Monthly Archives: June 2011

House Chickens Out on Libya Funding Cut

24 Friday Jun 2011

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, Libya, Politics, Republicans

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the United States House of Representatives:

After voting down a bill earlier today which would give Congressional approval to the war that’s not really a war in Libya by a 295-123 margin, our esteemed Congresschickens turned around and rejected another bill which would have cut off funding for the Libyan non-war— 180 were in favor of the funding cut, 238 against. And it wasn’t even a complete de-funding, there were exceptions for search and rescue, aerial refueling, operational planning, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

So to re-cap, 295 were against supporting the Libyan operations, but only 180 were in favor of cutting off just a portion of the funding. Chickens.

Here are the two roll call votes. First the bill for support, then the vote on funding.

So this is for all you clucking cowards who voted against the funding cut after voting against support. First, the Republicans. I don’t ever again want to see you waving that copy of the Constitution you so proudly carry in your inside pocket. I don’t ever want to hear you cackle again about the president overstepping his constitutionally prescribed powers. You had your chance to at least take a step in the direction of reining in some of that power today and you didn’t do it. From now on, shut the hell up.

Democrats, the next time a Republican president makes up a reason to go to non-war, and by your acquiescence to King Obama and his convoluted definition of “hostilities” you have made that a guaranteed ‘when’ not a conditional ‘if,’ I don’t want to hear anything from you either. Remember today and shut the hell up.

A pox on both your houses.

House Votes to Deny Consent on Libya

24 Friday Jun 2011

Posted by in Congress, Libya, Obama

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Do I sense some backbone here? McClatchy is reporting:

“The House of Representatives voted 295 to 123 Friday to deny congressional consent for U.S. military involvement in Libya, a rebuke of President Barack Obama’s policy and an expression of lawmakers’ frustration with his reluctance to consult with them on it.

The vote has no immediate effect on U.S. Libya policy, but Democratic leaders had urged support for Obama’s approach.

They were thwarted by an unusual combination of anti-war Democrats, as well as most Republicans, who argued that the three-month old mission has become too murky and too costly. 70 Democrats joined 225 Republicans to vote against the measure.”

The real test comes later today when the vote to cut funding comes up. Then we’ll see who puts their mouth where the money is.

Pakistani Intelligence Knew Where bin-Laden Was? Ya Think?

24 Friday Jun 2011

Posted by in Pakistan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

You have to get up pretty early in the morning to slip one past our “intelligence” agencies. In a startling revelation, it turns out Pakistan’s version of the CIA, the ISI, may have known of Osama bin-Laden’s whereabouts all along and was, hold on to your seats, protecting him. Brilliant detective work, Columbo:

“The cellphone of Osama bin Laden’s trusted courier, which was recovered in the raid that killed both men in Pakistan last month, contained contacts to a militant group that is a longtime asset of Pakistan’s intelligence agency, senior American officials who have been briefed on the findings say.

The discovery indicates that Bin Laden used the group, Harakat-ul-Mujahedeen, as part of his support network inside the country, the officials and others said. But it also raised tantalizing questions about whether the group and others like it helped shelter and support Bin Laden on behalf of Pakistan’s spy agency, given that it had mentored Harakat and allowed it to operate in Pakistan for at least 20 years, the officials and analysts said.

[…]

But the cellphone numbers provide one of the most intriguing leads yet in the hunt for the answer to an urgent and vexing question for Washington: How was it that Bin Laden was able to live comfortably for years in Abbottabad, a town dominated by the Pakistani military and only a three-hour drive from Islamabad, the capital?”

This is a “vexing question?” To who?

No “Hostilities” But “Imminent Danger” Pay

23 Thursday Jun 2011

Posted by in Libya, Obama

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

What’s wrong with this picture?

“The White House has officially declared that what’s happening in Libya is not “hostilities.”But at the Pentagon, officials have decided it’s unsafe enough there to give troops extra pay for serving in “imminent danger.”

The Defense Department decided in April to pay an extra $225 a month in “imminent danger pay” to service members who fly planes over Libya or serve on ships within 110 nautical miles of its shores.

That means the Pentagon has decided that troops in those places are “subject to the threat of physical harm or imminent danger because of civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism or wartime conditions.”

[…]

Asked Monday whether the White House finding contradicted the Pentagon’s, an Obama spokesman declined to comment.”

Understandable. They’re busy re-defining “imminent” and “danger.”

Herding Cats

22 Wednesday Jun 2011

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, economy, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Wanted: Director of Messaging. Apply, Democratic Party. Prior cat-herding experience a pre-requisite:

“The Senate Democratic leadership – all of them, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Patty Murray, Debbie Stabenow and Mark Begich – planned a morning press conference today where they will call for job creation measures, or stimulus, to be included in any debt limit deal. They will say that deficit reduction cannot bring Americans back to work, and that recent soft numbers for the economy demand that jobs get the primary attention. According to the press release “they will urge the negotiators to consider new proposals to boost hiring in the short term at the same time that they pursue a plan to bring down the debt in the long term.” The phrase “equal priority” is in there as well.”

