Enough with the Obama blame-game

really puts things in perspective. Thanks for sharing!

and with a Democrat controlled congress I might add

I think I now understand why the states won by the Republicans are always listed in red on the electoral maps shown during elections.

Simply stated, it's the Republicans who put the country in the red!

. . . They couldn't pour piss out of a boot with the instructions on the heel, but they sure as hell know how to spend money we don't even have!

No offense, don't believe everything you read. Especially, and I mean especially from the New York Times. We should always question anything you read from any source that holds a extreme bias. Which of course, is the NY Times. The public has grown wise to them and is the reason this paper is almost bankrupt.

Anyone here think CBS news is "conservative"?



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...90-503544.html
Look at the slope of the line, not only has the POSITOO dramatically increased the debt in less than a full term, but the rate of increase has also accelerated. And, some of the biggest blights on the country put forth by this gang have not even begun to contribute, Obamacare alone will increase the rate of debt tremendously. Also noteworthy is the fact that the real GDP was 30% higher than the national debt in 2008, the same as the national debt in 2009, and became less than the national debt in 2010.

To his credit, he did keep the thugs in Gitmo, he did stick to the Bush plan for withdrawal from Iraq, he did allow the use of the armed drones develooped and ordered by the previous administration, and he did use the information derived from "enhanced" interrogation under the Bush administration to allow the military to kill Osama.

On the other hand, he delayed for months the requested resources to fight the war in Afghanistan, and then sent 60% of what the field commanders requested. The higher casualties resulting were predictable.

Care to give even a single example of the previous administration denying available resources to the commanders in the field?

Jesus. Christ. They had to beg for armored under lining for tyheir humvee's. And the previous admin is the reason theyb areover there in the first place. Talk about revionist history there.

Jesus. Christ. They had to beg for armored under lining for tyheir humvee's. And the previous admin is the reason theyb areover there in the first place. Talk about revionist history there. Originally Posted by WTF

Which part of the phrase "available resources" escape your tiny grasp? Revisonism is answering things you wish I had posted rather than things I posted. Which is why I keep your ilk on ignore normally, you simply aren't bright enough to even be entertaining.

When the economy crashes, it won't matter whose fault it is. Somebody has to take charge and QUIT SPENDING!

Which part of the phrase "available resources" escape your tiny grasp? . Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Which part of not making something that could be available, available don't you understand, yu simple minded fuc?

Those things could have been done, yet they weren't until the soldiers in the field made a stink.

Revisonism is answering things you wish I had posted rather than things I posted. Which is why I keep your ilk on ignore normally, you simply aren't bright enough to even be entertaining. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

I am not here to entertain you. I am here to keep your ilk from spreading all the lies you seem to think are true.

People like you cry for more resources on one hand and cry about the debt on the other.

Your kind is sickening. Not worth fighting for IMHO. I'd bring all the troops home before having another soldier die for people like you.

Jesus. Christ. They had to beg for armored under lining for tyheir humvee's. And the previous admin is the reason theyb areover there in the first place. Talk about revionist history there. Originally Posted by WTF

Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005

The bill, sponsored by Sen. John Warner, reported out of conference committee with $435 million in appropriations for individual body armor

It passed with 47-0 Democrats in favor and 49-0 Repubs in favor.

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004

The bill, proposed by Sen. Ted Stevens, includes $300 million in appropriations for the purchase of body armor for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan

It passed with 37-11 Democrats in favor and 50-0 Repubs in favor

Dodd Amendment to Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004

The amendment, offered by Sen. Chris Dodd, would have added $322 million to the $300 million already appropriated towards the purchase of "high-tech body armor, bullet-proof helmets, special water packs to keep soldiers hydrated, and other survival gear."

It passed with 2-37 Democrat opposed and 47-0 Repubs in favor.


