Leaving 150,000-odd soldiers in Iraq in a Sisyphusean labor to tamp down a civil war is to abandon them. Leaving them out there with extended tours and insufficient time between them is to abandon them. Leaving them out there with a "surge" that is nothing more than a political stalling tactic in an attempt to shift the opprobrium for finally admitting that going into Iraq was a mistake to the next administration is abandoning them. Leaving them in chronic danger for a mission that is neither morally nor strategically justified is abandoning them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kuwait has just dumped the US dollar peg as it ($US)is tumbling down and they need to get inflation under control....Does Kuwait have much oil? Mmmmmm.......Stick that up your a@#se dumbbya. .......And you think it hasn't started.....

Captain OUT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Great rhetoric Barack, but way short on the truth. Looks like substantial policy ideas won't be coming from this group in the campaign. But nice to see the Democrats have someone who at least can look good while spouting empty slogans that actually prove McCain's and Romney's accusation that the vote against funding the Iraq mission necessarily cuts into the troops ability to perform it. Once you are president, Barack, you can change the mission. Until then, you best fund the military when it has been sent to perform a mission on behalf of your country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Adam Howard and Alternet should realize that such fluff pieces, dishonest appraisals of politics and candidates do not make for a convincing, consistent ideological opposition, especially in light of the hard hitting commentary by Keith Olbermann's piece titled: "The Entire Government Has Failed Us". Olbermann accuses Barack Obama and all other democrats of "pathetic", "betrayal", "capitulation" and goes after all the class elites, from the Corporate media, to the two class parties, and all 3 branches of government for their abject servility this dictatorhsip, and fascism. It seems he is almost making a Marxist class analysis by noting that it doesn't matter that all three branches are not equal, if all institutions are corrupted by the same class corruption, class elites.

The corruption of democracy by class interests, is institutional and Olbermann goes after Nancy Pelosi and: "...Mr. Reid, Mr. Hoyer, and other Democrats...have failed us." Then he goes after failed Presidential candidates: "With the exception of Senator Dodd and Senator Edwards, the Democratic presidential candidates have(so far at least) failed us." This is clear reference to the "rock stars", the Corporate media has annointed, Barack O Bama, and Hillary as their class whores for Corporate Fascism. Olbermann compares the Democrats, Barack Obama to a historical analogy...
"their 'Neville Chamberlain moment' and even describes this class corruption: "the Democrats have merely steamlined the process". This reference to the appeasement by Neville Chamberlain, the British diplomat, to Germany's corporate fascism, who financed and supported Hitler's dictatorship, is taught "safely", in the history books, as an individual failure, when in fact it represented the same kind of middle class appeasement to class nationalism by elites.

Barack Obama's capitulation, along with other Democrats, is not an individual failure, but an institutional failure that reflects the class rot of Corporate Capitalism. Their party and him, routinely pretend opposition to the Iraq War, yet fail to cut off the funds of this illegal war and illegal occupation. They claim to have put into place some benchmarks in place to force the issue of withdrawal. It is, however, a criminal benchmark, the attempt by Democrats to force the occupied Iraqis, to accept, impose the theft of Iraqi oil, to Amerikan oil companies, that steal 70 to 80 percent of its revenues. This is criminal, illegal, like the other illegal acts democrats capitulated to, and makes them complicit war criminals. Worse yet, Barack Obama routinely pretends opposition to the Iraq war, while warmongering against Iran for AIPAC, Isreals lobby, with nearly 100 democrats capitulating to this fascism and zionism.

Olbermann has made all the right connections, instiutional connections to the class rot of its middle layers, corrupted by an oligarchy, corporate fascsim. Still Olbermann has dropped the ball, even though he used a correct historical analogy, the Neville Chamberlain moment, because he only appplies the wholesale failure, to the issue of Iraq. This is proof he will let us down eventually, and his not so little slip ups, shows that the problem of class capitulation is even too fundamental, for this class liberal. Why would this failure not apply to our fascist foreign policies?, or not apply to the corrupt structure, class society, which instiutionalizes generic corruption and Class Empire?. A warning is here. Why did Olbermann leave out the names of Kucinich, Gravels, Barbara Lee and other Progressive Democrats, who did not capitulate, yet came up with the selective names of Dodd and Edwards, what is up with that??? Why is Olbermann not going after the Democrats for their routine class whoring, war mongering at AIPAC, the Israeli lobby, which right now is helping Cheney find a way to attack Iran? And finally why Barack?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama, 2006

"...Now, after the President’s last State of the Union, when he told us that America was addicted to oil, there was a brief moment of hope that he’d finally do something on energy.

I was among the hopeful. But then I saw the plan.

His funding for renewable fuels is at the same level it was the day he took office. He refuses to call for even a modest increase in fuel-efficiency standards for cars. And his latest budget funds less then half of the energy bill he himself signed into law - leaving hundreds of millions of dollars in under-funded energy proposals.

This is not a serious effort. Saying that America is addicted to oil without following a real plan for energy independence is like admitting alcoholism and then skipping out on the 12-step program. It’s not enough to identify the challenge – we have to meet it.

See, there’s a reason that some have compared the quest for energy independence to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo moon landing. Like those historic efforts, moving away from an oil economy is a major challenge that will require a sustained national commitment.

During World War II, we had an entire country working around the clock to produce enough planes and tanks to beat the Axis powers. In the middle of the Cold War, we built a national highway system so we had a quick way to transport military equipment across the country. When we wanted to pull ahead of the Russians into space, we poured millions into a national education initiative that graduated thousands of new scientists and engineers.

