How creepy is this? This is a cult of personality on crack. Can you imagine a campaign of
BUSH EVERYWHERE?
The rest are clips from Obama's personal website. It is a shadow of his mind.
- posted August 09 6:00:59 PM
From OFA Director Mitch Stewart: All throughout August, our members of Congress are back in town. Insurance companies and partisan attack groups are stirring up fear with false rumors about the President's plan, and it's extremely important that folks like you speak up now. So we've cooked up an easy, powerful way for you to make a big impression: Office Visits for Health Reform. All this week, OFA members like you will be stopping by local…
- posted August 08 6:56:13 PM
Earlier today, Sonia Sotomayor was sworn in as the newest Justice of the Supreme Court. Shortly thereafter, Vice President Joe Biden sent out the following message to supporters who called, wrote letters, and displayed their support for Judge Sotomayor: Congratulations. Just moments ago, Judge Sonia Sotomayor was sworn in as the newest Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Our highest court and the nation it serves will benefit…
- posted August 08 9:15:32 AM
The President dispells some of the outlandish rumors being promoted by those who are defending the status quo:
- posted August 07 11:51:15 AM
From WhiteHouse.gov: If you’ve been following the health insurance reform debate, you probably have a number of questions about how health insurance reform will help you and improve the quality of care you receive. With all the talk about health insurance reform, it can be difficult to sort out fact from fiction. We want to be sure you have the facts and answer your questions. Today, I’ll be moderating a webcast with Health and Human…
- posted August 06 3:03:51 PM
Moments ago, the Senate voted 68-31 to confirm Sonia Sotomayor as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Shortly after the vote, President Obama made the following statement: I am pleased and deeply gratified that the Senate has voted to confirm Judge Sonia Sotomayor as our nation’s 111th Supreme Court justice. I want to thank the Senate Judiciary Committee, particularly its Chairman, Senator Leahy -- as well as its Ranking Member, Senator…
Obama Everywhere
ReplyDeletePowered by Hope.
my.obama.com ?
Connecting with his community.
Circumventing the MSM.
Wonder what kind of traffic counts they register?
It is a braver, newer whirled than Maverick McCain and his 38 rough riders were ready for.
Obama's grass-roots network is put to the test, from the LATimes.
Comrades! GOOD MORNING!
ReplyDeleteDear Great Father Please grace us with direction!
/off sarcasm
puke
So, those Marines, playing whack a Taliban in the south have failed to tie down the enemy.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, if three of our six stars is to be believed, we just whacked a horneys next with a baseball bat.
Excited the hornets, didn't kill 'em.
KABUL, Aug 10 (Reuters) - The Taliban have advanced out of traditional strongholds in Afghanistan's south and east, gaining the upper hand as they moved into the north and west, the top U.S. and NATO commander said in an interview on Monday.
U.S. Army General Stanley McChrystal, who will soon present an assessment of the war, said the resurgent Taliban have forced a change of tactics on foreign forces and warned that record casualty figures would remain high for some months.
"It's a very aggressive enemy right now," McChrystal told The Wall Street Journal newspaper (online.wsj.com/) in an interview in Kabul. "We've got to stop their momentum, stop their initiative. It's hard work."
Analysts Expect Long-Term, Costly U.S. Campaign in Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteBy Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer.
Looking like the US military is engineering another clusterfuck, from here.
Traffic at Obama.com is down 27%, over the last three months.
ReplyDeleteCheck out the chart, click the max view and look at the 'bell curve".
I sure hope he doesn't get the Flu in Mexico.....NOT
ReplyDeleteAfter outlining two scenarios, both of which fit the observable Obama data sets, Fred Hiatt wonders which script Obama is reading from.
ReplyDeleteA Summer Obama Drama.
...
... -- so which is the real movie?
We may get some sense when the story reaches its exciting climax -- when a health bill gets to conference, that is -- and we see how hard Obama will fight for the cost-control, deficit-controlling side of reform.
But, as with other Obama dualities that have vexed observers from the start (centrist or liberal? conciliator or partisan?), the real answer may be: both.
Obama wants universal health care for its own sake -- what president would want his legacy defined by the crabbed, thankless task of balancing the budget? -- but he also believes it can pave the way to fiscal reform. It's an audacious gamble. But, then, it wouldn't be an Obama movie without one.
Still nothing from murray?
ReplyDeleteGuess he only wanted to talk about me. That is just so sad, here I was hoping he'd contribute, here at the EB, supply us a little pontification of his own.
But he fell short of those hopes and dreams, let alone expectations.
what is a "murry?
