SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FJB who wrote (44355)8/2/2010 11:53:21 AM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
Will Dems Run Away From "President O'Carter"?


ROTFLOL That is great. It appears they already are.



To: FJB who wrote (44355)8/3/2010 8:13:33 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
Obama is also pulling equipment and bases from Iraq

Aug 03, 2010
06:00 AM
The Oval - tracking the Obama Presidency
USA Today
content.usatoday.com

The Obama administration isn't just cutting the number of troops from Iraq.

The amount of equipment and number of bases in Iraq are also shrinking as the U.S. prepares to end combat operations this month and have all troops out of the country by the end of next year.

The White House has provided details of the drawdown:

Troops and Change of Mission

When President Obama took office in January 2009, there were 144,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. At his Camp Lejeune speech on February 27, 2009, President Obama announced that the United States would end its combat mission on August 31, 2010, and retain a transitional force of up to 50,000 U.S. troops to train and advise Iraqi Security Forces; conduct partnered and targeted counter-terrorism operations; and protect ongoing U.S. civilian and military efforts.

- By January 2010, there were 112,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. By the end of May 2010, that number had been reduced to 88,000. General (Ray) Odierno made the decision in May 2010 that positive developments in the security sector permitted the drawdown to go forward as planned. The final tranche of the drawdown to reach the President's commitment to end combat operations began in earnest in June 2010. By the end of August 2010, the number of U.S. troops in Iraq will be further reduced to 50,000. On August 31, Operation Iraqi Freedom will end. The transitional mission will be called Operation New Dawn. Consistent with our agreements with the Iraqi government, all U.S. troops are scheduled to leave Iraq by the end of 2011.

- There are currently 665,000 Iraqi Security Forces who have been leading the effort to secure Iraq since June 2009, when U.S. troops repositioned outside of Iraqi cities. Even as terrorists have sought to exploit the period of government formation that has followed Iraq's successful election, security incidents remain near the lowest level since we've been keeping records. Since the beginning of this year, the U.S. and Iraqi military partnership has resulted in the death or arrest of more than 30 members of the top leadership of al-Qai'da in Iraq.

- The reduction in troops does not mean a reduction in the U.S. commitment to Iraq – it means a change in the nature of our commitment from one led by the military to one that is civilian-led. The transitional force that we will have in place can continue to support Iraqi Security Forces. And we will strengthen the U.S. and Iraqi partnership in fields such as education, the rule of law, trade and technology. To guide the expansion of our relationship, the United States and Iraq signed a Strategic Framework Agreement, which specifies areas for dialogue, exchanges, links, and the transfer of expertise.

Equipment

By the end of August 2010, U.S. Forces in Iraq will reduce the total number of equipment in Iraq from 3.4 million pieces in January 2009 to a total of 1.2 million pieces, which are required to support the remaining troops which will be organized six Advise and Assist Brigades plus enablers. Lieutenant General William Webster, who commands the Third Army and is overseeing the drawdown, said "This is the largest operation, that we've been able to determine, since the build-up for World War II."

- The equipment is being moved to one of three places in priority order: to U.S. troops fighting in Afghanistan, to replenish U.S. military stocks, and to Iraqi Security Forces to ensure they have the minimum essential capability to handle Iraq's security. Most of the troops and equipment are being transported out of Iraq through Kuwait, although Jordan and Turkey are also permitting transit.

- The Army has dubbed the combined drawdown in Iraq and reinforcement in Afghanistan "Nickel II." The name plays off the Third Army's role in World War II, when General Patton ordered a dramatic turnabout to attack the Germans during the Battle of the Bulge. Patton called his operation "Nickel."

Bases

As part of the drawdown in Iraq, U.S. forces are also closing or transferring military bases in Iraq.

- In June 2009, U.S. Forces occupied 357 bases. U.S. Forces currently occupy 121 bases, and are expected to reduce that number to 94 bases by the end of August.

The Big Picture: U.S. troops "Boots on the Ground" (BOG) in Iraq and Afghanistan

Several facts illustrate both the size and scope of the drawdown, and the shift in focus as we end the war in Iraq, and focus on al Qaeda and Afghanistan.

- In January 2009, there were about 177,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan: 144,000 in Iraq and 33,000 in Afghanistan. In July 2010, there are about 169,000: 81,000 in Iraq and 87,000 in Afghanistan. In September 2010, there will be about 146,000: 50,000 in Iraq and 96,000 in Afghanistan. So even with the surge in Afghanistan, the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan will have been reduced from 177,000 to roughly 146,000. In addition to those on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are about 28,000 U.S. service-members deployed supporting Iraq and 17,000 supporting Afghanistan. They are deployed in other locations, such as Kuwait, Qatar, and afloat in the Persian Gulf.

- The drawdown of U.S. forces from Iraq since January 2009 comprises roughly three times as many troops as the President ordered to Afghanistan last December.

