Govt Watch: Obama File – December 3rd 2009

After procrastinating for about three months, President Obama finally committed to the request of General McChrystal and his request for more troops, but fell short by increasing troops to 30,000 instead of 45,000 (minimum) to 80,000.

President Obama, in his speech, announced to the world that 30,000 troops would join those already in operation in Afghanistan and soon after also announced that a withdrawal date was set, keeping in tune with his political party instead of proper decisions made by a commander-in-chief. The withdraw date: July 2011. Experts say this does not only provide enough time to train and equip the Afghan National Army to reach a level of proficiency to stave off the Taliban and other Islamic Fascists, but it provides (once again) a message of hope and morale support and providing a psychological advantage to the enemy.
Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is to travel sometime at the end of this week to Brussels to meet with NATO Foreign Ministers in an attempt to get additional troops from our allies. Since President Obama didn’t meet the level of additional troops asked for by General McChrystal and adding a deadline to the deal, it may cause allies to resist sending more troops as they did when GW Bush was president.
Whatever be the case, I hope the plan succeeds and wish the best for our troops in winning the Afghanistan part of fighting global Islamic Fascism.
In July of 2009, 56% in a Gallup poll approved of President Obama’s handling of Afghanistan and currently dropped to 36% (November 2009).
Chuck Norris has a question about this topic:

How is it that President Barack Obama fast-tracks borrowing, bailouts and Obamacare but is slower than molasses when it comes to decisions regarding the military — especially this one, seeing as he basically is returning to Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s 3-month-old solution?

Yes, Indeed, Mr. Norris how is it so?

Meanwhile, usual horse dung comes from MSNBC out of the mouth of Chris Matthews who described the visit by President Obama to the United States Military Academy at West Point as a visit to the enemy camp. When are the American people going to censure and boycott the socialist traitor? Chris Matthew quote:

President Obama went to maybe the enemy camp tonight to make his case. I mean, that’s where Paul Wolfowitz used to write speeches for, back in the old Bush days. That’s where he went to rabble rouse the ‘we’re going to democratize the world’ campaign back in ’02. So, I thought it was a strange venue.

Other than stating later that maybe he used the wrong phrase – no apology was provided by Mr. Matthews.

One of the media’s least accurate tropes is that, with the President’s speech last night, Afghanistan is now ‘Obama’s war.’ No, it isn’t. Nations go to war, not merely Administrations, and President Obama’s commitment of 30,000 more troops to that Southwest Asian theater is a national investment in blood and treasure on behalf of vital U.S. security interests. We support Mr. Obama’s decision, and this national effort, notwithstanding our concerns about the determination of the President and his party to see it through. Now that he’s committed, so is the country, and one of our abiding principles is that nations should never start (much less escalate) wars they don’t intend to win.

The full transcript of President Obama’s long-delayed speech on Afghanistan is here. You can watch it in full here. Bush-bashing? Check. Noxious complaining about the cost of fighting a necessary war? Check. Disingenuous denial that he dithered? Check. ‘Let me be clear’s = 9. Self-congratulations for sticking to Gitmo closure policy = 1. Self-referential ‘As your Commander-in-Chief’s = 2. References to global jihad = 0.

The issue isn’t whether a war is popular: either it has to be fought or it doesn’t. It is a president’s duty to define the war and lead the nation to victory. And if a war is worth one American life, it is — by definition — worth however many dollars it takes to win. Domestic spending must be curtailed to fund a war, not the other way around.

Ralph Peters may have hit upon one of the reasons why American public approval of President Obama’s actions had declined …

Strategic success isn’t Obama’s ultimate concern. He wants political cover and is doing all he can to ensure that he’s not on the blame-line, no matter what happens. He wants to appear strong — but without unleashing our strength. He’ll send more troops — but won’t let them do more.

James Jay Carafano, Heritage Foundation …

The blunt truth is: The United States needs to win in Afghanistan. Defeating the Taliban and destroying al-Qa’ida is in our vital interests. It is the price of peace in South Asia. It is the only way to prevent another 9/11. By dedicating the resources needed to win and by getting our fiscal house in order, we can keep our nation safe, free and prosperous. Any other talk is just politics.

Just months after President Obama fired the CEO for government-owned General Motors, Fritz Henderson, currently GM CEO, resigned this week.

The state tends to expand in proportion to its means of existence and to live beyond its means, and these are, in the last analysis, nothing but the substance of the people. Woe to the people that cannot limit the sphere of action of the state! Freedom, private enterprise, wealth, happiness, independence, personal dignity, all vanish. Frederic Bastiat, French economist, 1801-1850.

