May 11, 2009President Barack H. ObamaThe White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Obama:
Like millions of Americans we, the undersigned national security whistleblowers, are inspired by the bold and creative measures you have taken to put people back to work while at the same time re-engineering government to make it more responsive to people’s needs and more accountable to voters and taxpayers.
We are particularly heartened by your special relationship with America’s young people and by your call on them to make a significant contribution to their country through public service.
For those reasons and more, we write you today to ask that you take concrete steps in favor of national security whistleblowers that will help to restore time-honored values of openness, honesty and transparency to the federal service – and help those entrusted with the nation’s secrets to do their jobs in a manner consistent with the public interest.
A call to public service without needed whistleblower protection can only - at some future date - put at risk those most inspired by your leadership. We the undersigned feel we have a special bond with you and your Administration, given your long-standing support for federal employee free speech and against acts of bureaucratic retaliation against those who dare to “commit the truth.” We have been thrilled by your strong statement of support for whistleblowers, both during your presidential campaign and the transition:
Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled as they have been during the Bush administration. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.
In the years before your presidency, each one of us undertook a largely solitary battle in favor of the values we share with you and against the kind of wrongdoing that resulted in many of the American people flocking to your standard last year. And in doing so, each one of us, together with our families, and sometimes our friends and colleagues, have paid a heavy price for our ethical dissent.
The steps we are asking that you take are a necessary remediation for past wrongs and would be a clear signal to those now heeding your call for service that by adhering to the standards you have so clearly embraced, they will not become – as we did not so long ago – victims of bureaucratic wrongdoers, who may still feel that they can get away with continued misdeeds.
As the federal government of necessity grows in response to the many crises that you have inherited from your predecessor, the lack of protection currently afforded to whistleblowers means that federal workers – the front line in the fight against fraud and waste, and best guarantee that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and government works effectively – must either sit on the sidelines or, still forced to look over their shoulders for signs of reprisal, risk their careers.
Not only did the U.S. Office of Special Counsel fall into ridicule under the stewardship of George W. Bush appointee Scott Bloch. In the last nine years, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), charged with adjudicating federal worker claims, has found only one case of illegal retaliation in 56 decisions on the merits. And only three whistleblowers out of 212 prevailed in decisions on the merits in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals since October 1994, when the current whistleblower “protection” law last was modified.
We the undersigned, national security whistleblowers from agencies across the federal government, know the special vulnerability people like us have in trying to do right by our principles and by the country we love. And we still do not have any real safeguards against retaliation. Instead, for protecting this nation, we and others face having our security clearances yanked, as well as a rosary of humiliation, demotions, threats, punitive polygraphs and myriad other intimidatory measures. To be sure, these are meant not only to destroy our careers – and in the process our physical and mental well being, our marriages and the tranquility necessary for nurturing our families in a wholesome environment. They also serve as a warning to others – that the price is high, too high, and the possibility for real vindication remote. Even if Inspectors General, Congressional committees, the reputable news media, or other outside groups are fully able to corroborate our complaints, wrongdoers are mostly allowed to retain their posts - and many even receive promotions.
For all that you have accomplished in little more than 100 days in office, we are sure you would agree that ensuring true transparency and accountability means the enforcement of a zero-tolerance policy for repression and retaliation, and the guaranteeing of the legal rights of every federal employee.
We urgently need a law to protect national security whistleblowers from retaliation, including those in agencies where even paper protections do not exist. We ask you to make one of your highest priorities support for whistleblower protection legislation that would end our second-class status compared to that of all other federal employees, contractors, and private sector workers who report threats to public health and safety, violations of laws or regulations, or waste, fraud and mismanagement. We also ask that you seek the criminalization of bureaucratic retaliation against whistleblowers, whose only “crime” is the exercise of their employee free speech rights for the common good.
Finally, we respectfully request that for those of us who have lost jobs, reputations and significant professional opportunities because we stood fast in favor of the principles you maintained even before you announced your presidential candidacy, consideration be given to “making us whole” once again. In giving us the opportunity to restore our often shattered lives, others will know that better times are in store for people who tell truth to power on behalf of the American people.