America now finds itself at a similar crossroads. As gas prices keep rising, the Middle East grows ever more unstable, and the ice caps continue to melt, we face a now-or-never, once-in-a-generation opportunity to set this country on a different course.

Such a course is not only possible, it’s already being pursued in other places around the world. Countries like Japan are creating jobs and slowing oil consumption by churning out and buying millions of fuel-efficient cars. Brazil, a nation that once relied on foreign countries to import 80% of its crude oil, will now be entirely self-sufficient in a few years thanks to its investment in biofuels.

So why can’t we do this? Why can’t we make energy security one of the great American projects of the 21st century?"

Well, gosh, Senator Obama - wouldn't that be against the interests of the corporate oil barons, coal barons, and their shareholders? We sent our troops into Iraq soley for the benefit of the international oil corporations and their Wall Street controllers, didn't we?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wish more politicians would hammer on the distinction between the occupation of Iraq and the War on Terror.

Invading Iraq HELPED the terrorists. Getting out will be a step toward undermining support for Islamic terrorists. Republicans and Democratic enablers have made such a mess that there is no solution that will show immediate positive results, but by getting out as soon as possible we can at least minimize the damage.

Stop letting Republicans get away with using wholly innaccurate terminology in framing the debate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you know a soldier or Marine headed for Iraq as part of President Bush’s troop surge plan or has just arrived in country, tell him or her about Operation-Helmet.org.

A charitable organization based in Montgomery, Texas, and managed by Dr. Bob Meaders, Operation-Helmet supplies FREE helmet upgrade kits to troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as to those ordered to deploy in the near future.

Manufactured by Oregon Aero Inc, the helmet upgrades provide three primary things:

Protection : Shock-absorbing pads keep the helmet from slapping the skull when hit with blast forces, fragments, or being tumbled along the ground or inside a vehicle. This decreases the chance of brain injury from IED's, bombs, RPG's, vehicle accidents, falls, etc.

Comfort: A comfortable helmet will stay on a trooper's head longer and more often.

Stability: Keeps the helmet firmly on the head and out of the eyes.

As of today, 05-28-07, Operation Helmet had a waiting list of 215 names. Disgracefully for the world's richest nation, with special shame on President Bush and the Pentagon for doing nothing to end the shortage, it was due to inadequate contributions, not manufacturing problems.

NOTE: The U.S. Army has been supplying its combat units with less expensive liner pads made by a skateboard helmet company.

According to emails received by Operation-Helmet.org, the government-issued pads are hot, hard and uncomfortable. Some GIs are removing the pads and pounding them with a hammer to make the material softer and more wearable, which reduces protection against explosions.

Because the DOD has refused to promote Operation-Helmet.org, some GIs in the Middle East don't know the improved Oregon Aero pad system exists, despite publicity generated by the famous singer rock star, Cher. Our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve the BEST equipment available, not the cheapest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Regarding Obama.

What he really says.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now that I have read the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential directive, I have re-evaluated Nancy Pelosi's stance on impeachment.

I now feel that her stance on the President's impeachment is not just weak, I feel that it is criminal behavior.

Her silence implies tacit complicity in the complete evisceration of the Constitution of the United States of America. She has effectively decided that the Constitution of the United States should now be delivered to the historical archives and placed on mothballs.

Rather than expanding the provisions of the Constitution and modernizing it while preserving insights worked into the fabric of that document, she would prefer to have that document replaced with what president Bush calls the "Enduring Constitutional Government." See: (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=) + (viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720).

Rather than expand on the idea of republicanism, the recognition of States rights, and deliver those rights to the local community, she prefers to have the federal government commandeer what rights remain to the states, territories, local governments, tribal lands and any other entities which now retains any semblance of jurisdiction, rather than protect them.

Perhaps she is doing that because right now the United States is being challenged on every front in the arena of international politics.

George Bush's War in Iraq has sent a chill through the governments of all other countries who now regret any treaties they made with the United States in terms of United States presence in their countries.

Because of this, the United States is left with only one option in international negotiations and that is the military option and this is the reason this administration needs to present the face of solidarity to the world with regard to that option, hence the need to "enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergencies,” including emergencies related to acts of nature, accidents, technological failures, or attacks. And these emergencies don’t even have to be occurring, but only have a high likelihood of occurring.

Is this want we need to combat environmental degradation and global warming?

Is this what we need to combat loss of habitat due to corporation exploitation?

Is this what we need to combat depletion of resources due to overproduction?

What we need is a focus on solutions to the problems, and the realization that the absurdly sumptuous lifestyle that we have become addicted to is not sustainable more than a few more years into the future and that if we have the wisdom to elect to put that aside now and begin looking for long term solutions to the above problems, we just might have a chance to see the dim begin to brighten, and the first ray of promise leading out of the mineshaft of despair appear as a distant hope in these dark days.

What I’d like to ask Mr. Obama is: “How are you gong to lead us forward considering the bleak landscape in front of us.

How are you going to address the issue of blatant disregard for the Constitution and its provisions for the people and their communities?

How are you going to address Americas reckless posture regarding the perils of global warming that threatens civilization, as we know it?

How are you going to address the looming energy crisis without resorting to military acquisitions of international resources?

These are real issues that have to be faced by this nation before the end of this decade. Everything else is just political career building exercises and personal emolument, which is exactly the kind of activities that have led to the present precipice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The thing I like most about this man is he speaks the truth and seems less corporate owned when compared to many of the politicians of today!

Obama has my vote!


-----------------------

Mortgage Companies

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]