Arnold Ahlert, columnist, wrote …

How many times has a liberal touted this or that government agenda with the idea that they’re doing it ‘for the children?’ When more Americans begin to understand that the more accurate phrase it ‘to the children,’ it will be the beginning of the end for these power-hungry thugs. Here’s hoping it happens sooner rather than later. 

The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insaneMarcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor, 121-180 AD

Here are some words of wisdom from the socialist fanatic, Helen Thomas, Queen of Propaganda (pictured left), who makes the Wicked Witch in the Land of Oz look like a beauty queen:

Who would deny health care to all Americans? Well, there are a lot of those folks in Congress, including nearly all Republican lawmakers, none of whom have rejected their own generous government health care plans. The United States is the only country in the developed world that does not provide affordable health care for all its citizens.

Looking at the female lineup from the American political scene, depicted in the following snapshots:
 General Reno (Waco, Ruby Ridge, Gonzalez Boy, Red-Light Lesbian District)

 Hillary Rodham-Clinton (Bill got to her)

 Michelle Obama – authoritative

 Katie Couric, Night Out

 Nancy Pelosi (before or during face job)

Do you feel the need to call in an Exorcist?
One can readily see that when it comes to good looks, American Patriots are the winners:
 Sarah Palin

 Katherine Harris

 Sue Lowden

 Ann Coulter – letting off steam at firing range

 Michelle Malkin

 Star Parker {love the new braided look)

Even on a casual day at the firing range.

Who can say grassroot conservatives do not represent diversified ethnicity in America – as Americans, not multicultural misfits?
[Idea of the photo comparison came from an email from Friend of LPJ, Joan Bartelson, who is the biggest contributor to the Light Side of the Lighthouse humor department.]
One last quote (well, a couple) from the voice of Leftist propaganda and who seems to be disenchanted or just amazed, can’t tell, Katie Couric at CBS:

Although President Obama has been in office less than a year, many Americans are growing disenchanted with his handling of the enormous problems he and the country are facing, from health care to unemployment to Afghanistan. His poll numbers are sliding, and at least one poll shows his job approval rating has fallen, for the first time, below 50 percent.

And, also at CBS, Chip Reid:

The American people are increasingly questioning the president’s credibility. He says the stimulus has saved or created 640,000 jobs, but only 7 percent of Americans believe it has created any. And he’s repeatedly promised health care reform will not increase the deficit, but a mere 19 percent believe him.

Or how about John Dickerson, CBS News …

People want something to be done about the deficit, and here he’s talking about spending a trillion more dollars.

I guess, as Hollywood folks know well – fame is fickle.
New Gingrich, concerning the job creation promise of B.H. Obama:

As the Obama Administration convenes with the so-called “experts” in Washington, how many in the White House have actually created a job? … After 10 months and the authorization of $787 billion in government spending, the economic policies of the White House and the Democratic Congress have failed. 15.7 million Americans are out of work, 3.2 million of them since the stimulus was first passed in February. Unemployment, at 10.2 percent, is higher than the President promised it would be if he did nothing. The Obama-Pelosi-Reid economic policies are hurting, not helping. … The mainstream media roll their eyes and laugh at the term, but the Obama-Pelosi-Reid economic policies are genuinely secular-socialist policies. Their central purpose is not to create wealth but to redistribute wealth. The problem is this big government, high taxing, big bureaucracy and politician driven model simply does not work to create jobs. It was the model of the United States in the 1970s and the model of Europe today. It has never worked anywhere to create jobs and wealth, and it won’t work here. 

As the Obama-Pelosi-Reid machine attempts to force its secular-socialist model on Americans in the form of job-killing health, energy, and big labor legislation, American small business people are crying out for a very different set of solutions. … They are the solutions of Ronald Reagan and the Contract with America. Reduced taxes to spur jobs and investment. Controlled government spending to favor entrepreneurs over bureaucrats. Reduced regulation and litigation to produce jobs and create wealth.

Wealth, like government, is to be created and maintained By the People and For the People. It is not the job of those elected to operate our government to create wealth for the government, but control spending and use funding provided frugally. Government has no right taking your earned funds before you even see them – make April 14th be just another day and keep government out of your paychecks – insist that the 16th Amendment be repealed and replaced with a flat consumption tax whose rate is no more than 15% and can be raised only with two-thirds vote in Congress.
I guess some Americans are finally seeing just what kind of CHANGE B. H. Obama had in mind. Clearly it can be seen that American voters were not concerned with the details.
The legacy that Mr. Obama will leave behind is what not to do if you are President of the United States.
Now, what was that again about a candidate’s association and character doesn’t count?