With warmest best wishes to your and to your family, we remain,
Martin Edwin Andersen, Former senior advisor for policy planning at the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division; Winner of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel’s 2001 “Public Servant Award”
Mark Danielson, Department of Energy SRT whistleblower
Michael DeKort, Former Lockheed Martin program manager/systems engineer; exposed waste, fraud and abuse on Coast Guard Deepwater program and major security/safety issues
Bogdan Dzakovic, Aviation Security whistleblower regarding the 9-11 attacks, as well as current issues within the Transportation Security Administration
Richard E. Hoskins II, Formerly of the Federal Air Marshal Service; Only Non-Air Marshal to report corrupt behavior and violations of veterans rights to the Office of Special Counsel and Congress
Robert J. MacLean, Former Federal Air Marshal, U.S. Department of Homeland Security/National whistleblower liaison, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA)
Spencer A. Pickard, Federal Air Marshal, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Coleen Rowley, Retired FBI Agent (retired 2004) and former Minneapolis FBI Division Legal Counsel
Craig R. Sawyer, Former Tier-1 level U.S. Navy SEAL Operator, decorated for "Heroic Service" in combat; "Original 33" Air Marshal and whistleblower, as an ATSAIC (manager) in the Federal Air Marshal Service, against gross mismanagement and retaliation.
Lt. Eric N. Shine, Graduate of the United States Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point [1991]; Federal maritime engineering watch officer
George R. Taylor, U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Federal Air Marshal Service
Frank Terreri, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association director of labor relations; FLEOA Federal Air Marshal Agency President
Russell D. Tice, Former intelligence analyst and capabilities operations officer for Special Access Programs (SAP) Information Warfare, National Security Agency (NSA)
(Non-National Security Whistleblower Category)
Peter D. Nesbitt, FAA Whistleblower Alliance
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
Accountability: America's Moral Responsibility to Humanity
Eight years of Republican "leadership" has left America both economically devastated, and globally humiliated. Yet, far from apologizing for the damage that they've done to the stability and image of this great nation, instead, they've circled their wagons and gone into damage control mode–not to control the damage that they've done to the nation, but in an attempt to rewrite history in order to control the damage that they've done to themselves.
So now, as President Obama goes about the business of desperately trying to return America to its former position of economic stability at home, and respect, admiration, and moral authority abroad, the GOP leadership seems to be completely oblivious to the nation's desperate and immediate need for a concerted effort in that regard. They're like clueless children who find it impossible to see the big picture. Thus, at this point it has become abundantly clear that their primary concern is not with restoring America to a sound footing in the world, but rather, simply restoring themselves to power at any cost.
Though the topline numbers in the Obama administration’s national security budget for 2010 may not make headlines, there’s a lot of newsworthy moving and shaking happening beneath the surface. The budget gives the Defense Department $533.7 billion, $20.4 billion more than last year but only a two percent jump when adjusted for inflation. However, President Obama has said several programs are on the chopping block, warning just days ago he would cut “Cold War-era weapons systems we don’t use.” The White House also claims the budget has absorbed some programs funded for the last five years in the wartime supplementals, such as security support for foreign governments and some medical programs. Another $75.5 billion supplemental was also released today, bringing Fiscal Year 2009’s war spending tab to more than $142 billion when combined with the $66 billion supplemental passed last fall. Another $130 billion war funding boost is penciled in for 2010, but the administration says supplementals will eventually be phased out altogether.
The Energy Department’s budget flatlines at $26.3 billion, though nuclear weapons spending is not broken out. Green energy initiatives get a big increase, according to the White House. Nuclear nonproliferation and cleanup programs also get more money, as do programs to extend the life of existing warheads. The Reliable Replacement Warhead—a Bush administration program to rebuild nuclear warheads—is singled out for elimination.
Homeland Security also stays relatively flat at $42.7 billion—only $500 million more than 2009—but the budget brags about more than $100 million in new spending on Transportation Department and Transportation Security Administration programs. The real winner is the State Department, which gets $51.7 million—a 40 percent increase from 2009. Foreign aid is “on a path” to double in size, and global health, USAID and the Foreign Service will all grow. The budget also funds the launch of a new “multi-year counterterrorism and law enforcement assistance program.”
for more information contact Laura Peterson
Enter your Email:
Let’s be honest. We didn’t really expect Congress to come up with a "bold" stimulus plan, did we? But do we agree that NO action will only aggravate our current crisis?
The GOP surprised us when it failed to respond more constructively to the bipartisan overture from Barack Obama. I personally witnessed the precedent-setting bipartisan dinner for his defeated opponent (my photo of the President-elect at the dinner honoring McCain, January 19) and noted the subsequent meetings with Congressional Republicans. And what did we get in the way of proposals from the loyal opposition? More of the dogma-driven, supply-side ideology that contributed to our current mess: tax cuts!
On the other hand, GOP critics have a point: the bill that passed the House and was embraced by Obama essentially is an accumulation of favorite Democratic spending proposals.
What is missing is CHANGE. The CHANGE Obama advocated in his campaign for the Presidency. The CHANGE that won him a resounding mandate to govern for four years. The CHANGE from policies that have worked to benefit few and imperil many. Where are the first steps toward affordable health care, a sustainable green economy and alternative energy? And why are we not moving boldly to address the systemic failures that underlie the current crisis in credit markets?
