On ThursdayBarack Obama asked Congress to increase the Defense Budget by an additional 83.4 billion; which brings the total 2009 military budget to approximately $150 billion dollars, down from 188 billion in 2008.
Obama plans to increase troop levels in Afghanistan from 38,000 to 60,000 and give the Pentagon requested funds to overall increase the overall armed forces to 547,000 plus active duty personnel.
John Boehner, Republican House Leader, indicated that the GOP members would support the request, although he placed a caveat on that announcement – Democrats are historically prone to manage war efforts and funding; in effect hamstringing military efforts through the use of timelines.
The most interesting aspect of this particular request to Congress will be the reaction of those Democrats who supported Obama as an anti-war candidate, including the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi released the following statement after receiving Obama’s request:
“Pelosi said Congress would carefully review Obama's request and "engage in a dialogue with the administration on appropriate benchmarks to measure the success of our investments."
In this simple statement, one can surmise that: “Carefully Review” does not meet the President’s request for quick and speedy cooperation, and may also include earmarks which he specifically indicated should not be attached to this particular bill. Additionally, the “diaglogue with the administration on appropriate benchmarks”, would indicate the usual timelines and other restrictions common with the leftist in the Party ultimately forcing the GOP to back off of support for the bill.
Within the past month, North Korea launched a long-range missile, which drew the strongest criticism within the current administration from Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. In addition, the drug cartels and violence on the U.S. and Mexico border has reached critical proportions – the State Department issued a travel alert. Just this week, Somali Pirates ( Who are not officially linked to terrorists) hijacked an American Flagged Ship, and are currently holding the Captain Hostage. Obama has remained quiet on the subject, while Hillary Clinton is releasing statements and keeping the press informed. In the case of the 3AM phone call, directly following, Obama contacted his staff, while Clinton made the calls to U.N. Security Council During the primary challenges, Clinton warned there would be days like this, giving rise to speculation that the President may lack ability to deal with the world violence that has increased since January.
Perhaps, that may be part of the reason, this anti-war Candidate – Obama, suddenly finds it necessary to take a rather hawkish stance through the increase military funding. The questions now remain; will Pelosi cooperate with both the President and the GOP in crafting a bill that will be earmark and restriction free? Will Obama begin to speak out strongly on the attacks on American interests and the threats from nations such as North Korea, or will Clinton continue to prove to be the “strong arm” of the administration? Finally, with the Presidents “strongly approves” continue its downard spiral - currently dwindling to a mere 34 percent.
A side note:
Obama’s approvals may only decrease, as the President plans to push for very controversial immigration reform, in hand with the Senate , which on Thursday introduced legislation that would grand conditional citizen ship to illegal immigrants. Currently, 74% polled (crossing party lines) are in favor of increased border security.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Duval Patrick - Tax Hikes - Massachusetts Legislature Weighs How Many More The Can People Bear
Mass. Gov. Duval Patrick with Obama - image Boston.com
Massachusetts GovernorDuval Patrick has requested that the Legislature impose a plethora of new taxes on the Commonwealth, yet legislators are beginning to balk at imposing an additional tax burden on the citizens of the State. With a dwindling tax base and an increasing budget deficit due, in part, to the insatiable state-mandated health care reform the debts from the corruption ridden “Big Dig” and the Governor’s decision to hire high priced State personnel, the Governor is at a loss as to how to increase revenues without making budget cuts – the answer – taxes.
Patrick has suggested imposing a .19 cent per gallon additional gas tax, which is still under consideration, increases in the States Registry Fees and at least 3 other taxes, designed to close the budget gap. Legislatures, in fear of being ousted, are considering budget cuts. Patrick, who is apparently oblivious to the recent polls suggesting that his approval rating is far from stellar, is continuing to suggest new ways to tax the Commonwealth out of existence.
