Search This Blog

Follow by Email

GI's are dying for a lie -- "security situation" in Afghanistan is NOT improving in spite of U.S. "surge" and "counter-insurgency" doctrine

Claims that the "security situation" in Afghanistan is improving are a lie, a "bright, shining lie."

Confidential UN maps show a clear deterioration in security in parts of Afghanistan this year, the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, as its mission there acknowledged security in some parts had worsened.

Two United Nations maps, one showing the situation at the start of this year's fighting season in March and the other towards its end in October, highlight a particular decline in parts of the north and east, the paper said.

Kieran Dwyer, communications director of the UN mission in Afghanistan, acknowledged security had got worse in some parts, hampering its mission, although he said he had not seen the maps.

"There are parts of the country that have become increasingly difficult to operate in during 2010 due to insecurity.

"This includes the targeting of humanitarian workers and government officials whose jobs it is to deliver services to the people," he told AFP.

Check out the UN maps:

GOP has now ditched Reagan and George W. Bush

By voting down the DREAM Act on 18 December 1010, the GOP did two things.

First, the Republicans who voted down the DREAM Act made a huge mistake, both morally and politically, and deserve to pay a major price for it in 2012 and beyond. So much for the "Party of Lincoln."

Second, the GOP buried Reagan and Bush II, pissed on their graves, and walked away.

So much for the the Party of Ronald Reagan, who signed a law which "legalized 2.8 million undocumented workers."

Reagan also said proudly that people "from any corner of the world, can come to live in the United States and become an American."

And, Reagan added:
It makes one wonder about the illegal alien fuss. Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won't do? One thing is certain in this hungry world; no regulation or law should be allowed if it results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters.
In fact, the GOP is no longer the Party of George W. Bush, who said:
Latinos come to the US to seek the same dreams that have inspired millions of others: they want a better life for their children. Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande. Latinos enrich our country with faith in God, a strong ethic of work, community & responsibility. We can all learn from the strength, solidarity, & values of Latinos. Immigration is not a problem to be solved, it is the sign of a successful nation. New Americans are to be welcomed as neighbors and not to be feared as strangers.
And there you have it, folks. The GOP -- no longer the party of Lincoln, Goldwater, and William Buckley, has now ditched Reagan and Bush in favor of Palin, DeMint, Sessions, Boner, Tancredo, and Gingrich -- Tweedle-Dumb and Tweedle-Dumber.

Have you noticed -- the Tea Party soap opera has been cancelled

It's been a little more than a month since the November 2010 election and there's a real change in the air.

No, I don't mean the fact that the Republicans will take over the House of Representatives in January.

I mean -- have you noticed the sudden complete absence of the Tea Party in the media, especially on Fox?

In the months leading up to the November 2010 election, Fox was a veritable 24/7 Tea Party telethon. Glenn Beck was holding Tea Party rallies on the Mall in D.C. Sarah Palin was flying around the country, speaking to Tea Party rallies and Fox was gushing over her latest utterances.

Tea Party candidates all but had their own shows on Fox and even the mainstream, serious media was featuring interviews with such dingbats as Christine O'Donnell and Sharron Angle (remember them?).

Now -- where are they? Where are the Tea Party mobs, riding around on their Scooters and PowerChairs that were paid for by Medicare, shouting about how they don't want "government medicine." Where are the interviews with Joe Miller and his merry band of dingbats?

Fox has dropped every single one of them, replacing them with GOP establishment types.

And, even worse, the Tea Party clowns who were elected to Congress have dropped all pretense of being "grass-roots" and "populist." For example:

-- What happened to the Tea Party animus against earmarks? Now, suddenly, earmarks aren't so bad after all -- every new Tea Party Congresscritter suddenly has backed off from calls to do away with earmarks.

-- And, did you notice that over a dozen of each of the newly-elected Tea Baggers has appointed a K Street lobbyist as their chief of staff? Whatever happened to that "of the people" talk from the Tea Baggers??

Looks like the Tea Party soap opera lasted about one season. Of course, as the 2012 election approaches, look for the GOP to crank up their Astroturf operation and the Tea Party will be back.

President Obama caves in to Republicans; sets the stage to destroy Social Security

The following article was copied directly from DailyKos at this link:

-- quote

Why do Republicans support a payroll tax holiday? Hotlist

Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 02:41:25 PM PST

[bumped - Barbara Morrill]

By far, the single biggest new piece of stimulus in the Obama-GOP tax deal is the temporary one year reduction of individual Social Security payroll taxes from 6.2% to 4.2%.

That one measure alone will inject $120 billion into the economy next year, and because it only applies to the first $106,000 of each taxpayer's income, the vast majority of that $120 billion will go to people who will actually spend it, in the process, strengthening the economy.

So if the payroll tax holiday will (a) stimulate the economy and (b) primarily benefit middle-income taxpayers, then why do you think Republicans are agreeing to it?

The answer to that question should figure prominently into whether you support or oppose this deal, and at least to me, there's only one answer that makes sense: Republicans see the payroll tax holiday as yet another tax trap.

Here's why it's a trap: the deal calls for the payroll tax holiday to last for just one year. That means on January 1, 2012, payroll taxes would go back up to 6.2%.

Put another way, the Republican message in 2011 will be this: "If Congress doesn't extend the payroll tax holiday, everybody's taxes are going up on January 1, 2012."

If you don't think Republicans that's exactly what Republicans will say, then you haven't been paying attention. Not only will they demand an extension of the payroll tax holiday, they'll make extending it permanently the centerpiece of their 2012 Presidential campaign.

Given that the economy is likely to still be in lousy shape shape one year from now, extending the payroll tax holiday will probably be politically popular. So there will be tremendous pressure on Democrats to extend it. The problem is, extending it would threaten Social Security. And extending it permanently would kill Social Security as we know it.

The issue isn't whether we can afford a temporary one year payroll tax holiday. We can. In fact, doing so would help the economy. But as is painfully obviously, in this political climate, there's no such thing as a "temporary" tax cut.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that cutting the employee side of the payroll tax from 6.2% to 4.2% on a permanent basis will force massive cuts in Social Security benefits. Republicans certainly understand the implications. And that's why they want this payroll tax holiday -- because it will help them undermine the entire Social Security system.

Sure, it would be wildly irresponsible to risk the entire Social Security system. But these are Republicans we're talking about. They live for this kind of stuff.

Could Democrats hold the line and refuse to extend the payroll tax cut? In theory, yes. But it would require good messaging. And you'd have to be crazy to depend on Democrats to do a good job with messaging.

So even though the payroll tax holiday would provide some short-term stimulus, in the long-run it will jeopardize the future of Social Security. It's being sold as a concession on the part of Republicans, but it's not a concession, it's a trap that Democrats should avoid.

-- end quote