Withdrawal from Afghanistan

Currently the withdrawal date for American personnel is 2014. The Obama administration claims the war is going well with last December's surge of 30,000 troops, the use of predator drones and the further cooperation with Pakistan. Pakistani forces have been coordinating against the Taliban on their eastern front while the U.S., Afghan and NATO forces assault their western front. At the moment though it is difficult to see how successful the war is due to that Taliban forces traditionally do not fight during the winter. It is expected that Taliban resistance will harden during the spring and summer. But even in the winter the U.S. has not been overly successful. President Obama's strategy of "clear, hold, build" has not exited the "clear" stage. U.S. and NATO forces have had some success clearing Taliban areas but have not been able to hold them. Even though there has been an increased U.S. presence in the east and south of Afghanistan there has been a decline in the northern and western regions of the country. Last Thursday Obama remarked that the Afghan strategy is going according to plan and that the scheduled drawdown will begin in July, but troops on the ground believe the war is intensifying and only beginning. After nine years of combat the Taliban show no sign of ending their resistance. Their insurgents still actively fight U.S. and NATO forces along with persistently assassinating and targeting Afghan officials. The Afghan government cannot fill over a third of government positions due to the fear caused by the high mortality rate of their officials.
The Question then arises: Is Afghanistan worth fighting for? The cost of the Afghan War is about $7 billion a month. It costs a million dollars a year for one soldier to be in Afghanistan and Obama just added an additional 30,000 troops. After nine years of combat the debt accrued is more than I want to count. A total of 2,193 NATO soldiers have died during this conflict. 1,361 of those deaths were American and about 9,770 American military personnel have been wounded. When considering those few factors alone I do not believe the war is worth fighting anymore and 60% of Americans also agree with that conclusion. Originally the war was necessary to dismantle al Qaeda but according to senior U.S. intelligence officials there are around a 100 al Qaeda operatives currently in Afghanistan. The Taliban itself says al Qaeda has a very small role in this war. This war has become more about stopping the Taliban from retaking Afghanistan. And though no one wants to see that happen, it is not worth the price we are paying. How can the American people directly benefit from a democratic Afghanistan? It is a third world nation everyone had forgotten about after the Soviets abandoned their war with Afghan insurgents. It is time for the withdrawal of the majority of U.S. and NATO forces.

Senate Approves Bush-era Tax Cuts

In another blow to the Obama administration, the unemployment benefits and tax cut package proposed last week by the President were approved by the Senate. This measure includes many of the Bush-era tax cuts for middle and upper-class brackets, including controversial benefits for the top 2% of earners. The legislation is tied with a 13-month extension for unemployment benefits that would carry the unemployed until after the next holiday season.

This legislation represents a major compromise on the part of Senate democrats and President Obama. Part of his platform of change was founded on ending the previous adminstration's tax breaks to the rich. To fold on this issue demonstrates a willingness to cooperate but also highlights a major disappointment in Obama's domestic policy to date. Guantanamo is still open, we're still mismanaging our financial regulatory system, and tax cuts for the rich are being extended. Many of the central themes Obama spoke so passionately about have disinitegrated in the wake of the loss of the 'super-majority' and dwindling support for the formerly popular politician.

Sen. Harry Reid had this to say: "My Republicans colleagues would rather talk about the deficit than do anything to bring it down." In my opinion this should be viewed as a bipartisan effort and should be used to continue cooperation in the future. We've demonstarted over the past ten years partisan politics in our legislature leads to headaches and bitterness. Our public has less confidence in Congress today than in many points of history. If Congress fails to pass this package, taxes for the middle-class will go up on January 1st. Unfortunately, I don't think this is the answer.