With increasingly vocal Republican State Senate members, in concert with Republican Chair, Jennifer Nassour, the pressure is on the administration and the Democratic Legislators to pull the plug on taxes and seriously consider reform – or face defeat in 2010. The solution as far as the legislator is concerned:
“You're not going to get people to vote on four or five different taxes," said Representative Daniel Bosley, a Democrat from North Adams. "People can't feel like we're raising taxes on them every week. You need . . . to do this one time." Should the legislator take a clue from Mr. Bosley, the backlash would be substantial – any increase in taxes during a recession is political suicide. "Yes We Can" elect a new Govenor.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Analysis - It’s all about perception – Obama Supporters Concered About Domestic Impact of recent Euro Tour
An article from the Los Angeles Times suggests that some of Obama’s supporters may perceive his recent tours overseas as a disconnect with the problems of regular Americans. On the one hand, they worry that his continual travel (he’s off to the Caribbean and Mexico next week), might upset those who feel there is more need for the president to stay put while the country is in an ever deepening cycle of economic misery (see Carter), while on the other hand, Obama is restoring the Worlds appreciation of America.
One must understand that it is the President’s job (or, more appropriately, the Secretary of State), to meet with his international counterparts from time to time; whether it be for a “dog and pony” show, such as the G-20, or not. Timing is not always convenient, especially to the one holding the office. The fact that the President is abroad representing the United States has little to do with his stagnant job approval ratings; those numbers are dismal due to domestic decisions made since January 20, 2009.
As to the Presidents mending the image of the United States, one would have to pick their poison, so to speak. On the one hand, American’s were reviled abroad when Bush was President, but respected. The European Press maligned Bush, simply because his policy and personal believes were in direct opposition to the liberal ideology of the same. That said, when push came to shove, he took no quarter and defended the United State of America at every turn.
On Obama’s recent trip to Europe, he was said to be extremely popular, saying what he felt would make the Europeans' like him more, going so far as to apologize for America's "arrogant and dismissive" attitude towards the world.(This did not sit well on the home front.) He went seeking support from the G-20 participants on several levels and was summarily ignored. His request for more aid to the U.S. in Afghanistan was a bust with the Euro powers that be offering up only 5,000 troops. On the economic side, Germany and France, refused to pump endless trillions into additional stimulus package. Richard, Sisk, at the New York Daily News put it best: “Other heads of state found in President Obama a guy who could take "No" for an answer Thursday at the world economic summit, and that's what they liked best.” Additionally, some in the British Press, commented on his oratory skills, much applauded here and abroad (when teleprompters are in use), - as being less than stellar.
Therefore, the Obama supporters who are concerned about Domestic perception of the President’s trip should worry more about the new perception that the current “Leader of the Free World” is a wishy-washy, clumsy clod (the later in response to the greeting with the Queen of England). This may lead countries that were not in attendance at the G-20, such as Iran, or organizations such as the Taliban and Al Qaeda, to believe that they now have an invitation to do as they might like. The Paper Tiger is back.
One must understand that it is the President’s job (or, more appropriately, the Secretary of State), to meet with his international counterparts from time to time; whether it be for a “dog and pony” show, such as the G-20, or not. Timing is not always convenient, especially to the one holding the office. The fact that the President is abroad representing the United States has little to do with his stagnant job approval ratings; those numbers are dismal due to domestic decisions made since January 20, 2009.
As to the Presidents mending the image of the United States, one would have to pick their poison, so to speak. On the one hand, American’s were reviled abroad when Bush was President, but respected. The European Press maligned Bush, simply because his policy and personal believes were in direct opposition to the liberal ideology of the same. That said, when push came to shove, he took no quarter and defended the United State of America at every turn.
On Obama’s recent trip to Europe, he was said to be extremely popular, saying what he felt would make the Europeans' like him more, going so far as to apologize for America's "arrogant and dismissive" attitude towards the world.(This did not sit well on the home front.) He went seeking support from the G-20 participants on several levels and was summarily ignored. His request for more aid to the U.S. in Afghanistan was a bust with the Euro powers that be offering up only 5,000 troops. On the economic side, Germany and France, refused to pump endless trillions into additional stimulus package. Richard, Sisk, at the New York Daily News put it best: “Other heads of state found in President Obama a guy who could take "No" for an answer Thursday at the world economic summit, and that's what they liked best.” Additionally, some in the British Press, commented on his oratory skills, much applauded here and abroad (when teleprompters are in use), - as being less than stellar.
Therefore, the Obama supporters who are concerned about Domestic perception of the President’s trip should worry more about the new perception that the current “Leader of the Free World” is a wishy-washy, clumsy clod (the later in response to the greeting with the Queen of England). This may lead countries that were not in attendance at the G-20, such as Iran, or organizations such as the Taliban and Al Qaeda, to believe that they now have an invitation to do as they might like. The Paper Tiger is back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