On the other hand:

“The debt-reduction package emerging in talks between the White House and congressional leaders would not “fundamentally change” the alarming rate of growth in the national debt, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee said Tuesday.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) said the goal of slicing more than $2 trillion from the federal budget by 2021 falls far short of the savings needed to stabilize borrowing, reenergize the economy and avert the threat of a debt crisis.

“A $2 trillion package sounds big, but I think most serious observers would tell you that it takes a package of at least $4 trillion to fundamentally change the trajectory we’re on,” Conrad told reporters.”

And then there’s Harry:

“Democrats are increasingly concerned that Republicans are setting them up to endorse large spending cuts in a deal to raise the national debt limit without giving ground on anything — even GOP-friendly policy measures like tax cuts for business owners — to stimulate the economy in the near-term.

…”I don’t like to question my colleagues’ motives,” noted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) during his weekly Capitol press conference Tuesday, “but whether they work with us to pass these policies, or continue opposing ideas they once supported, will tell us a lot.”

*Sigh*

Old Habits Die Hard

22 Wednesday Jun 2011

Posted by in Politics, Sarah Palin

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Winners never quit. Quitters never quit quitting:

“Less than a month after she appeared poised to shake up the Republican presidential campaign, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has once again receded from the 2012 limelight…Though Palin and her staff never announced a timeline for the remaining legs of her trip, aides had drafted preliminary itineraries that would have taken her through the Midwest and Southeast at some point this month. But those travel blueprints are now in limbo, RCP has learned, as Palin and her family have reverted to the friendly confines of summertime Alaska, where the skies are currently alight for over 19 hours a day and the Bristol Bay salmon fishing season is nearing its peak.”

Obama to Announce Afghanistan Drawdown

22 Wednesday Jun 2011

Posted by in Afghanistan, Obama

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

In an address to the country tonight, President Obama is expected to announce the beginning of troop withdrawals from Afghanistan. The Washington Post is reporting that the numbers will be 5,000 by the end of this summer, another 5,000 by the end of the year and possibly another 20,000 by the end of 2012. Not enough and not fast enough for me, and according to Pew, not for the majority of the American people:


Numbers which have increased substantially among just about every political and demographic group since June of last year:


Back to WaPo:

“Even by drawing down the 30,000 reinforcements, there still will be great uncertainty about how long the remaining 70,000 troops would stay there, although the U.S. and its allies have set Dec. 31, 2014, as a target date for ending the combat mission in Afghanistan.

…If Obama were to leave the bulk of the 30,000 surge contingent in Afghanistan through 2012, he would be giving the military another fighting season — in addition to the one now under way — to further damage Taliban forces before a larger withdrawal got started. It also would buy more time for the Afghan army and police to grow in numbers and capability.”

“Grow in numbers…” An audit from SIGAR (Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction) showed that even though we’ve spent nearly $30 billion since 2002 to train and equip Afghan security forces, “Afghanistan’s government does not know exactly how many people work for its national police force.” And according to the Pentagon’s own report, “there are currently no Afghan National Police units that are able to operate independently.”

“…and capability.” This from an investigation into a 2009 battle in which 8 Americans were killed and 22 wounded:

“[F]irst-hand accounts from the battle at Keating, detailed in witness statements included in the investigation, provide a different, highly critical view.

One of the harshest came from two Latvian soldiers stationed at Keating and responsible for mentoring the three dozen Afghan troops at the base in mountainous Nuristan province near the Pakistan border. In interviews conducted after the attack, the Latvians told the U.S. investigators that the Afghan soldiers lacked “discipline, motivation and initiative.”

Close to 300 insurgents attacked Keating at dawn with rocket-propelled grenades, mortars and guns. As the chaos of combat enveloped the base, the Latvians said they saw three Afghan soldiers at the aid station waiting to be treated for minor scratches and cuts. An Afghan platoon sergeant was in a corner of the station, curled up in a fetal position, they told the investigators.

Later, they opened a door to one of the buildings and found several other soldiers and Afghan security guards sitting on beds “anxiously waiting.” None of them had weapons at the ready or made an aggressive move when the door swung open. In other buildings, they found Afghan soldiers “in ones and twos, hiding under blankets in the fetal position.”

Whether we leave Afghanistan in stages or all at once, whether we do it in 2012, 2014, or 3014, Afghanistan is going to be what Afghanistan has always been. Not an actual country but a region on the map with lines drawn around it, with a weak, corrupt central government, and with never-ending tribal disputes and clashes. The only difference any kind of timeline will make is how many billions of dollars we pour in and how many flag-draped coffins we take out.