Continuing Wealthy Tax Cuts

11/12/2010
A wave of panic hit liberals after White House Advisor David Axelrod stated the Obama administration was highly considering a temporary extension of all Bush's tax cuts. Mr. Axelrod was quoted saying "we have to deal with the world as we find it", meaning the White House does not plan to fight for the end of the wealthy tax cuts. Unlike the Democrats the Republicans show no sign of lessening their resistance to Obama's agenda. This extension would continue the tax cut for all families including those earning more than $250,000.
Even though the Democrats still maintain control of the House and Senate, the Obama administration is open to compromise with Republicans. This is a huge mistake. It seems President Obama is surrendering without a fight, even he repeatedly promised during his campaign to continue the tax cuts for the middle and lower classes but ed it for the wealthy. Obama in the past has been too willing to compromise with Republicans. During the creation of the health care bill Obama unnecessarily removed reforms in attempt to gain some Republican support which he never received and it appears again that he is already ready to capitulate. It should be apparent that no matter what Obama offers the Republicans will not play ball with the Obama administration or the Democratic party.
The trickle down theory proposed by Republicans has failed time and again and the majority of Americans do not approve of extending tax cuts to the wealthy. The tax cut for the wealthiest Americans would cost the U.S. government $700 billion over the next ten years, which is intolerable, especially at such a troubling economic times. Axelrod also said "I don't want to trade away security for the middle class in order to make that point", signifying once again the Democrats are unable to have the slightest resemblance of a backbone. The lower and middle classes need the tax cuts unlike the wealthy but the top percentage of American should give back to the country that has supported them.

Obama and Asia-Pacific Leaders Vow to Work Toward Freer Trade

For this blog entry I went on NewYorkTimes.com to find an article. There were plenty of articles to choose from but the one that stuck out for me was how Obama was talking to asianpacific leaders about having better tradeand talked about creating a regional free trade zone. This meeting was the end of his 10 day diplomatic and economic journey where he recieved a warm welcome from India but was criticized for not being able to finalize a free trade pact with South Korea.

On his final say of his adventure Obama had a meeting with the President of Russia Dmitri A. Medvedev talking about how Obama is commited to lifting the Cold War era trade restrictions which would allow them to join the World Trade Organization. Obama also talked with 20 other countries and territories in the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum and agreed on taking steps to a free trade zone in that region. There is no official time table for this free trade yet but they thought a good starting point might be the Trans Pacific Partnership, Which is a free trade agreement that four small countries are in, but there are talks of five other countries including the US that might join in as well.

The Major leaders of the global economic activity agreed to remove protectionist measures put in place dring the current global economic crisis, but also to avois any sudden changes in the foriegn exchange markets. Obama also brought up with Medvedev that his top priority was the ratification of the two countries new arms treaty that was stalled in Senate. Obama and Medvedev will meet later on in the weel in Libson for the NATO summit meeting. Obama said that next time they meet he would like to talk about Afghanistan and missle defense.

The President then went to go see the Great Buddah of Kamakura before he left to deal with the Lame Duck Congress in Washington. Obama is seeming to make small steps into making other countries not hate us as much as they used to. This trade talk has seemed to have countries trust us a little more than they used to and hopefully if we follow through on these ideas it will help stimulate the global economy. I hope that we do lift the trade regulations on Russia from the Cold War era because we seem to always promise the Russians something then back out leading into a Cold War. If we lift the trade regulations then Russia will start getting alon with us better and hopefully other countries will follow.

Midterms 2010

Unlike the majority of Americans, I’ve been glued to the midterm election coverage over the past couple days. I keep checking the New York Times website to see if any other races have been decided. While it’s been reported for months that the Republicans were going to gain in the House, I guess I just had to see it for myself. I just spent the last few moments comparing the map from elections of Representatives from 2008 to 2010. The amount of blue that is changed to red is very surprising to me. Even California went 7/8 red this time around.
While this isn’t something to celebrate by any stretch of the imagination for sitting Democrats in Congress, it could be worse. Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell did not win (Angle lost by 6%, and O’Donnell by 16%). O’Donnell’s concession can be seen here and Angle's here. Angle was well known for her commercials profiling illegal immigrants and O’Donnell for her controversial Christian stances on pre-marital sex and other clips from the 1990's on Real Time with Bill Maher.

But it is important to note that while these radical Republicans did not win, Rand Paul did. Paul is a Libertarian who has been known for controversial opinions on the Civil Rights Act. It was almost humorous to watch the panel on MSNBC (including Kieth Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Mathews, and Lawrence O’Donnell) freak out about his success.