Obama asked for ideas. And Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, among others, obliged. But what these brilliant men offer is predictable: rationales for orthodox Keynesian solutions and concern about labor market distortions, respectively. More is needed, not just in additional spending, but in fresh ideas that advance the President's policy agenda. So, if suggestions are still welcomed, here is my two-cents worth. And please do keep the CHANGE.
Health Care
Obama has promised the nation affordable health care similar to his own Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), to be available to all by the end of his first term. There is no need to back off this goal. Health care is one of the largest drags on our economy and the stimulus bill provides a real opportunity to begin managing its cost. In addition to the bill’s provisions to help state governments fund Medicare and work projects, I suggest that the federal government reimburse all state and local governments for their employer's share of health care for the rest of this year. In exchange, recipients may not fire government workers and must commit to integrating their health care plans with the existing FEHBP starting in 2010. That provides additional and immediate financial assistance to state and local governments, while paving the way for the establishment of a Public Employees Health Benefits Program. By January 2010, the federal government’s negotiated health care program would expand its base and economies of scale. The next step will be to apply the system to businesses, and subsequently to capture the un- and under-insured.
Energy Independence
Most honest leaders recognize that in due course government will have to produce the substantial additional revenue to pay for the stimulus. But good luck finding a politician willing to propose increasing taxes of any kind. So let me suggest instead a hefty tariff on imported oil to fund the “green economy.” A tariff of 50 percent or more on the landed cost of all imported energy (probably with some form of accommodation for our NAFTA partners) can be justified because of national security as well as the external costs to our environment inherent in the use of fossil fuels. And such a levy would promote conservation, subsidize domestic production, and help to fund and protect our investments in alternative energy. This is a measure that should be welcomed by Republicans who advocate "drill, baby, drill” as well as environmentalists interested in promoting clean energy. The windfall earned by American producers could be invested domestically or taxed as profits. And while there may be a marginal increase of fuel cost at the pump, it will pale in comparison with the amounts we forked over to foreign potentates rather than our own Treasury these past few years, when oil was effectively 200% greater than its current price.
Reestablish a ‘Risk-Free’ Investment Benchmark
Explanations for our current credit crisis and financial market meltdown abound, including the Washington Post's excellent series. But absent from all the expert analyses is any mention of the Treasury Department's October 2001 decision to discontinue issuing 30-year Bonds. That decision, on the heels of 9/11 and the cusp of Bush's costly war on terror, both lowered mortgage yields and prompted increased sales of bundled mortgages marketed as alternative 'risk-free' instruments, which in turn fueled the housing bubble and distorted both government and corporate credit point spreads. Treasury Bond auctions have resumed, but a clear provision to finance America’s recovery through borrowing would repair yield spreads – both between short and long term sovereign debt and in relation to all other debt instruments. Transparent budget financing will help re-establish more realistic risk pricing and global confidence in the US economy. But the 30-year Bond will not regain its position as a benchmark for 'risk-free' long-term investment if Fed meddling in the market, as it proposes to do with its planned purchase of Treasuries from troubled banks. In fact, this central-bankers-gone-wild approach will only create a greater Treasury bubble that will seriously aggravate our problems. Once markets are allowed to properly price the cost and risk of our recovery without Fed manipulation, global confidence in the US economy has a chance to be recover.
So Pay the Bill, and Keep the CHANGE
Barack Obama attended his last inaugural event, the Staff Ball, at the DC Armory on January 21. But he arrived after a performance by the opening act, Arcade Fire. So here are some insightful lysircs from their “Intervention”:
You say it's money that we need As if we're only mouths to feed I know no matter what you say There are some debts you'll never pay
You say it's money that we need
As if we're only mouths to feed
I know no matter what you say
There are some debts you'll never pay
The message is relevant to the stimulus bill now before Congress.
We can act responsibly and cautiously if we:
Pay the Bill and Keep the CHANGE.
According to recent polls, voters believe that solving our energy problem is the nation's second-highest priority. Eighty-two percent think it is “very important.” Only the financial crisis ranks higher in voter concern.
At present, of course, we are highly dependent for energy on imported oil whose price we cannot control. To pay for it, we send vast sums to nations that are not our friends. Even though, the price of oil is relatively low at present,it cannot stay that way, because the world is exhausting the “easy” sources of oil. More oil is available, but in locations and forms that will be increasingly difficult and expensive to obtain.