Landrieu Amendment to Supplemental Appropriations Act to Support Department of Defense Operations in Iraq for Fiscal Year 2003

The amendment, proposed by Sen. Mary Landrieu, would have appropriated $1 billion to procurement for the National Guard and Reserves. The amendment was intended to fill a Guard and Reserve shortage of "helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests" and "chemical and biological protective gear". Landrieu based the $1 billion on National Guard and Reserve Unfunded Requirement lists. The amendment would offset the $1 billion appropriation with a $1 billion reduction in President Bush's tax cuts

It passed with 1-46 Democrats opposed and 51 Repubs in favor.


So who is it again blocking protection for our troops?

Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005

The bill, sponsored by Sen. John Warner, reported out of conference committee with $435 million in appropriations for individual body armor

It passed with 47-0 Democrats in favor and 49-0 Repubs in favor.

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004

The bill, proposed by Sen. Ted Stevens, includes $300 million in appropriations for the purchase of body armor for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan

It passed with 37-11 Democrats in favor and 50-0 Repubs in favor

Dodd Amendment to Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004

The amendment, offered by Sen. Chris Dodd, would have added $322 million to the $300 million already appropriated towards the purchase of "high-tech body armor, bullet-proof helmets, special water packs to keep soldiers hydrated, and other survival gear."

It passed with 2-37 Democrat opposed and 47-0 Repubs in favor.


Landrieu Amendment to Supplemental Appropriations Act to Support Department of Defense Operations in Iraq for Fiscal Year 2003

The amendment, proposed by Sen. Mary Landrieu, would have appropriated $1 billion to procurement for the National Guard and Reserves. The amendment was intended to fill a Guard and Reserve shortage of "helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests" and "chemical and biological protective gear". Landrieu based the $1 billion on National Guard and Reserve Unfunded Requirement lists. The amendment would offset the $1 billion appropriation with a $1 billion reduction in President Bush's tax cuts

It passed with 1-46 Democrats opposed and 51 Repubs in favor.


So who is it again blocking protection for our troops? Originally Posted by robin hood

Sounds to me like the Democrats were not for funding this stupid war...had they gotten some numb nutted Repub on board, we would not have been over there needing Body armor!

Do you have a problem understanding what politics is?

Repubs put people in harms way that Dems do not want in harms way and then try and blame Dems for wanting to not fund them being there (the only option I have to get them outta harms way).

Repubs then cut taxes after starting 2 wars and then those same folks start a Tea Party because the fuckig deficit is to high.

I am not a smart man but that is dumb as fuc.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in652491.shtml

Two weeks ago, a group of Army reservists in Iraq refused a direct order to go on a dangerous operation to re-supply another unit with jet fuel.

Without helicopter gunships to escort them over a treacherous stretch of highway, and lacking armored vehicles, soldiers from the 343rd Quartermaster Company called it a suicide mission.

The Army called it an isolated incident, a temporary breakdown in discipline, and an investigation is underway.

But the 343rd isn't the first outfit to be put in harm's way without proper equipment, and commanders in Iraq acknowledged that the unit's concerns were legitimate, even if their mutiny was not.

With a $400 billion defense budget you might think U.S. troops have everything they need to fight the war, but that's not always the case.

Correspondent Steve Kroft talks to a general, soldiers in Iraq, and their families at home about a lack of armored vehicles, field radios, night vision goggles, and even ammunition - especially for the National Guard and reserve units that now make up more than 40 percent of U.S. troops.

In this report, Kroft also talks to Sen. John McCain about how pork-barrel politics have shortchanged troops on the ground.
Every couple of weeks Karen Preston gets a telephone call from her son Ryan who is serving in Iraq with the Oregon National Guard.

But Karen Preston has been worrying a lot ever since last summer when Ryan returned home on leave and showed her these photos of the unarmored vehicles his unit was using for convoy duty in Iraq.

Lacking the proper steel plating to protect soldiers from enemy mines and rocket propelled grenades, they had been jerry-rigged with plywood and sandbags.

"They were called cardboard coffins," Preston says.

There have been more than 9,000 U.S. casualties in Iraq so far – more than 8,100 wounded and 1,100 killed. Nearly half of those casualties are the result of roadside bombs, known as improvised explosive devices or IEDs in military jargon. Yet the U.S. military still lacks thousands of fully armored vehicles that could save American lives.