ReplyDeleteA murray is a lurker that stopped by a week or so ago to say that the EB was all desert rat, all the time.
ReplyDeleteThat was the gist of his comment, that I pontificated, at length.
He's been invited back, numerous times, to contribute to the noise and confusion. As of yet, murray has demurred from further comment.
Which is just so sad, that the highest priority issue that he had to discuss, was me.
It didn't take the Taliban long to figure out Obamadinejad.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time they were putting in more troops they were talking about wanting to "leave" as soon as possible (perhaps, starting next year.)
If you were the Taliban, what would you do?
Obamadinejad has the "potential" of being a One-Term Wonder. We'll see.
ReplyDeleteI see trish has discovered that there is porn...errrrr....erotica free on the internets but she won't share...
ReplyDeletehmmm...
Hey trish, (or anyone else for that matter) - how come the US military wants/needs 7 bases in Columbia?
I suppose Ash that it makes more sense to have seven in Colombia than it does to have 22 in the UK.
ReplyDeleteunless your goal is to stimulate the economy of one over the other more...
ReplyDelete...then, of course, there is the empire theme - world domination and all. "projecting powa"
ReplyDeleteHey trish, (or anyone else for that matter) - how come the US military wants/needs 7 bases in Columbia?
ReplyDeleteMon Aug 10, 03:08:00 PM EDT
The US has no - let me repeat that: NO - bases in Colombia. None, nada, zip, zilch, squat.
(That's right, ash, trish doesn't do porn. Trish does *erotic literature*. Which is ever so much more tasteful just by the way it sounds.)
(You know. Sounds like something one might major in or gather to discuss over canapes and wine.)
ReplyDeletehehe, yep, literature.
ReplyDeleteI realize that there aren't any bases but it seems that Chavez is getting his knickers in a knot over a proposed 7. I just curious as to what the purpose for such a deployment would be. I read a bit about drug interdiction. I thought you might be privy to some of the reasons.
She sighs.
ReplyDeleteTHERE ARE NO PROPOSALS FOR ANY US BASES IN COLOMBIA. AT ALL. WHATSOEVER. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
(But that's what you get for listening Nutjob.)
(Rather, that's what you get for listening TO Nutjob.)
ReplyDeleteNobody can beat the Italian for beauty of word and sensuale.
ReplyDeletesensuale ~ sensual
pomodoro ~ tomato
amore ~ love
ciao
ninfea ~ waterlily
la costa toscana ~ The Tuscan coast
It's just Chavez yakking?? The NYTimes article had a reference to a Colombian response:
ReplyDelete"Colombian officials say Venezuela has no reason to be concerned, and that the U.S. forces would help fight drug trafficking. The proposed 10-year agreement, they claim, would not push the number of American troops and civilian military contractors beyond 1,400 -- the maximum currently permitted by U.S. law."
I can't say I've read anywhere that the US has denied or confirmed anything regarding the bases - other than your *official* declaration.
interesting.
"I can't say I've read anywhere that the US has denied or confirmed anything regarding the bases"
ReplyDeleteAmb. Brownfield, bless his soul, has to trot himself out every week or so to make the point expressly.
None of the bases are ours. They belong to the Colombians and the Colombians kindly invite us to share in their use, largely because we are working WITH them. We lost the use of an airfield in Ecuador, for instance, and have been graciously allowed the use of a replacement here. The airfield does not belong to us.
"Nobody can beat the Italian for beauty of word and sensuale."
ReplyDeleteOh, I don't know. I think in this genre as in any other, the unique precision and flexibility of English (more synonyms than any other language, by a mile at least) and a cadence which can be endlessly varied, lends itself to some smashing storytelling.
One might ask: Okay, does Chavez know this?
ReplyDeleteTo which would be the response: Does a bear shit in the woods?
Here we go. Ipsnews.net:
ReplyDelete[...]
U.S. Ambassador William Brownfield said Thursday that the U.S. would not be acquiring bases but would merely be gaining increased access to Colombian bases.
Describing the Colombian military as the most "sophisticated" armed forces in Latin America, Brownfield said this country does not need new bases. "They have their bases. This is a question of access."
He said the Colombian government would authorise "each and every mission - 100 percent," and that as Plan Colombia stipulates, "each mission will include a representative of the Colombian government – the police or armed forces – aboard the planes, and the missions will have specific, explicit authorisation from the Colombian government."
Acting Defense Minister General Freddy Padilla, who is the chief of the armed forces, said the air force generals would still be in command at the bases where the U.S. troops will be stationed.