The National Security and Foreign Affairs (NSFA) sub-committee of Team Obama Hyde Park is engaged in the following: (1. Participating in Camp Hope which is "Organized by a coalition of social justice, religious and peace organizations from the Chicago area, Camp Hope's goal is to remind President-elect Obama of the progressive themes he sounded in his campaign and urge him to follow through with policy changes when he takes office later this month" (http://camphope2009.org/) Among the sessions members are attending are:Discussion Withdrawal of Troops from Iraq; Jan. 7, Myths and Realities about U.S. in Afghanistan; Jan. 10, Witness Against Torture Reform; Jan.11, The Gaza Crisis; Jan. 14. (2. Arranging presentations to community groups of the state of readiness of Hyde Park to respond to a natural or man-made disaster. We will be working with the Red Cross (http://www.usa.redcross.org/) and others with an emphasis on educating the public on preparedness.
Sharon Klopner, Committee Chair
The following regards a local issue with national implications. The shameful saga began in the Reagan Year's, perpetrated by Reagan cronies. The history can be found at www.friendsofwolfcreek.org. In any event, the developer was stopped. Now he is planning his next step ~ I submit it is appropriate for citizens to help inform his thinking............. please read on
Dear Editor,Let me share a few reasons why Red McCombs should abandon his dream of a Village at Wolf Creek and return his ill-gotten parcel of Alberta Park to the Rio Grande National Forest. Thereby leaving a legacy proclaiming: here was a man who learned to appreciate the deeper value of his land, a man who had the insight to see its down to earth necessity for future generations ~ along with the generosity to secure that biological treasure that is Alberta Park for those future generations. > Alberta Park is at 10,000 elevation, it receives some of this country’s biggest snowfalls, it is 200 miles from the nearest large population centers, and thousands from the shrinking money capable of buying into such speculative ventures. > Economic winds have shifted. Current events are proving that the Reaganomics Faith, upon which the Village at Wolf Creek was conceived, is actually an illusion that hides cruel balloon payment liabilities. The Village, in any form, is simply not viable in the coming economic upheaval.> Climatic winds are shifting. Water storage and supply issues are going to take on greater urgency in a drier Southwest. > Alberta Park currently functions as a key component in a vast nearly pristine watershed. A component that serves vital biological, life sustaining functions. Such as holding and filtering water used in countless ways by millions of down stream Rio Grande River stakeholders. It is also a linchpin to wildlife migration. Given the habitat loss this past half century, any remaining parcels we can spare need to be protected - we can’t rebuild them. > Alberta Park: its hydrologic, biologic and wildlife resource’s are worthy of being seen as National Security Items. (For more background on the value of wetlands visit: www.waterinfo.org/ )Today, Red McCombs is back to the starting gate with his VWC development plans. Currently, they remain silent about future strategies - it can be assumed there are discussions about how realistic going ahead is. That means the table is open to suggestions.Regarding Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture, consider this. These people, rather brochures, assure us they can build a viable village, at ten thousand feet, under some of the nations greatest snowfall, along with all the tremendous infrastructure a running town needs. Yet, try finding them in the Yellow Pages, Texas, Colorado, nothing. Look up the Better Business Bureau, nothing. They can be found on the web, but their website is way out of date & no contact address. LMJV seems to be a virtual company. Nothing wrong in that. But, do you want to trust a virtual company to build and maintain your town?If you agree the VWC makes no sense, and if it matters to you. Now is one of those rare moments when some grassroots action could actually make a big difference. Quick, before new commitments are made! Write the man himself. A polite, reasoned, plea, or argument explaining why he should create the Billy Red McCombs Watershed Preserve. ) Since LMJV is elusive here are some addresses that trace to Mr. McCombs himself: McCombs Enterprises755 E Mulberry Ave #100San Antonio, TX 78212210-821-6523Red McCombs Media6207 Sheridan Avenue, Suite 200Austin, Texas 78723 http://www.redmccombsmedia.com/us/contact-usClear Channel200 East Basse RoadSan Antonio, TX 78209lisacdollinger@clearchannel.comImagine if Mr. McCombs received lots of letters lobbying him to establish a wetland - biological preserve - bet it would have an impact. Send a copy to each address. A stitch in time may save nine ;-)printed in the Duragno Telegraph 12-18-8 http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com
Iran ate my Caliphate
Posted on December 16, 2008 by Jeff Huber @ scholarsandrogues
Last week, at a meeting of his country’s ruling party, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak accused Iran of “trying to devour the Arab states.” Don’t worry, Hosni. Iran won’t eat you. It can’t. It can’t sit on you either. It’s too far away.
What led Mubarak to say such a mean thing about Iran? Well, it seems that a bunch of Iranian students shouted a bunch of mean things at the Egyptian embassy in Tehran, including their apparently genuine wish that someone would hang Mubarak. The Iranian students shouted mean things about Mubarak because Egypt wouldn’t let the Iranian Red Crescent sneak around Israel’s blockade of the Gaza strip and deliver food and supplies to Palestinians, who have been reduced to eating grass.........