Specialist Ronald Pepin, who serves in Baghdad with the New York National Guard, says, "They have no ground plating. So if you hit something underneath you, then it's going to kill the whole crew, you know? And that's just something you have to live with."

Staff Sgt. Sean Davis from the Oregon National Guard was critically wounded last June when his unarmored Humvee hit an IED outside of Baghdad. He suffered shrapnel wounds, burns, and was unable to walk for six weeks.

Davis said his Humvee was armored with plywood, sandbags, and armor salvaged from old Iraqi tanks.

He considers himself lucky that he wasn't killed in the blast. His friend and fellow guardsman Eric McKinley, who was riding in the same vehicle, wasn't so fortunate. The 24-year-old Army specialist died of his wounds. His father Tom said his son was supposed to have been discharged from the Oregon National Guard a few months before his death, but was held over because of the war.

McKinley says his son would have stood a lot better chance of surviving had his vehicle been fully armored.

"Our troops need to be protected over there to the best ability that we can protect them and it's not being done," he says.

The Department of Defense denied a 60 Minutes request for an on-camera interview to explain the situation. But responding to a written question about vehicles traveling dangerous routes in Iraq being armored with plywood and sandbags, the Army told us, "As long as the Army has a single vehicle without armor, we expect that our soldiers will continue to find ways to increase their level of protection."

60 Minutes went to a man more familiar with the problems facing the Oregon National Guard than anyone else – its commanding general, Ray Byrne. General Byrne was somewhat reluctant to talk when 60 Minutes showed him pictures of his men's Humvees and trucks, armored with plywood and sandbags.

"If you have nothing then that's better than nothing. The question becomes then again when – when are they going to receive the full up armored Humvees? And I don't have that answer," says Gen. Byrne.

"It distresses me greatly that they do not have the equipment. I don't have control over it. The soldiers don't have control over it. The question becomes, 'When is it going to be available? When is it going to be available? When will they have it?'"

There are still no good answers to those questions. Most of the vehicles in Iraq arrived there without armor plating, because the Pentagon war planners didn't anticipate a long, bloody insurgency.

But 18 months after President Bush declared an end of major combat, the Pentagon is still struggling to provide the equipment needed to fight the war.

Oregon Congresswoman Darlene Hooley, a Democrat whose district includes Gen. Byrne's National Guard, complained to the secretary of defense. She says she thinks the vehicles are not fully armored yet because military planners didn't anticipate an insurgency.

"We didn't have enough armored vehicles," she says. "They weren't manufactured."

Congress has appropriated additional money for armored trucks and Humvees, over $800 million in the current defense bill.

The Army told 60 Minutes they will have produced 8,100 fully-armored Humvees by March.

However, production is lagging behind the urgent need, and the Pentagon's interim solution is shipping so-called "add-on armor" kits to Iraq, where they are being bolted on to thousands of vehicles.

But most of those add-ons don't protect the bottom of the vehicle, leaving them vulnerable to an explosive device.

And it isn't the only equipment problem facing soldiers in Iraq.

Oregon guardsman Sean Davis told us that his unit was short ammunition and night vision goggles, and lacked radios to communicate with each other.

He says guardsman were using walkie-talkies that they or their families purchased from a sporting goods or similar store. "And anybody can pick up those signals, you know," he says. "And we don't have the radios that we need."

Gen. Byrne says stories about families in Oregon having to go out and buy for their sons and daughters radio equipment, body armor, GPS gear, computers and night vision goggles because they weren't being issued are true.

He said some Guard units are also using Vietnam era M-16 assault rifles, which he calls adequate for state duty but not acceptable for duty in Iraq. There is also a bullet shortage for training, he says.

It bothers him, but "there's nothing I can do about it," he says.

"If I was making the decisions, I would readjust," he says. "The soldier on the ground should be a focus. When that's taken care of you can take care of other stuff."