Congress now stands with each house being controlled by a different party. Republicans won 60 seats in the House of Representatives, putting the final total at 239 Republicans and 186 Democrats, while winning 6 seats on the Senate, putting the final total at 52 Democrats and 46 Republicans. How this will effect Congress is uncertain. When the House had a majority of Democrats and a supposed filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, still over 400 pieces of legislation were passed through the House and were not passed or reconciled by the Senate. Now, with differing ideologies in Congress, it seems to make sense that the House will pass even more legislation than before over the Democratic minority, only to hit a road block at the Democratic Senate. Another discussed point was the power of the filibuster. It was just recently threatened by John McCain over the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t tell. Now that the Democrats have no power to block a filibuster, will it happen more and more often?
These are all extremely hypothetical questions. All of the candidates that have been recently elected have been running on ideological statements and now must attempt to put those into practice. Republicans in this election ran on the ideal of small government and cutting government spending, and it is known that the United States will reach the designated debt ceiling sometime this spring. If the ceiling is not increased, then the United States will risk default. Read about it here. If the newly elected Republicans vote to increase the debt, than they will not appear to be the small government advocates that they appeared to be during their campaign. But if they don’t’ raise the ceiling then there will be repercussions for the United States financial system.

One thing that is always predicatable about elections is their unpredictability, that's for sure.

What One Word Describes Your Current State of Mind? Disconnected.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’ve never claimed to be the best student…but election day has been distracting to my studies tonight.

I stumbled on a NYTimes.com interactive online piece which poses the question “What One Word Describes Your Current State of Mind?”. The piece asks you to enter the word that best describes your current mood, with the header of the frame reading “Election 2010”. When I first clicked to the page, I was simultaneously comforted, and perplexed: are we not listening to these “disgusted, sickened, powerless, anxious, worried, tired, and nervous” Americans? “I’m not alone! I’m one of them too!”, I thought. When I saw “worried” fly past the screen, I clicked “I also feel worried” What is worrisome is simple: The new face of Congress, and my inability to change it. 

Washington Post reporter Ezra Kline called election day “The end of the ‘do-something’ Congress”. From historic health reform, something that the national government has struggled with for decades, to the 75,000 infrastructure projects that were initiated in the past two years, to the refinement and overhaul of financial regulation: it hasn’t been perfect…but it’s been ‘something’. No other time in the past 40 years have we seen such a prolific amount of legislation flow from Capitol Hill. Within a few years, over 32 million Americans will now be able to gain health coverage they once could not afford; fantastic. 

..and it’s all ended, the progress anyway. Despite being a Congress that was able to legislate like no other, it seems that they’ve failed as politicians. Multiple polls show a widespread ignorance that the 111th Congress was successful at “getting things done”.

I’m worried, cynical, tired, and nervous. I feel disconnected, disenfranchised by the American political system. I’m not alone, but our voices seem to fall on deaf ears. But hey, we’re in this together, right?

Young Voters Say They Feel Abandoned

As of Tuesday Barack Obama will have been in office for two years. At the begining of his term President Obama seemed to be very connected with the youth of America making promises to help pay for education and lower taxes for the youth. Obama seems to be losing the votes of the younger crowd more and more as his term goes on. early on in the 2008 election Obama turned his sights on the youth realizing that there is not a big voter turnout, this was a very smart idea because by gaining the support of the youth Obama gained many votes that helped him win the election. He recieved sixty-six percent of the vote in the US for ages 18-29 which was a historic proportion. There were the most americans under the age of 30 who helped work on campaigns at a greater rate than the general population for the first time since 1952. It is safe to say that in the beginning of Barack Obama's presidency that he had the youth vote on his side.

The youth voters who supported Obama have seem to been on a decline since his election in 2008. Many of the youth who supported Obama was saying that they would have liked to be more involved with the Obama agenda. They were hoping to train and work in the campaign office once Obama was elected. Much of the youth supporting Obama, they seemed to be the faces for the campaign in college campuses and little towns who would turn undecided voters into Obama voters. In Miama alone they got 2000 new voters.

The youth helped Obama more than just asking people to vote for him but they got the word out about Obama every way they knew how, through facebook,twitter and even the Great Shelp which was run by Sarah Silverman trying to get young Jewish kids to have their grandparents vote for Obama. Most of the younger voters felt that they were being used by Obama because he was all about the youth in his campaigns then when he got elected into office he mainly focuse on health care and the older crowd and forget about the youth. In the past few weeks before the midterm election Obama seemd to be trying to reach the youth again, by going on the daily show and having a conference call with the College Democrats around the country. Lynda Tran a Spokeswomen for Organizing for America said that President Obama " was busy digging us out and making sure we didn't fall into another great depression.

