Skip to main content

View Diary: Congressman McGovern's response to President Obama's troop drawdown announcement (95 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the bottom line (23+ / 0-)

    from jed's front page post:

    The withdrawal of 33,000 troops will return troops to December, 2009 levels when President Obama announced his administration's second major deployment of troops to Afghanistan. Troop levels will be roughly double what they were in January, 2009 when he took office.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 05:26:21 PM PDT

    •  Since Obama campaigned on a buildup in Afghanistan (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordcopper, jj32, ericlewis0, doroma

      ...what's the surprise?

      •  So if Obama had ten terms he could... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gooderservice, Earth Ling, pot, Dallasdoc

        ...honestly keep building for 40 years because his campaign position said he would?

        The only exercise I take is walking behind the coffins of friends who took exercise. -- Peter O'Toole

        by dov12348 on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 05:40:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  He also campaigned on a public option (13+ / 0-)

        and tax cuts.  

        Which one(s) are we supposed to believe?

        To every millionaire who decries they don't want their grandchildren paying for the deficit, I say: PAY MORE TAXES NOW and your grandkids won't have a deficit burden.

        by gooderservice on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 05:57:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Check the Constitution (6+ / 0-)

          The president is not a dictator.

            •  Congress doesn't need the president to do anything (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gooderservice

              to vote on Libya.  They can just vote on Libya.  This congress is not capable of doing its job.

              "Hope 2010 feels a lot different than Hope 2008. Tougher, deeper, more dearly bought." Femlaw, Hope 2010, September 8, 2010.

              by seanwright on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 07:19:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  So exactly whose decision is it to keep more (6+ / 0-)

            troops there or bring them home?

            Did Congress have a vote on this that I missed?

            My point is that he said this and that on the campaign trail solely to win the election.

            If he said something like, Every American will have peach ice cream in their homes, and it turns out that people are allergic to peaches, we wouldn't be saying:  Well, he said he would have peach ice cream in every home.

            His words hardly ever match his actions.  He says this and that, but doesn't follow through.

            Just because a broken clock is right twice a day doesn't mean that his current war plans are good for the country.

            His job is to recognize and adapt to our own situation at home, and he certainly hasn't taken any steps to do so.

            To every millionaire who decries they don't want their grandchildren paying for the deficit, I say: PAY MORE TAXES NOW and your grandkids won't have a deficit burden.

            by gooderservice on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 06:11:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Constitution says a lot of things, many (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Robobagpiper

            of which aren't adhered to.  

            To every millionaire who decries they don't want their grandchildren paying for the deficit, I say: PAY MORE TAXES NOW and your grandkids won't have a deficit burden.

            by gooderservice on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 06:13:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  that'd be cool if it were true, but when you (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            drnononono, Dallasdoc, gooderservice

            VIOLATE the Constitution and refuse to defend it (by prosecuting war criminals for instance or by usurping Congress' war powers, or by spying on Americans en masse, or by prosecuting whisteblowers instead of the exposed criminals, etc., etc.) well THEN what SHOULD we call the guy?

            “The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” – Einstein (1946)

            by Earth Ling on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 07:19:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The U.S. involvement in Libya doesn't violate (0+ / 0-)

              the Constitution.  It  violates the War Powers Resolution. Which is not part of the Consitution.  When did he spy on American's en masse?

              "Hope 2010 feels a lot different than Hope 2008. Tougher, deeper, more dearly bought." Femlaw, Hope 2010, September 8, 2010.

              by seanwright on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 08:10:58 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Article 1, Section 8 for war powers (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Hayate Yagami, Dallasdoc

                And do you really not know that the gov't has massively overstepped its powers with regard to spying on citizens?

                As one example from McLatchy:

                Obama assertion: FBI can get phone records without oversight

                WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's Justice Department has asserted that the FBI can obtain telephone records of international calls made from the U.S. without any formal legal process or court oversight, according to a document obtained by McClatchy.