ENTIRE ARTICLE - http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/12/16/iran-ate-my-caliphate/
Set aside for the moment the fact that more terrorists are being trained by fundamental and radical extremists than now ever before and that there is more support for terrorists among the growing population of fundamentalists and radicals than ever before.
Set aside for the moment the fact that Iran, who was labeled as an Axis of Evil, has greater influence in Iraq and the Middle East now than at any time prior to the War in Iraq.
Set aside for the moment the fact that U.S. foreign aide has been misappropriated and misused by those who received it for purposes of terrorism. The late Mujahideen Commander Nek Mohammed was bribed with U.S. foreign aide money that he requested to repay his loans from al Qaeda. It has been alleged that the attack on an Indian Embassy and perhaps the more recent attacks within India were financed by the Pakistani ISI with U.S. foreign aide.
Set aside for the moment the fact that the threat is greater now than ever that terrorist will acquire multiple nuclear weapons in Pakistan as opposed to just a dirty bomb.
How do the Republican Party and Senator John McCain justify heinous and reprehensible acts by fellow Republicans, which threatened National Security and may have influenced the actions of the White House in an international incident? Notwithstanding the issue of their age and gender, which is made all the more evident by testaments to that individuals frequenting an infamous child bordello in Thailand, how do the Republican Party and Senator John McCain justify a fellow Republican accepting enslaved Thai Prostitutes from the son of a now disgraced communist leader? Did their knowledge of his actions limit the response of his Republican family member during an international crisis? Did their knowledge of his actions limit the response of his Republican family member during a National Security threat? For those who have faith, each persons God's ultimate assesment of our lives occcurs on the day of reckoning. Your god may have had the first of many last laughs on the person who accepted the enslaved Thai Prostitutes, although one must sympathize with his former wife. That person became infected with an incurable sexually transmitted disease.
Indiscretions such as these are generally supposed to be considered a potential threat to National Security when considering others for security clearance, but this has not always been the case. The Department of Defense (DOD), including the military and other federal agencies has overlooked illegal and immoral indiscretions in the past. DOD helped an underage Philippine female immigrate to the United States to marry a former Marine Aviator, who was once employed by the contractor at USAF Plant No. 4 and once in the reserve. When she revealed at a Christmas Party that she was an underage bride, his security clearance was not revoked. DOD, including the USAF, and the Senate Armed Services Committee overlooked the access by employees of the contractor at USAF Plant No. 4 of child pornography on the World Wide Web. They destroyed evidence on individual computers, but they were so ignorant in their obstruction of justice that they forgot to destroy evidence on mainframes and servers. Their security clearances were not revoked. DOD, including the USAF, and the Senate Armed Services Committee ignored visits by defense contractor and some military personnel to child bordellos in South Korea and Thailand among other nations. Some employees openly bragged about their visits to the parlors, which were staffed with underage child prostitutes. Their security clearances were not revoked.
I would not feel safer with Senator John McCain in the White House at any level. He has already demonstrated for me his failure to lead at any level. He has already demonstrated his failure to lead morally. He has already demonstrated his failure to lead in matters of National Security. He has already demonstrated his ability to lead use into the most serious economic crisis of the last 100 years.
I had a dream: We are writing the year 2016, America has left behind the economy crisis of 2008 and developed to a green, social and prosperous society. The unemployment rate is down at 2.3 %, the number of poor people dropped from 37 to 9 million, the national deficit is only a fourth of that in 2008. Every American has affordable health care now, and Obama`s tax cuts have put more money into the pockets of the middle-class American, which led to higher consumption, re-fueled the economy, and created millions of new jobs. Above all 5 million new created green collar jobs and a better, more effective environmental policy with solar, wind and other renewable energies dropped America`s energy bill, air pollution and CO 2 balance by 25%, making the country cleaner and almost independent of foreign oil. America´s is about to become the world leader in green technology, especially due to the broad-scale introduction of US built hybrid cars. In foreign politics America has restored faith and regained respect in the world community of nations as a wise and peaceful mediator in all conflicts. This and other measures also led to an improvement of the national security. The dark Bush years are history and America has made the real CHANGE to a better future - YES WE COULD - And due to the great achievements of Barack Obama`s successful 8 years in national and international politics a committee was founded, proposing the extension of his presidency for 4 more years, as applied during the Roosevelt administration.
Was all of this just a dream ? - No, you can make it happen by voting for OBAMA next Tuesday - It is now up to you, America !