I happen to agree with Lynda Tran, Obama has a lot of things on his plate. He can't do everything he promises right away he is more worried about our economy,trying to get it back on the right track. I can understand why he is dealing with this first because the economy affects all of us. Obama has started getting back to the youth in recent months by having conference calls and going on younger talk shows. I can understand why some people are losing faith in President Obama but I feel like he stepped into a position that had multiple problems with it and he is trying to fix them the best way he can. It is just going to have to take time, it can't all be solved over night. So I feel that Obama has not forgotten about the youth, he had to deal with some big issues but now is getting back to the youth and hopefully will make the changes he set out to make.

www.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/us/politics/01generation0.html

www.prx.org/.../27147-barack-obama-addresses-youth-issues

Don't Ask Don't Tell and Presidential Power

A perfect example of a President making a promise during an election that they needed Congress to help keep was when Obama campaigned in the 2008 election on the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT). This policy was originally passed during the Clinton administration, and essentially states that a homosexual person may serve in the military, as long as they are not open about their sexuality. With the issue of legal gay marriage becoming more prominent, the overt discrimination in DADT became a more prominent issue as well. The debate is heated, and also shows the President’s dependence on Congress.

During MTV’s recent broadcast “Conversation with the President,” Obama answers a question from a woman asking why he does not end the law with an executive order, as Truman had done to desegregate the military in 1948. He also points out that in the law, it is specifically written that the president cannot use an Executive order to repeal it, and he also tells the woman that “it will end on my watch.”

The video of this exchange can be found here.

Why would Obama walk around saying that it will be repealed when he honestly has no power on this one? This is interesting, because in his previous state of the Union Address, he acknowledges that he is going to work with Congress. But he doesn’t say that he is dependent on them.

During the recent MTV town hall meeting, he states that the Senate could lift the restriction on the Executive Order so he could issue it. Enter John McCain. All it takes for Obama to look like a stagnant leader and a like President who is not producing the promised drastic change is a measly filibuster. Now Obama has to wait until McCain is no longer willing to filibuster the repeal of the policy to even make headway. Since Obama can’t repeal it, McCain and others against the repeal are refusing to repeal it, the only avenue left at this point for repeal is the court system.

On October 12, 2010, a federal judge in California ruled to stop the enforcement of DADT. The Obama administration has appealed this ruling, which can easily seem contradictory. But since this is a very complicated situation, one has to think critically about the decision. For a decision to really be in effect for the entire country, it makes sense that the Supreme Court should make the decision to suspend enforcement of the policy.

To read one soldier’s story of what it is like to serve in the military while gay, click here

Deepwater Drilling Moratorium Lifted

The Obama Administration lifted its moratorium on offshore drilling Tuesday afternoon. The move comes in the wake of an oil spill caused by a BP drilling station that devastated the Gulf Coast. In spite of the environmental consequences, Gulf area politicians and citizens alike largely opposed the moratorium, which resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of jobs. The end of the moratorium brings with it new regulations on maintenance and observation of drilling sites, as well as stricter guidelines of emergency procedures such as fail safes and cashing wells. Support for the administration's decision has been limited and mixed.
As Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal points out, the moratorium was intended for deep-water drilling but since April only 12 new shallow water permits have been issued. The slowing of the federal review process has inhibited the process of all domestic drilling. Many companies are expected to object to the new regulations, but federal officials say there is no going back to 'business as usual'. Louisiana Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu has a lock on Obama's nomination of Jack Lew as his new director of the Office of Management and Budget; one she's refused to lift until the moratorium is finished. She still refuses to lift her lock, claiming she needs to examine how the OMB will handle new contracts before she'll consent to nominating a director in the midst of re-organization.
Of course the administration's decision has it detractors. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist opposes the lift on the grounds that until real investigation and problem-solving can be completed on the devastating BP spill. He claims that while the process of claims and repair on the coast cripples business, it's not appropriate to restart deepwater drilling regardless of new precautions. Natural Resources Defense Council executive director Peter Lehner called the action premature. He claims prevention is the most important tool available. Until we understand the damage of the spill and why it happened initially, we should not risk another disaster. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar responded by saying ""The truth is, there will always be risks associated with deepwater drilling, but we have now reached a point where we have, significantly, in my view, reduced those risks,"
This decision reflects the ability of a president to seize and consolidate power during times of crisis. Be it through rally around the flag ideals, a surge in sympathy or patriotism, or classic support for leadership executives often grow in strength during times of need. Unfortunately for Obama, Hurricane Katrina and the ensuing economic difficulties in the Gulf and nationwide have his approval ratings low. His attempt to reconcile the dangers of continued drilling with the need for oil industry workers to earn was seen as arbitrary and short-sighted. Our classic respect for leadership has declined steadily since an increase in media exposure rendered the White House less formal. There were no prescribed solutions for this disaster and both the government and BP came out looking unprepared, ineffectual, and poorly managed.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/12/news/companies/deepwater_drilling_moratorium_lifted.fortune/
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/10/12/130515423/deepwater-drilling-ban-no-political-plus-for-obama
http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/article703915.ece/US-lifts-moratorium-on-deepwater-oil-drilling
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/US-Lifts-Ban-on-Deepwater-Oil-Drilling-104807834.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/13/us/13drill.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hD3eceN6XYCd91U0H_GAfAKgJ96AD9IQC8AO3?docId=D9IQC8AO3