The Army acknowledged to 60 Minutes that there is a shortage of radios in Iraq and a shortage of bullets for training, and says both are in the process of being remedied. There have also been problems with maintenance and replacement parts for critical equipment like Abrams tanks, Bradley personnel carriers and Black Hawk helicopters.

Winslow Wheeler, a long time Capitol Hill staffer who spent years writing and reviewing defense appropriations bills, thinks he knows one reason why those shortages exist, after looking at the current Defense budget. Army accounts that pay for training, maintenance and repairs are being raided by Congress to pay for pork-barrel spending.

Wheeler says $2.8 billion that was earmarked for operations and maintenance to support U.S. troops has been used to "pay the pork bill."

Wheeler, who has written a book called "The Wastrels of Defense," says congressmen routinely hide billions of dollars in pet projects in the defense bill.

And buried in the back of this one, Wheeler found a biathlon jogging track in Alaska, a brown tree snake eradication program in Hawaii, a parade ground maintenance contract for a military base that closed years ago, and money for the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial celebration.

By law, these projects can't be cut, so Pentagon bookkeepers will have to dip into operations and maintenance accounts to pay for them.

"They do all kinds of things that adds up to: 'We're basically eating our own young to support the war,'" he says.

According to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a member of the Armed Services Committee who speaks out against pork-barrel spending, there is a total of $8.9 billion of pork in this year's defense bill, which would go a long way toward upgrading all the equipment used by the National Guard.

"I don't think that this war has truly come home to the Congress of the United States," McCain says. "This is the first time in history that we've cut taxes during a war. So I think that a lot of members of Congress feel that this is just sort of a business-as-usual situation."

"The least sexy items are the mundane - food, repair items, maintenance – there's no big contract there," says McCain. "And so there's a tendency that those mundane but vital aspects of war fighting are cut and routinely underfunded."

It is not a comforting thought for families with loved ones in Iraq, who lack armored vehicles, radios or things they need to stay alive. It's on Karen Preston's mind every time she talks to her son.

"He's very pro-military, as am I," she says. "I just want them to have the best equipment."

Some armored vehicles have now been shipped to her son's unit, but without protection on the bottom of the vehicle, an insurgent's explosive is just as deadly.

Specialist Pepin on the New York Guard says, "It's kind of like an act of faith. When you get in your vehicle, you just hope, you know. Say a little prayer before you go out."

This weekend, Acting Secretary of the Army Les Brownlee wrote to 60 Minutes saying, "The Army has made great strides in improving the capabilities of all units deploying to Iraq as the nature of the conflict has changed." He noted the president approved spending $840 million to improve the armor on Humvees in Iraq.

Anyone here think CBS news is "conservative"?



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...90-503544.html
Look at the slope of the line, not only has the POSITOO dramatically increased the debt in less than a full term, but the rate of increase has also accelerated. And, some of the biggest blights on the country put forth by this gang have not even begun to contribute, Obamacare alone will increase the rate of debt tremendously. Also noteworthy is the fact that the real GDP was 30% higher than the national debt in 2008, the same as the national debt in 2009, and became less than the national debt in 2010.

To his credit, he did keep the thugs in Gitmo, he did stick to the Bush plan for withdrawal from Iraq, he did allow the use of the armed drones develooped and ordered by the previous administration, and he did use the information derived from "enhanced" interrogation under the Bush administration to allow the military to kill Osama.

On the other hand, he delayed for months the requested resources to fight the war in Afghanistan, and then sent 60% of what the field commanders requested. The higher casualties resulting were predictable.

Care to give even a single example of the previous administration denying available resources to the commanders in the field? Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Note that the Y axis of the graph doesn't go to 0, thus making the run up seem much more steep than it actually is. Yep, the right wing corporate media is slanting it's chart to make the Democrats look bad.

Unless something is done, we will all look bad.

Okay, enough with the excessive pessimism, guys.

Let's look on the objective bright side for a minute.

Unemployment is down.

Retail sales were up.

The war is over.

. . . We may still have a long way to go, but the train is finally back on track!