SHOP AMERICA SUPPORTS OBAMA
In an article in yesterday's Detroit Free Press, "Knollenberg pushes [Gary] Peters on what-if vote on bailout," Congressman Joe Knollenberg is quoted as saying, about Alaska Governor Sarah Palin:
"[She] obviously is someone who is very much involved in national security because Alaska touches very closely to Russia."
Now I can understand the governor of Texas knowing something about Mexico, given their long common border, but Alaska and Russia? Is there ferry service across the Bering Straits that I don't know about? Are governors in the chain of command of our federal intelligence agencies?
This shows once again how out-of-touch Joe Knollenberg is. It is time to retire him to Oakland County. I'll be the first to concede that he does know a lot about localities near his home in Bloomfield Township.
Gary Peters is running against eight-term incumbent Joe Knollenberg in Michigan's 9th Congressional district. It is a tight race, and Democrats are hoping to pick up the seat.
After two debates, I wonder how I ever imagined that Senator McCain could lead this country. While I agree with a few points McCain has made where healthcare is concerned, even when I agree with him, I find myself wanting to oppose him. His condescension and ridicule of Senator Obama is so repugnant, that even if I agreed with him on every point, I'd find it difficult to vote for him.
Having said that, I wish Senator Obama would make a few of the most obvious rebuttals of McCain's most egregious charges:
Senator McCain invoked Theodore Roosevelt's famous aphorism: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."The truth is, Senator McCain has been the oracle of tough talk, while his policies have decimated our military, to the point where repeated requests by our commanders in Afghanistan for reinforcements have gone unanswered. McCain criticized Obama for not making a strong enough condemnation of Russia when it invaded the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. Unfortunately, Senator McCain's loud (and some would say blustering) condemnation of the Russian invasion did nothing but underscore the fact that the United States was in no position to do anything about it. Why? If we can't reinforce our own troops in Afghanistan, how could any of the countries neighboring Russia consider relying upon US support for their independence?Senator McCain continues to make the false assertion that Obama won't admit that 'The Surge' was successful.In fact, Senator Obama has acknowledged the success of one of the strategic changes made by our military as part of the so-called 'Surge', namely, allowing our military to pursue what is generally referred to as the "clear and hold" strategy, wherein our troops secure individual urban neighborhoods, and then support Iraqi soldiers who clear their own neighborhoods of insurgents. What Senator McCain doesn't mention (and may not even know) is that this strategy was proposed by our military two years earlier, and overruled by the Commander in Chief, George W. Bush. The reason the Surge was initiated was in response to the massive opposition to President Bush's handling of the war. Senator McCain wants us to believe that he's the only candidate who knows how to win the hearts and minds of the Afghani people, and stabilize that country.In fact, the single biggest factor contributing to the erosion of our position in Afghanistan is that the Afghani people do not believe the Americans will continue to support them in opposition to the Taliban. They have watched us put the Afghanistan campaign on the far back burner while we have poured resources into Iraq. With complete justification, the ordinary Afghani person must be wondering what may happen when the US and NATO forces leave, and they are left to fend for themselves. In a larger sense, McCain's attempts to sell the notion that Senator Obama was wrong on Iraq and naive on foreign policy fly in the face of reality.Obama was right to oppose the initiative in Iraq in 2002, when just about everyone, including McCain supported the idea. Obama was right in 2002 to warn against failing to complete the mission in Afghanistan, and in the last year, the consequences of our failure to follow that advice have elevated the risks to this country immeasurably, both in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We now face the very real risk that Pakistan's government could be taken over by Al Qaeda or a surrogate terrorist organization, and place us in the position of facing a terrorist state with nuclear weapons. As for Iraq, we desperately need to draw down our forces and reduce our expenditures in Iraq in order to reinforce Afghanistan and cope with serious threats to our economy. Notwithstanding that stark reality, McCain refuses to admit the strategic necessity of doing so.Senator McCain keeps asserting that Senator Obama has not done one thing to oppose his own party on any issue.In fact, Senator Obama introduced a bill in 2006, and then re-introduced an even stronger bill in 2007 which directly and specifically confronted the reckless practices which were at the heart of the sub-prime mortgage crisis. It never came to a vote. What did Senator Obama do about it? He ran for President, and wrested the leadership of the Democratic party from the Clintons. If that doesn't count as opposing the entrenched power structure of his party, what does?
Senator McCain invoked Theodore Roosevelt's famous aphorism: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."
The truth is, Senator McCain has been the oracle of tough talk, while his policies have decimated our military, to the point where repeated requests by our commanders in Afghanistan for reinforcements have gone unanswered. McCain criticized Obama for not making a strong enough condemnation of Russia when it invaded the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. Unfortunately, Senator McCain's loud (and some would say blustering) condemnation of the Russian invasion did nothing but underscore the fact that the United States was in no position to do anything about it. Why? If we can't reinforce our own troops in Afghanistan, how could any of the countries neighboring Russia consider relying upon US support for their independence?