Bush Taught, Obama Learned

20 Monday Jun 2011

Posted by in Congress, Constitution, George W. Bush, Justice Department, Libya, Obama, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

From an editorial in the St. Petersburg Times, May 21, 2006, via Newshoggers:

“[T]he changes that George W. Bush has made to our nation’s constitutional firmament may not depart with the first family’s bags. His disregard for the separation of powers has so dramatically distorted the office of the president that he may have engineered a turning point in American history.

…Bush has taught tomorrow’s leaders that, if there are no consequences for ignoring legal constraints on power and if no one stops you from conducting the nation’s business in secret, you don’t have to be accountable. He is ruling through the tautological doctrine of Richard Nixon, who told interviewer David Frost that as long as the president’s doing it “that means it is not illegal.”

…Holding the executive branch to account for its actions, demanding that it respect the law and insisting that it fully report to Congress on its activities – these are nonnegotiable duties of Congress, because they are key part of our inheritance.

Being answerable to another is humbling. It makes you more careful in your actions. It requires that you consider how you will defend your decisions. George Bush has freed himself of this constitutional imperative and is showing the next president, and the next, how it is done.”

Bush taught, Obama learned, as evidenced by recent events. Like the expansion of the FBI’s investigative powers:

“The Obama administration has long been bumbling along in the footsteps of its predecessor when it comes to sacrificing Americans’ basic rights and liberties under the false flag of fighting terrorism. Now the Obama team seems ready to lurch even farther down that dismal road than George W. Bush did.

Instead of tightening the relaxed rules for F.B.I. investigations — not just of terrorism suspects but of pretty much anyone — that were put in place in the Bush years, President Obama’s Justice Department is getting ready to push the proper bounds of privacy even further.”

Like ignoring the advice of the Attorney General, the Pentagon general counsel, and the head of the Office of Legal Counsel on the president’s convoluted definition of “hostilities”:

“President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations.

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

…Other high-level Justice lawyers were also involved in the deliberations, and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. supported Ms. Krass’s view, officials said.”

But the Executive’s ability to expand power and ignore existing law becomes easier with idiots like Lindsey Graham ready, willing, and able to lend a helping hand with statements such as this:

“Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Sunday that Congress should not interfere with U.S. operations in Libya. “Congress should sort of shut up and not empower Qadhafi,” Graham said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Pull out that copy of the Constitution that I’m sure is in your coat pocket, Sen. Graham. See what it says about Congress’ responsibilities and duties relating to the declaration and funding of war. I don’t think “shut up” is among them.

It All Depends on What “Hostilities” Means

16 Thursday Jun 2011

Posted by in Congress, Constitution, drone strikes, Justice Department, Libya, Obama, Obama administration, Yemen

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

I give the Obama administration points for creativity, if nothing else:

“The White House, pushing hard against criticism in Congress over the deepening air war in Libya, asserted Wednesday that President Obama had the authority to continue the military campaign without Congressional approval because American involvement fell short of full-blown hostilities.

In a 38-page report sent to lawmakers describing and defending the NATO-led operation, the White House said the mission was prying loose Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s grip on power.”

Wait a minute, I thought the mission was for humanitarian reasons, not regime change. Wha’ happen?

“We are acting lawfully,” said Harold H. Koh, the State Department legal adviser, who expanded on the administration’s reasoning in a joint interview with the White House counsel, Robert Bauer.

The two senior administration lawyers contended that American forces had not been in “hostilities” at least since early April, when NATO took over the responsibility for the no-fly zone and the United States shifted to primarily a supporting role — providing refueling and surveillance to allied warplanes, although remotely piloted drones operated by the United States periodically fire missiles, too.”

I think the people on the receiving end of those drone missiles might have a different definition of “hostilities.”

“We are not saying the president can take the country into war on his own,” said Mr. Koh, a former Yale Law School dean and outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s expansive theories of executive power.”

Uh yes, that’s exactly what you’re saying, Mr. Koh. You’re also saying that as long as it’s your guy expanding executive power and taking the country to war kinetic military action on his own it’s OK. Can you say double standard, boys and girls?

“We are not saying the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional or should be scrapped or that we can refuse to consult Congress. We are saying the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of ‘hostilities’ envisioned by the War Powers Resolution.”

No, you’re not actually saying you can refuse to consult Congress, whatever refuse means inside the White House these days, just that you can concoct some phony baloney reason not to, Carnac.

Mr. Koh, just for clarification purposes, the next time you talk to President Bush Obama, ask him whether or not a drone attack a day in Yemen falls under “hostilities.” Just curious.

Oh, one more thing about disregarding the War Powers Resolution, the ‘everybody else does it’ excuse didn’t work for me when I was six and it doesn’t work for you now as far as I’m concerned. I must have missed the ‘vote for me, I’ll do what everybody else has done’ campaign speech in 2008.