                That assertion was revealed — perhaps inadvertently — by the department in its response to a McClatchy request for a copy of a secret Justice Department memo...

                “The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” – Einstein (1946)

                by Earth Ling on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 08:26:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Also from the article you quote (0+ / 0-)
                  In January 2010, McClatchy asked for a copy of the Office of Legal Counsel memo under open records laws after a reference to it appeared in a heavily excised section of a report on how the FBI abused its powers when seeking telephone records.

                  In the report, the Justice Department's inspector general said "the OLC agreed with the FBI that under certain circumstances (word or words redacted) allows the FBI to ask for and obtain these records on a voluntary basis from the providers, without legal process or a qualifying emergency."

                  *

                  Since 2006, it appears the bureau has refrained from using the authority it continues to assert, according to another heavily redacted section of the inspector general's report.

                  So the one example of the Obama administration spying on American's en masse is an OLC/FBI opinion that the FBI has a right to ask for and obtain records of international phone records from phone companies on a voluntary basis - a right which the FBI has apparently not exercised since before Obama was President.  

                  There are a lot of things out there that any fools knows that just ain't so.

                  "Hope 2010 feels a lot different than Hope 2008. Tougher, deeper, more dearly bought." Femlaw, Hope 2010, September 8, 2010.

                  by seanwright on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 08:46:36 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  oh thank goodness they "appear" to be showing (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Dallasdoc

                    restraint. That's all we should demand of our government which clearly has only our best interests at heart. We should never constrain our government with the Constitution, that would be so inconvenient!

                    There's plenty out there to show that Obama is NOT defending the Constitution:

                    Meanwhile, the Obama administration is trying to quash an Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) lawsuit aimed at holding Bush administration officials responsible for warrantless surveillance conducted prior to the FISA amendments, surveillance that Obama himself has said was illegal. It argues that allowing the lawsuit to proceed would harm national security—a claim frequently made by the Bush administration, which Obama has criticized as excessively secretive. Obama's Justice Department has gone even further than the Bush administration, arguing that the PATRIOT Act immunizes government officials who participate in illegal surveillance, except when "the Government obtains information about a person through intelligence-gathering, and Government agents unlawfully disclose that information." As EFF puts it, "DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying [as opposed to disclosure]—that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes."

                    The DOJ dismissal motion is here. Glenn Greenwald has more here.

                    “The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” – Einstein (1946)

                    by Earth Ling on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 09:13:15 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  A politician (0+ / 0-)
              well THEN what SHOULD we call the guy?

              To every millionaire who decries they don't want their grandchildren paying for the deficit, I say: PAY MORE TAXES NOW and your grandkids won't have a deficit burden.

              by gooderservice on Thu Jun 23, 2011 at 05:18:19 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  He also campaigned on the rule of law (10+ / 0-)

        and support for whistleblowers. After he has systematically shielded the powerful (Bush, bankers, etc.) from consequences for their wrongdoing while simultaneously heightening whistleblower prosecutions to unprecedented levels (the Espionage Act?!), yes, I am sometimes surprised to see him follow through on a campaign promise.

        Formerly known as Jyrinx.

        “If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution.” ― Emma Goldman

        by Code Monkey on Wed Jun 22, 2011 at 07:05:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  no problemo (0+ / 0-)

        There is no problem, but I think most people assume when 58% of the populace opposes the war an intelligent president in a democracy might respond to the will of the people,  especially since Bin-Laden is dead and there are supposedly only 50 Al-Quaeda left in Afghanistan.   From a personal point of view when it comes to my relatives and friends dying in Afghanistan, my friends and relatives losing their jobs and houses due to failed presidential policies and a choice of a president I will chose my friends and relatives and dump the president.

      •  Obama campaigned on no stupid wars too. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc

        So that's the surprise.  Biden and others told him al Qaeda's not in Afghanistan they are in Pakistan.

        Bin Laden was there for years under the protection of the Pakistan government.

        Obama's Afghan adventures was a stupid war.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site