Senator McCain continues to make the false assertion that Obama won't admit that 'The Surge' was successful.
In fact, Senator Obama has acknowledged the success of one of the strategic changes made by our military as part of the so-called 'Surge', namely, allowing our military to pursue what is generally referred to as the "clear and hold" strategy, wherein our troops secure individual urban neighborhoods, and then support Iraqi soldiers who clear their own neighborhoods of insurgents. What Senator McCain doesn't mention (and may not even know) is that this strategy was proposed by our military two years earlier, and overruled by the Commander in Chief, George W. Bush. The reason the Surge was initiated was in response to the massive opposition to President Bush's handling of the war.
Senator McCain wants us to believe that he's the only candidate who knows how to win the hearts and minds of the Afghani people, and stabilize that country.
In fact, the single biggest factor contributing to the erosion of our position in Afghanistan is that the Afghani people do not believe the Americans will continue to support them in opposition to the Taliban. They have watched us put the Afghanistan campaign on the far back burner while we have poured resources into Iraq. With complete justification, the ordinary Afghani person must be wondering what may happen when the US and NATO forces leave, and they are left to fend for themselves.
In a larger sense, McCain's attempts to sell the notion that Senator Obama was wrong on Iraq and naive on foreign policy fly in the face of reality.
Obama was right to oppose the initiative in Iraq in 2002, when just about everyone, including McCain supported the idea. Obama was right in 2002 to warn against failing to complete the mission in Afghanistan, and in the last year, the consequences of our failure to follow that advice have elevated the risks to this country immeasurably, both in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We now face the very real risk that Pakistan's government could be taken over by Al Qaeda or a surrogate terrorist organization, and place us in the position of facing a terrorist state with nuclear weapons.
As for Iraq, we desperately need to draw down our forces and reduce our expenditures in Iraq in order to reinforce Afghanistan and cope with serious threats to our economy. Notwithstanding that stark reality, McCain refuses to admit the strategic necessity of doing so.
Senator McCain keeps asserting that Senator Obama has not done one thing to oppose his own party on any issue.
In fact, Senator Obama introduced a bill in 2006, and then re-introduced an even stronger bill in 2007 which directly and specifically confronted the reckless practices which were at the heart of the sub-prime mortgage crisis. It never came to a vote. What did Senator Obama do about it? He ran for President, and wrested the leadership of the Democratic party from the Clintons. If that doesn't count as opposing the entrenched power structure of his party, what does?
The subtext of Senator McCain's obvious frustration at having to cope with 'that one' (Senator Obama), is that anyone who takes the Obama candidacy seriously is naive, or stupid, or just plain foolish. As one who was a supporter of Senator McCain less than a year ago, I do feel foolish, just not anymore.
Sen. Obama:
Like most Americans, I have much to lose too, however, I am willing to risk another week (heck, GOP shut down the government in the 90’s and we all survived) of potential loss while you craft a plan that will:
1. Give no additional autonomy or authority to the Executive Branch, that’s right, the Treasury Secretary can't make unilateral decisions.....PERIOD non-negotiable
2. Regulate the Banking, Financial and Insurance industries so that each is separate and distinct from the other with uncomplicated accountability.
3. No "trickle down" solutions with regard to the insertion of the $700B into the economy.
4. Every legal US citizen who filed a 2003-2007 income tax return and who is 21 years of age or older as of July, 30th 2008 (rough estimate 200 million qualifiers) receive a stimulus check.
5. The "stimulus check" will be governed with the following provisions:
a. any outstanding mortgage the recipient has is satisfied.
b. 25% of any remaining stimulus money must be used by individual to buy Treasury Bonds, which are unredeemable for 1st 72 months. (yes, a 5 year comittment to our country)
c. 10% must be deposited in a local bank or credit union chosen at the discretion of the stimulus recipient. 5yr CD or Passbook Account w/o interest for initial 12 months.
d. any remaining money from the stimulus (which should be very substantial) may be use for satisfaction of any consumer debt, new tires for car, health insurance, investment, vacation, braces for the kids, college...all the kinds of things that we are struggling to afford.
Finally, the amount of the stimulus check to each of the roughly 200 million potential qualifiers shall be computed and distributed as follows:
1. each qualified recipient receives an equal share of the proposed $700 Billion.
2. 22% Federal and 8% State "re-stimulus" withheld from each check to infuse each of the 50 capitals in the nation and the US Treasury too.
Predicted/Desired Result:
1. Public confidence in our government instantly restored.
2. Banks remain operational.
3. Restored confidence ameliorates any further irrational slippage in markets.
4. Mortgage notes paid off by home owners alleviates the mortgage insurance debt that has been passed around the financial community like a rotten fish wrapped in bacon.
