United States border. They buy military type weaponry as well as ammunition and sneak it back into Mexico. We're supplying the people were fighting! Why don't we just monitor theses shops more closely or make it unlawful to have a gun shop within 250 miles of the border?
In a previous post I explained how the legalization of drugs could not only reduce crime, eliminate prison overcrowding, increase tax revenues, and create jobs. Now I would like to add that legalizing drugs would devastate the Cartels and reduce the need for further bloodshed and ridiculous deficit spending.

While my man OB14me has already done some very good things, stem cell research, actually allowed the press to ask tough questions, brought to the forefront the need for health and education reforms, spoke in complete sentences, etc etc. He has also shown that while he was elected president of the United States . . . the military industrial complex, Global corporations, and Greed make the rules by which you have to play.

DaG Out

Fox News "We distort - You abide"

Here's a story that actually happened and I can find zero mainstream coverage of it. It happened about 10 years ago: A large share of America’s milk supply has quietly become adulterated with the effects of a synthetic hormone (bovine growth hormone, or BGH) secretly injected into cows. The hormone maker Monsanto led Fox TV to fire two of its award-winning reporters and sweep under the rug much of what they discovered but were never allowed to broadcast.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8932894636742527407

8/23/2004
(TAMPA)--A Florida judge has denied a Fox Television motion that would have forced its former investigative reporters Jane Akre and Steve Wilson to pay nearly $2 million in legal fees and court costs the broadcaster spent to defend itself at trial in the landmark whistleblower suit brought by the journalists.
In her ruling which followed a lengthy hearing in Tampa Wednesday (August 18), Judge Vivian Maye cited previous court decisions that allow judicial discretion in deciding whether whistleblowers must reimburse defense costs if they ultimately lose.
Still at issue are some additional court costs that Fox says it is entitled to collect from the journalists under different rules that apply at the appellate level. Fox took the case there and ultimately overturned the jury on a legal technicality last year. (There, the party that ultimately wins is generally allowed to collect appellate costs and fees from the losing party.)
Ironically, the ruling came four years to the very day and exact hour that a jury returned its landmark ruling in the case and a $425,000 award to reporter Jane Akre.
This latest decision stems from a case filed in 1998 by former Fox journalists Akre and Wilson who charged they were pressured to broadcast what they knew and documented to be lies about an artificial hormone injected into dairy cows, then fired when they refused and threatened to report the matter to the Federal Communications Commission.
After a five-week trial in 2000, a jury decided unanimously that Akre was fired solely because she threatened to blow the whistle to the FCC the broadcast of a false, distorted or slanted news report. The panel that found in Akre's favor awarded nothing to Wilson who represented himself at trial.
The Fox appeal was largely on an argument that it is not technically illegal for a broadcaster to deliberately distort the news on television. The appellate justices reasoned that since state law provides whistleblower protection only for employees who object to misconduct which is against an "adopted law, rule, or regulation" and they decided prohibitions against news distortion are merely a "policy" of the FCC, the reporters' eight-year-old lawsuit must have been without merit from itsinception.
"The appellate judges were wrong to overturn the jury on the notion that it's not illegal for a broadcaster to lie in a television news report," Akre said.
"And what's even more shameful is that a broadcaster would argue that the First Amendment is broad enough to protect outright lies and deliberate distortion," Wilson added. "Remember this case the next time you hear `fair and balanced,' or `we report, you decide'."
In her ruling yesterday, Judge Maye noted, "Three different trial court judges believed this case had legal merit." Six times before Fox appealed its loss, those judges rejected that very same argument, deciding prohibitions against deliberate distortion of the news on the public airwaves was more than a mere violation of government policy.
Reading from the Jury Verdict Form, she also noted that six disinterested jurors decided Fox fired Akre for no other reason than her objection to airing a report the jurors agreed was "false, distorted, or slanted."

In a nut shell the Florida Appealate court is in the pockett of Jeb Bush and his state's big businesses.