The news that the United States would be shifting its activities from the Manta base in Ecuador to Colombia was confirmed on Apr. 14 by Brownfield during a visit by Uribe to Venezuela.
[...]
Ash
ReplyDeletewhat you get for reading the NYT
That, too.
ReplyDeleteThe difference being, ash, is really who is pulling guard duty on the main gate.
ReplyDeleteLighter footprint, if you do not claim sovereignty over the military installation.
It does not limit operational capacity, except to the limits of manpower. If 1,400 is the max allotment, then you wouldn't want to waste the slots on sentries and supply clerks. The airstrip and warehouse space does not care who claims it.
The more that we can utilize the native equipment, the better, as well.
Keeping that footprint light and the indigs fully engaged.
Proxy warfare. The Russians had it down, the Cubans, not so much.
We'd do better in Afghanistan, long term, if the plan to really arm up the Afpakis was already up and running. Team Bush did not smile upon the natives being fully engaged. That seems evident enough.
Not the case in Colombia, where Team Clinton set the course.
Some strategies succeed, some fail, some just stumble along looking for a goal post, or even a reasonable facsimile.
This is a one minute video that illustrates the nature of the fighting in the flatlands / villages of the '"Green Zone". This is typical of the fighting I observed day after day. We have the firepower. Body armor and gear weigh about 70 pounds per man on patrol. The Taliban gangs have the mobility and concealment. They initiate most firefights. We cannot locate their firing positions with sufficient precision to apply accurate killing fires. This is a serious operational-level issue, not a tactical hurdle. If we cannot fix and finish them, they can choose when to fight and extend the war.
ReplyDeleteBing West.
General Three Stars says the enemy has the inititive, in the midst of a Marine offense into that enemy's heartland. Which he intends to reinforce, sending thousands more troops into the opium fields.
With instructions not to destroy those fields.
That being "counter productive" to the "COIN Operations" in the coming 40 year mission in the pursuit of a stable Afpakistan.
"US efforts to rebuild the [Iraqi security forces]... ... neglected the greatest challenge ... the forces' ability to maintain security upon US withdrawal ..."
ReplyDeleteThis Iraqi fellow that wrote the initial report, Najim Abed al-Jabouri, he does not think the US military succeeded in its' primary strategic mission, in Iraq.
Report Sees Recipe for Civil War in Iraq - Eli Lake, Washington Times.
A report to be published this month by the US government's prestigious National Defense University warns that the Iraqi army and police are becoming pawns of sectarian political parties - a trend that it calls "a recipe for civil war."
The report by Najim Abed al-Jabouri, a former Iraqi mayor and police chief who helped run the first successful counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq after the US invasion, also concludes that US forces have failed to use their remaining leverage as trainers to insulate the Iraqi army and police from the influence of powerful Shi'ite and Sunni Muslim and Kurdish parties.
"US efforts to rebuild the [Iraqi security forces] have focused on much needed training and equipment, but have neglected the greatest challenge facing the forces' ability to maintain security upon US withdrawal: an ISF politicized by ethno-sectarian parties,"
It will be on public display, soon enough.
As successful as was the rush to Baghdad was, the establishment of an Iraqi military in the Turkish model was an abject failure. Turkey being the model of Islamic stability that we are striving to attain, with a mixture of hard and soft power, throughout the Islamic Arc.
The key to that stability, the Turkish Army's defense of the governmental model developed by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.
With Congressional Authorization to train Iraqis, passed in 2000 or '01, the US military has had EIGHT YEARS to stand up an independent Iraqi military.
ReplyDeleteA military that would have been the guarantor of the Iraqi people's liberation by the United States.
An Iraqi military that the US built from scratch, to its' own design specifications.
ReplyDeleteSTANDING UP so that we could stand dowwwwwn.
This is from the NYTimes, some may not want to continue:
ReplyDeleteWASHINGTON — Fifty Afghans believed to be drug traffickers with ties to the Taliban have been placed on a Pentagon target list to be captured or killed, reflecting a major shift in American counternarcotics strategy in Afghanistan, according to a Congressional study to be released this week.
United States military commanders have told Congress that they are convinced that the policy is legal under the military’s rules of engagement and international law. They also said the move is an essential part of their new plan to disrupt the flow of drug money that is helping finance the Taliban insurgency.
In interviews with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is releasing the report, two American generals serving in Afghanistan said that major traffickers with proven links to the insurgency have been put on the “joint integrated prioritized target list.” That means they have been given the same target status as insurgent leaders, and can be captured or killed at any time.
The Dealer network is to be rolled up, but the fields, US built irrigation canals and the poppies all remain.