5. Financial predators’ and scoundrels and robber barons accept the fundamentals of the risk they assumed as a result of the deregulation they desired and fought for; crafting ever more complex means of creating personal wealth; there will be winners and losers amongst these miscreants and that’s their row to hoe.
Finally, any remaining stimulus money held by the 200 million recipients of this package will, you can be sure, be spent in a variety of ways and to this end we will have to pray and hope that Jefferson is correct (Tocqueville too) that Americans are smart, industrious and capable.
Thanks for your efforts and please know this; Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi are in receipt of this (my proposal) which is a way out and a way up and over for you and our team.
Patriotically,
Michael J. Arendt
Fresh Meadows NY
Over the weekend, in a lead up to tonight’s first presidential debate, which will focus on foreign policy, Barack Obama’s Minnesota campaign held four town hall meetings across Minnesota to hear directly from Minnesotans about their views and answer questions on national security issues.
The campaign held town halls in Rochester, St. Paul, St. Cloud and Duluth.
U.S. Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), chair of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, retired U.S. Army Major General Paul Eaton, who commanded the team charged with rebuilding the Iraqi army, and former Ambassador Bob Gelbard, President Clinton's Special Representative for the Balkans led the meetings.
U.S. Rep. Tim Walz and U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum also joined the campaign for portions of the tour.
Here are some pictures from the St. Paul Town Hall, which was held at the History Center:
John McCain: Surely by now you recognize that America, and the world, is in deep trouble. The stewardship of our economic security, our national security, of our environmental security, our direction as a nation and as a people has been so disastrous that even the Bush backers see it. You have tried to recast yourself as a maverick after 8 years of casting yourself as a Bush backer and casting 90% of your Senatorial votes for George Bush's positions. If I do the math, and seeing that George Bush has been wrong about almost everything (I'll leave that to be self evident), that leaves 10% of you that pushes for change, to make the wise choices. That's a 10% solution to attack 100% trouble that is evident with just about every issue that might come up. John McCain, I do believe you'd be better than George Bush, at least 10% wise.
Barack Obama: All that said, remember how George Bush went into auto-pilot as soon as he stepped into the Oval Office? Remember how he didn't even examine the Clinton record and just ordered his people to do everything opposite, to abandon what was in progress, to undo the Clinton achievements? On North Korea nukes (the result: N Korea now has nukes), on Palestine/Israel conflict (result: Hamas is now in power), on Iraq policy (result: an intractable war, a booming U.S. budget deficit, and an empowered Iran), on protections against arsenic and air pollution (result: more allergies to airborne vectors, more asthma, more emphysema, more work time made unproductive, more cancers, more needless deaths), on control of global warming and fossil fuels combustion (result: more oil addiction, more reliance on adversaries, higher trade imbalance, more enrichment of al Qaeda and Hugo Chavez, a more aggressive Russia, higher gas prices, more and increasingly destructive storms and coastal erosion and flooding, more climatic upheaval and agricultural impacts), on logging our old growth national forests and reducing endangered species protection (less splendor, less natural treasure preserved), on social security (result: more insecurity, decreased well being of our seniors), on government balance of spending and income (result: ballooning budget deficit and reduced options for infrastructure improvements and other needs), on just about any issue you can name. On these issues there was pretty much no review of what was actually solid and positive about the Clinton record; there was just a knee-jerk action belying the Bush team's misunderstanding of the world's people, the economy, limits of military technology, and elementary physics. So they just did opposite Clinton or undid what he did; that was their policy, until 9/11 came along, and then they could think of nothing else, they ignored all the other looming troubles, and they didn't even see that other actions undermined the steps they took to try to get al Qaeda, to fight nuclear proliferation, and to make the world safe for Capitalism. We have some very serious undoing to do, but I urge that decisions to undo will be based on a serious level of review and a consideration of repercussive effects of changing course. There are many things to do and push forward on, and those can be pursued right away, without delay, within the fiscally handicapped condition Bush is handing you. In terms of the undoing, review is a good thing, if simply to establish the solid basis for undoing and to identify potential unintended consequences.
Join us on Friday, September 26, 2008, during the first presidential debate for the debut of Blue Star Families for Obama live blogging!
Blue Star Families for Obama leadership members will be on hand to share their perspective during the debate and military family members and veterans are welcome to stop by and share their thoughts as well. The focus of the first debate is national security, so we'd love to hear from all of you.
To join in, simply go to our new website:
Blue Star Families for Obama and click on Blog.
We'll be live blogging from 8pm EST until the debate ends and our conversation winds down.
We hop you'll join us!
Invitation and details.