Advocacy Groups and Transparency

527 and 501 advocacy groups have become more of an issue in today’s politics. Individual contributors giving money to their candidate is one thing but the combined efforts of a company or group that far outweigh the efforts of a few individuals is quite another. Companies especially often only hold interests in the field of profit and are less inclined to the good of society as a whole. To mark these groups as having the same rights as individuals and then preventing the public from seeing what interests these groups serve creates a lack of transparency that Americans want in politics.

            In recent campaign appearances, President Obama has called for Democrats to contribute in an effort to match the money that is being given to the Republican Party (Cooper). He also mentioned a report by the Center for American Progress that asserted that the Chamber of Commerce may be mixing money from foreign contributors in with its domestic funds in its payments for political advertisements and other activities, allowing for foreign influence on our elections (Cooper). Foreign influence is the last thing that the American people want in their elections of law makers as that kind of conduct could paralyze the country in any foreign policy that has to do with a country that has a now “vested interest” in some of our leaders. This is the extreme but it is something that must be considered carefully and guarded against to prevent things from getting out of control.

            More of a realistic problem is private companies that conduct business at the expense of the American people having more of a say in government in an order to sway it in their direction. Recently President Obama refused to sign a bill that was criticized that it could facilitate foreclosure fraud (Calmes and Streitfeld). The Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform called for lenders to voluntarily suspend foreclosures until their internal investigations are completed (Calmes and Steitfeld). Is it not possible that some companies may want to contribute towards candidates that will try and override the president’s veto if it allows them more leeway in conducting their business? This specific case may not be a problem but it shows how companies who have a stake in legislation passed concerning their field of business may want to work towards promoting a candidate more favorable to their interests.

            In American industries there is a need for transparency to prevent a powerful corporation from abusing its power. The same is true of American government. If people are aware of illegalities taking place, action is more likely to be taken. This process acts as a deterrent for most companies if they are ever tempted. If government is subject to heavy corporate influence then that transparency is lost along with accountability. Governments should certainly consider the needs of industry as they help make this country strong and provide goods, services, and jobs for American citizens. There is balance that must be maintained and a standard that must be upheld.

Calmes, Jackie, and David Streitfeld. "Obama to Veto Bill That Could Speed Foreclosures." The

New York Times 08 Oct. 2010, New York ed., B1 sec. The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 07 Oct. 2010. Web. 09 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/business/08mortgage.html?ref=politics>.

Cooper, Helene. "Obama Calls for Voters to Outweigh Outside Money." The New York Times 08

Oct. 2010, New York ed., A16 sec. The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 07 Oct. 2010. Web. 09 Oct. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/us/politics/08campaign.html?ref=politics>.

Largest wind farm should spark government interest

When it comes to agendas and presidential policies the environment is always at the forefront of discussion. Two weeks ago the worlds largest wind farm just opened, not in the US but rather in England. This large wind farm is located in the North Sea about seven miles off the coast of Kent, England. The energy company Vattenfall is in charge of the construction and operation of the farm. The farm is composed of 100 wind turbines which will create enough power for about 200,000 homes. The UK has enough land and offshore wind turbines to produce enough energy to power all the homes in Scotland.