(Posted by David Jackson)



To: FJB who wrote (44355)8/6/2010 10:37:50 AM
From: Peter Dierks1 Recommendation  Respond to of 71588
 
This Year May Mirror Dems' Setback in '66
Michael Barone, Washington Examiner
August 4, 2010

Everybody, even White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, agrees that Republicans are going to pick up seats in the House and Senate elections this year. The disagreement is about how many.

Some compare 2010 to 1994, when Republicans picked up 52 House seats and won majorities in both houses of Congress for the first time in four decades. That was a reaction to the big government programs of the first two years of the Clinton administration.

Others compare this year to 1982, when Democrats picked up 26 House seats and recaptured effective control of the House two years after Ronald Reagan was elected president. That was a recession year, with unemployment even higher than it is now.

Let me put another off-year election on the table for comparison: 1966. Like 1994, this wasn't a year of hard economic times. But it was a year when a Democratic president's war in Asia was starting to cause unease and some opposition within his own party, as is happening now.

And it was a year of recoil against the big government programs of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. The 89th Congress, with 2-1 Democratic majorities, had passed Medicare, federal aid to education, anti-poverty and other landmark legislation.

Democrats only failed, as they have in this Congress, to pass organized labor's top priority: then repealing section 14(b) which allowed state right-to-work laws, now the card check bill to effectively eliminate the secret ballot in unionization elections.

In 1966, Republicans gained a net 47 seats in the House. That left Democrats with a 246-187 majority but without effective control. That's because 95 of those Democrats were from the South (defined as the 11 Confederate states plus West Virginia, Kentucky and Oklahoma) and almost all voted conservative on most issues.

Republicans actually won the popular vote for the House in the North (defined as the other 36 states) by a 51 percent to 48 percent majority. They have only done so since in three elections, in 1968 (a virtual carbon copy of 1966 in House races), in their breakthrough year of 1994 and in the post-9/11 year of 2002.

Current polling data suggests that Republicans have a chance of doing so once again in 2010. The realclearpolitics.com's average of recent generic ballot polls -- which party's candidate for the House would you vote for? -- shows Republicans ahead by a historically unprecedented margin of 46 percent to 40 percent.

If those numbers hold, and if they turn out to underpredict Republican performance in the popular vote, as they have in the past, that could mean that Republicans would win a popular vote plurality or majority in the North. Those are two significant ifs, but they're possible.

There is not much doubt about which party will lead in the South. Back in 1966, the South elected only 29 Republican House members (including future President George H. W. Bush) to 95 Democrats. Democrats led in the popular vote there by a 63 percent to 36 percent margin.

In 1992, as Bush was getting thumped in the presidential election, Republicans won a higher percentage of the House popular vote in the South than the North for the first time since Reconstruction. In 1994, they carried the popular vote in the South by 55 percent to 43 percent. They have carried it ever since, even in 2008 when Barack Obama brought out unprecedented numbers of black voters in the South.

Republicans currently hold an 82-to-63 edge in Southern House seats, with eight Democratic-held seats rated likely or leaning Republican by realclearpolitics.com and another 11 Democratic-held Southern seats rated as toss-ups. And 15 more are in play, rated as likely or leaning Democratic.

So Republicans could easily gain 20 seats in the South. But they could gain even more in the North if current numbers hold up.

In 2008, Democrats won the popular vote in the North by 57 percent to 40 percent -- roughly comparable to their lead way back in 1964, the year of Lyndon Johnson's landslide.

If the popular vote in the North should turn out to go narrowly Republican, as it did in 1966, it could be disaster for Democrats. They lost a net 38 seats in the North that year, when they held just about as many seats Northern seats as now. Not a happy scenario for Democrats. But not out of the realm of possibility.

Michael Barone, The Examiner's senior political analyst, can be contacted at mbarone@washingtonexaminer.com. His columns appear Wednesday and Sunday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

washingtonexaminer.com



To: FJB who wrote (44355)9/21/2010 2:37:32 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
Chris Matthews: ‘We Rely on’ Media Matters
by Tommy Christopher
8:34 am, September 21st, 2010

Right near the end of a segment examining the continued relevance of Newt Gingrich, Hardball host Chris Matthews made a comment that probably seemed offhand to most viewers, but not all. In a modern media warscape that has each side out to convince itself of the sinister, conspiratorial bias of the other, Matthews’ comment to left-wing Media Matters senior fellow Eric Boehlert regarding the media watchdog, to keep posting the information because “we rely on it,” probably set off blaring sirens at the media watchdog Media Research Center.

In the eyes of the non left-wing media, you would be hard-pressed to find three more suitable bogeymen than Matthews (forever tarnished for enjoying an Obama speech), Eric Boehlert (the Anti-Breitbart), and “lefty” cable news network MSNBC, and this clip deliciously combines them.

HTPD

mediaite.com

See the video clip at the site.