DaG Out

Short term memory

Turn on any news program today and listen to pundits and politicians feign outrage at the executive bonus compensation that AIG is giving out. While it is egregious that AIG is giving away millions of tax payers money to the very people who actively participated in fraud, and the bilking of billions, it is important to remember that in the original draft of the TARP bill there was a $500,000 executive compensation cap. The very same people currently bitching and moaning about how poorly the Obama administration handled the TARP disbursement are the ones who spoke loudly against any kind of limits on executive compensation. They even managed to get the limit exemption dropped from the final bill. I guess they know the public can't remember what was said 2 months ago. (Unless they happen to turn on the Daily Show with John Stewart and he plays the video. The corporate media sure as hell ain't going to show us.)

A mere 4 years ago in 2005, a repub led congress, senate, and executive branch passed new bankruptcy laws that snuck in credit default swap and derivative contingencies. Basically this new legislation put the holders of the derivatives to the front of the line should a financial institution file for bankruptcy. While this law made it far tougher for the average citizen to stay afloat when filing for bankruptcy it made it so much easier for financial institutions to disperse whatever capital they had left to their wealthiest investors be they national or foreign. Even a Bank or investment houses employees and stock holders got pushed to the back of the line. Interesting to note that blame for this crap piece of legislation can be directly placed on both sides of the isle. Even our current VP Joe Biden voted for this thing.

This all leads one to believe that they all knew this was coming. The finger pointing and accusations are nothing more than posturing in an effort to cover their asses. Are you listening Chris Dodd?! Yes it's true that you wrote the amendment granting the compensation exemption that limited bonuses to $500,000 however, you're not above suspicion as last year you received a sweetheart deal on two of your mortgages, saving upwards of $75,000 courtesy of Countrywide, one of the biggest pushers of the subprime mortgages. As head of the U.S. banking committee he could have spoken out over the past 2 years when the Dems had a majority but, said nothing. (The Right has lied to the public about Dodd's amendment. Rush and Fox news report Dodd's amendment as the "exemption that allowed AIG to pay out executive bonuses. They conveniently leave out the cap amount he put in.)

The main reason this corruption has been allowed to take place is the repeal of the Glass Steagal act of 1933 . . . . Specifically the second act. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, bankers and brokers were sometimes indistinguishable. Then, in the Great Depression after 1929, Congress examined the mixing of the “commercial” and “investment” banking industries that occurred in the 1920s. (Sound familiar?) Hearings revealed conflicts of interest and fraud in some banking institutions’ securities activities. A formidable barrier to the mixing of these activities was then set up by the Glass Steagall Act. (My my how history does seem to repeat itself. See what I mean by our collective short term memory? For the record, both Glass and Steagal were Democrats) The first Act established the Federal deposit Insurance Corp. The FDIC.

Now just out of curiosity let's see when and who was responsible for the repeal of Glass Steagal. Ah yes, back in 1999, the distinguished gentleman from Texas Senator Phil Gramm and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (Repub -Iowa) brought forth this dastardly piece of legislation. The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines, but the Dems are not completely absolved of responsibility as President Clinton signed the repeal into law. After that, brokerage houses and Banks could do as they pleased, they could create investments out of thin air and they did. With AIG's help these investments got AAA rated and insured for the maximum amount. In addition, the cancer of stocks as compensation became all the rage so that CEO's no longer cared about a companies health in the long term only how high they could get the stock to go. The financial market became a football game with no referees. The financial institutions could hold, clip, facemask, chop block, illegally forward pass all they wanted. And boy did they want to . . . .a lot. In case you didn't realize, you, me and damn near everybody else in the civilized world were and are the opposing team.

What can be done? How can this all be fixed? Got me? Short of a reboot . . .Wipe the slate clean and start all over again, I don't see how it can. Don't forget, the outstanding bill that is past due is more than the GDP of the entire planet.

DaG out