I find energy consumption and how we acquire our energy to be interesting and important. I think this wind farm shows that renewable energy is a legitimate source and is really just starting to be explored. I think this article shows that renewable energy is for real just on the fact they can power all the homes in Scotland on strictly wind power. Here in the US I think we are falling behind other countries especially compared to other developed nations. I find this opening of this wind farm as a model for the rest of the developed nation to use. The Obama administration can use this farm as a model to show how efficient wind power is. Its not just wind power but also other renewable energy sources such as solar power, tidal power, and geothermal power are all legitimate sources that help in curbing our carbon out put. Right now the US is and has been falling behind in renewable energy.

After this past summer the images of an oil ruined gulf are still fresh in my head. Its time to look into renewable energy for real enough of this talk . Personally I do not believe our government did enough with this man made disaster. They should of had a ship called the USS Obama out in the gulf skimming the gulf for oil. Obviously that was a joke but seriously this is the time to jump on the renewable energy band wagon and use the gulf oil spill as a image to convey it. The presidents way of combating pollution is the recovery act. The act includes $80 billion in the generation of renewable energy such as expanding maufacturing for clean energy, advancements in vehicles, and bulding a smart/ more efficent power grid. This is all stated on whiteouse. gov. I like how this policy claims all these important ideas but what I want to see is progress. Progress would be putting up the cape wind farm, I get that its not that large of a wind farm and could have effects on the fishing down on the cape but I see as it as a symbol. I get progress does not happen over night but when you see something actually functioning it gets the ball rolling. Eighty million dollars is alot of money being pumped into renewable and cleaner energy projects so in that aspect the Obama administration has done a decent job providing the funds for these projects.

Renewable energy creates innovative jobs and these projects can be made by American companies, there should be no outsourcing here. The main point of me blogging tonite was to show that renewable energy is real and its not being headlined by the US but by European countries. I belive is up to us and our government to really step up. Its time to make this real, wether it be wind solar or tidal power. We have the technology, we need the jobs its almost like killing two birds with one stone. We rely on energy, without it we would plunge into a third world country within weeks. The Obama administration has the funding its time to make this happen and once we complete a massive wind far it will show how well it works and in return help the administration succed in there environmental policy.
Sources:
http://technorati.com/lifestyle/green/article/worlds-largest-wind-farm-now-operational/
www.whitehouse.gov/issues/energy-and-environment
Used both Websites

The President has multiple roles and it takes a great deal to fulfill these roles, especially when one considers the ever-changing tide of public opinion and always shifting party rhetoric. Currently President Obama is actively working to fulfill his presidential roles though he is only one man and as such can only do so much at one time. In trying to meet several goals at once, President Obama is trying to energize Democratic voters to get them to vote in the upcoming midterm elections. Some in the Democratic Party have criticized Obama for not being as driven in this campaign as he was in his presidential race. I must admit this seems a little unfair as that was the presidency and it was his campaign to run. Yes he should be supportive of his own party as it helps him in the long run but these elections are for those in Congress to run and they shouldn’t have to rely heavily on the president. Maybe the Democrats should step up their strategy and stop letting the Republicans have all the say. In trying to get Democratic voters to vote, President Obama is fulfilling his role as party/opinion leader as well as partly carrying out his duty as a legislative leader in trying to form a “friendly” Congress that will make it easier for him to pass his legislation. Should this be a major issue concerning the Obama Administration or are there more pressing issues? Is this advanced planning of his own reelection more strategically sound or does it betray a lack of confidence in the party?

            In trying to carry out the role of Commander and Chief, President Obama has had a real problem in Afghanistan. The book “Obama’s War” by Bob Woodward, according to Peter Baker of the New York Times, shows that the strategy in Afghanistan seems to be more about extracting the US from its involvement there. It is strange how this war has been labeled Obama’s war because he did not start this conflict and is trying to finish it. Obviously the history of Afghanistan doesn’t give much hope for America leaving it with pride or even a sense of accomplishment. Do you think that Obama should just look for an exit strategy in Afghanistan or should he maintain a policy of staying there to accomplish what we “set out to do”? Do you defend or oppose more troops? Will it be like Vietnam if we gradually increase the number of soldiers or should we stop at a certain troop level to prevent ourselves from being sucked into a bigger conflict similar to what happened in Vietnam?