Tools of reconciliation.
I am really getting the hang of that whole scroll thing. Wow!
ReplyDeleteI really like the way Mr Evans used the word "extra" in regards to those US military personnel.
ReplyDeleteAnother 45,000 US Troops Needed in Afghanistan, Military Adviser Says - Michael Evans, The Times.
The United States should send up to 45,000 extra troops to Afghanistan, a senior adviser to the American commander in Kabul has told The Times.
The adviser, Anthony Cordesman, an influential American academic who is a member of a team that has been advising General Stanley McChrystal.
This Mr Cordesman, he is a known entity to many of US. Some would even consider him to be a reasonable man.
“The insurgents may have lost virtually every tactical clash [against Nato troops], but they have expanded their areas of influence from a presence in some 30 of Afghanistan’s 364 districts in 2003 to one in some 160 districts by the end of 2008, while insurgent attacks increased by 60 per cent during October 2008 to April 2009 alone.
“Nato must change its strategy and tactics after years in which member countries, particularly the United States, failed to react to the seriousness of the emerging insurgency,”
Are the poppie proceeds goiing to be redistributed amongst those in Helamand Valley, or shipped off to Mr Karsai's cronies?
And for the den mother, because I really do care.
ReplyDeleteThe Pain of Being a Redhead, from the NYTimes.
It keeps you commenting, about me, allen. Are you still crusading?
Mark Sappenfield, Christian Science Monitor.
ReplyDeleteNational Security Adviser James Jones asserted Sunday that the Pentagon will require a year to determine whether its Afghan strategy is working. The comment, made on NBC's "Meet the Press," is an indication of how little progress Afghanistan has made under international stewardship since 2001- and the enormity of the task ahead. The top US military officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, called past American neglect toward Afghanistan a "culture of poverty" in a recent meeting with reporters and editors at The Washington Times.
AfPak Daily Brief from ForeignPolicy.com:
ReplyDeleteNo fortunate sons.
Young men who have escaped from Taliban camps tell stories of up to 400 boys, some as young as seven, captured from their homes, trained in spycraft, and indoctrinated with Taliban ideology (Los Angeles Times). While these figures are impossible to verify independently, the camps underline the fact that while this spring's offensive in the Swat Valley has mostly ended, the effects will be felt for some time.
Fifty-nine percent of Pakistanis believe the United States is the greatest threat to Pakistan, according to a survey released by Gallup and al Jazeera over the weekend (Al Jazeera). Only eleven percent thought as much for the Pakistani Taliban.
(AFP) – 3 hours ago
ReplyDeleteWASHINGTON — Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud was killed last week in a CIA drone attack while getting a leg massage, on the roof of his father-in-law's house, CNN said Monday, citing an unnamed US official.
A US counterterrorism official told AFP, meanwhile, that "there are strong indications (Mehsud) is dead" following a drone attack.
"No one is expecting him home for dinner tonight," the official said.
scrolling...scrolling...;-)
ReplyDeleteDoes scrolling rack up points on that big scoreboard in the sky?
ReplyDelete: )
ReplyDeleterat's point about local Colombian bases not requiring sentry's ect. is an interesting one. My gut feeling reading trish's first responses and confirmed by her later citations was that she/US/Colombians was blowing smoke re. the 'new' bases. When is a new base not a new base?
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Colombian Vice Foreign Minister Clemencia Forero denied the agreement means the establishment of U.S. military bases in Colombia.
ReplyDeleteForero said U.S. soldiers to be stationed at Colombian bases are obliged to abide by Colombia's jurisdiction and sovereignty.
Unasur groups 12 countries including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Guyana, Surinam, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela and Ecuador.
Military Agreement
Nobody can beat the Italian for beauty of word and sensuale.
ReplyDeleteLife is a combination of magic and pasta.
-Federico Fellini
---
From a caption on the back side of today's Trader Joe's receipt. Home of Charles Shaw Winery's two-buck-chuck. Never a bad year. From the kitchen counter we're now serving an impertinent Cabernet Sauvignon, 2007. $1.99.
Why pay more?
Bob smiles, wherever he is.
Burma's leader, Senior General Than Shwe, denied a request by the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, to meet Aung San Suu Kyi in prison early this month. The regime claimed, to widespread derision, that it did not want to be seen to be interfering with the judicial process.
ReplyDeleteBan Ki-moon ended his trip to Burma by urging his hosts to allow Aung San Suu Kyi to participate in the political process "without delay".
As today's judgment confirms, it was a demand that Burma's increasingly nervous dictators were never going to honour.
Suu Kyi