            Concerning the role of Chief Diplomat, the Mid-East peace talks between Israel and Palestine are starting to deteriorate again. A week seems to be about all the time that is left for those involved to find a solution to the continuation of expansion of Israeli settlements. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Nicolas Sarkozy are taking active roles in trying to promote peace between Israeli and Palestinian leaders. The Obama administration certainly has taken steps in urging both sides to remain with the peace talks but Obama himself isn’t taken an active role in visiting with the two leaders Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas. How important are these peace talks? Are they more of a priority than the midterm elections? Both issues are pressing at the moment but with Americans so concerned about matters in the United States, more focus on Palestinian-Israeli peace talks would probably be frowned upon by the general public. The Republicans, with all their past stress on homeland security and these peace talks would be a part of securing us at home, would use it as another attack on the president for not letting the concerns of the American people take priority.

            The president has a role to play in making sure that the economy is running smoothly. This is going to be difficult in that his director of the National Economic Council, Lawrence H. Summers, is leaving his post. This will give the president the opportunity to restructure his economic team. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Is it too early to tell? With Rahm Emanuel leaving to run for mayor of Chicago and David Axelrod is leaving to begin working on President Obama’s re-election. Is this smart planning to get the ball rolling so soon? Such advance planning maybe what the Democrats as a whole need to do. The republicans are constantly letting their positions be known and are quick to jump and attack the other side for not fulfilling its promises. They do this with elections in mind, planting that doubt with the voters. With many leaders leaving there is a chance for the president to rearrange the bureaucracy and get some different policies going. Is this a good thing or should he stick to what he has going?  

           

Baker, Peter. "Woodward Book Says Afghanistan Divided White House." The New York Times

22 Sept. 2010, New York ed., A12 sec. The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 21 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/world/asia/22policy.html?scp=1&sq=obama and the war in afghanistan&st=cse>.

Bronner, Ethan. "Diplomats Try to Save Mideast Talks." The New York Times 28 Sept. 2010,

New York ed., A10 sec. The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/world/middleeast/28mideast.html?ref=middleeast>.

Feller, Ben. "Obama: Democratic Voter Apathy 'inexcusable' - Yahoo! News." Obama:

Democratic Voter Apathy 'inexcusable' 28 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. <http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_interview>.

Stolberg, Sheryl G. "Obama’s Economics Chief Is Set to Leave." The New York Times 22 Sept.

2010, New York ed., A1 sec. The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 21 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/business/22summers.html?scp=1&sq=Obama%E2%80%99s%20Economics%20Chief%20Is%20Set%20to%20Leave&st=cse >.

Stolberg, Sheryl G. "Obama Puts Campaigning Back on His Agenda." The New York Times 28

Sept. 2010, New York ed., A20 sec. The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 27 Sept. 2010. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/us/politics/28obama.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&ref=politics&adxnnlx=1285704126-NCaQ2H5MuMt6R4LLig940A>.

Blog Posting Schedule

Please post on or before Thursday of the week listed below.  

Week of October 4:
Justin B
Nat G
C.J. M.

Week of October 11:
Justin B.
Daniel C.
Eric S.

Week of October 18:
Alissa R.
Kyle L.

Week of October 25:
Daniel C.
Nat G.


Week of November 1:
Alissa R.
Mike W.


Week of November 8:
Justin J.
Kyle L.


Week of November 15:
Mike W.
Justin J.


Week of November 29:
Eric S.

C.J. M.

Please check the Blog each week and make sure you comment on the postings!

Welcome to our Blog!

Welcome to our Fall 2010 Presidency class blog! The first step for class members is to set up an account with Blogger.com so I can add you to this blog so you can get started posting! Look for an email from me, if you do not receive one, let me know. I will send a sign up sheet around and publish the posting schedule.



A few rules to follow:

1. No profanity or obscenities! This Blog will maintain professional standards of discourse!

2. No jerks.

3. No incivility. You are expected to treat one another with respect and offer constructive comments.

4. follow all rules about fair use of material--copyrights etc.

5. You are expected to post a story on or before Thursday of the week assigned below.

Now--get blogging!