Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Congress Votes Itself a Pay Raise in Middle of Worst Deficits
I can't believe it. We have the worst deficits and Congress rewards itself with a pay raise! That is cheeky. It is undeserved - with gas prices hitting record levels along with trillion dollar increases in the debt celing they should have their pay frozen, or cut, but not raised. If I were there, I would vote AGAINST a pay raise until they balance the budget. THAT could generate a return to fiscal sanity. I guess it is just too rough on them to live on $168,000 year, a king's ransom to most people, even in CD22...
Monday, June 12, 2006
What is Needed to Keep Iraq From Becoming a Failed State
Winning Iraq Requires Changes
In order to have any hope of turning the tide in Iraq will require vast training changes in our military. Our troops were trained to be warriors, but were put into a counterinsurgency, which is a totally different conflict.
Just now, three years after the counterinsurgency started, the Pentagon is finishing a new training manual – but it has yet to be put into use. In order to win in Iraq, our troops will need to interact with the population in new ways. Right now in mess halls in Iraq our troops don’t intermingle with the Iraqi troops – that does not bode well for future success.
The Iraq counterinsurgency feeds off the mistakes made when troops don’t have the training designed for the environment in which they are working. For success in Iraq, our troops have to be part warrior and part Peace Corps. It requires a 21st Century soldier who knows how to getting rid of terrorists while avoiding killing innocent civilians which gives the wrong impression of who we are. It will mean our soldiers get more training in local customs and language – it means giving US Special Forces training to national guardsmen.
Why is this important? Because if Iraq becomes a failed State, it will be a greater threat to global security, especially America’s security, than it is today. Only by getting the Pentagon to upgrade training of our overworked units in Iraq ASAP will have the most direct potential benefit of anything we could do at the moment. We have too much to lose not to put everything possible solution into action in Iraq. Just killing Zaqawi’s is not enough.
So why hasn’t Congress insisted on this training years ago?
I say that as one of the few people who saw 9 11 coming and warned about it…
In order to have any hope of turning the tide in Iraq will require vast training changes in our military. Our troops were trained to be warriors, but were put into a counterinsurgency, which is a totally different conflict.
Just now, three years after the counterinsurgency started, the Pentagon is finishing a new training manual – but it has yet to be put into use. In order to win in Iraq, our troops will need to interact with the population in new ways. Right now in mess halls in Iraq our troops don’t intermingle with the Iraqi troops – that does not bode well for future success.
The Iraq counterinsurgency feeds off the mistakes made when troops don’t have the training designed for the environment in which they are working. For success in Iraq, our troops have to be part warrior and part Peace Corps. It requires a 21st Century soldier who knows how to getting rid of terrorists while avoiding killing innocent civilians which gives the wrong impression of who we are. It will mean our soldiers get more training in local customs and language – it means giving US Special Forces training to national guardsmen.
Why is this important? Because if Iraq becomes a failed State, it will be a greater threat to global security, especially America’s security, than it is today. Only by getting the Pentagon to upgrade training of our overworked units in Iraq ASAP will have the most direct potential benefit of anything we could do at the moment. We have too much to lose not to put everything possible solution into action in Iraq. Just killing Zaqawi’s is not enough.
So why hasn’t Congress insisted on this training years ago?
I say that as one of the few people who saw 9 11 coming and warned about it…
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Legal Shenanigans Could Backfire
The Democrats have gotten a temporary restraining order to keep Mr. DeLay on the ballot for November. A hearing on a permanent injunction to keep it that way will be heard later this month.
They need to keep in mind that being smart legally could blow up in their faces. If DeLay gets past the Austin indictment and pulls out a squeaker with Lampson, then that strategy will blow up in their face.
As it is, DeLay has set up a loss for his replacement. The precinct chairs are moving at the speed of a glacier. By the time the sacrificial lamb is chosen, he or she will have only three (3) months to cover parts of four counties in CD22, a very diverse district. I’ve run in it four times and I still don’t feel that I’ve covered CD22 adequately -- so how people think they can do it in 3-4 months is wishful thinking at best. The candidate will also be two million dollars behind the Democrat Lampson in fundraising, and who knows what skeletons or embarrassing statements will come out of the closet. Only DeLay has the time in district and access to dollars to match it. If his legal troubles in Austin are satisfactorily resolved, he’s home free.
So using the courts to keep DeLay on the ballot could boomerang—the outcome could be the return of Tom DeLay (who will laugh in their faces and never leave at that point)...
They need to keep in mind that being smart legally could blow up in their faces. If DeLay gets past the Austin indictment and pulls out a squeaker with Lampson, then that strategy will blow up in their face.
As it is, DeLay has set up a loss for his replacement. The precinct chairs are moving at the speed of a glacier. By the time the sacrificial lamb is chosen, he or she will have only three (3) months to cover parts of four counties in CD22, a very diverse district. I’ve run in it four times and I still don’t feel that I’ve covered CD22 adequately -- so how people think they can do it in 3-4 months is wishful thinking at best. The candidate will also be two million dollars behind the Democrat Lampson in fundraising, and who knows what skeletons or embarrassing statements will come out of the closet. Only DeLay has the time in district and access to dollars to match it. If his legal troubles in Austin are satisfactorily resolved, he’s home free.
So using the courts to keep DeLay on the ballot could boomerang—the outcome could be the return of Tom DeLay (who will laugh in their faces and never leave at that point)...
Friday, June 09, 2006
Monday, June 05, 2006
Mr. Risk Goes to Washington
No, not me – Business Week is referring to Mr. Paulson, the new Treasury Secretary. They say he is well suited to today’s environment, which is at a dangerous point:
“Both liberal and conservative economists warn that the bulging trade deficit, now roughly 6% of gross domestic product, poses a danger of sending the dollar plunging and causing a financial meltdown. The federal budget deficit for 2006 will hit at least $300 billion. And current projections call for Social Security and Medicare to run up enormous deficits in the long run.”
Check out the article. It makes sense. This line also jumped out at me:
“Facing intense competition from around the world, the only way the American economy can thrive is through risk-taking. Indeed, some economists have characterized the U.S. as a giant venture capital fund that sucks in money from overseas and invests it in high-risk, high-return projects.”
Bottom line: There are greater issues facing us then most politicians and voters realize. We will need more “Mr./Ms. Risk” types in leadership to deal with these global issues that impact our future. But to have value, they have to know global trade and international finance to avoid pushing the wrong button that leads to disaster instead of opportunity...I can't say that I see a lot of those types around. Know anyone?
“Both liberal and conservative economists warn that the bulging trade deficit, now roughly 6% of gross domestic product, poses a danger of sending the dollar plunging and causing a financial meltdown. The federal budget deficit for 2006 will hit at least $300 billion. And current projections call for Social Security and Medicare to run up enormous deficits in the long run.”
Check out the article. It makes sense. This line also jumped out at me:
“Facing intense competition from around the world, the only way the American economy can thrive is through risk-taking. Indeed, some economists have characterized the U.S. as a giant venture capital fund that sucks in money from overseas and invests it in high-risk, high-return projects.”
Bottom line: There are greater issues facing us then most politicians and voters realize. We will need more “Mr./Ms. Risk” types in leadership to deal with these global issues that impact our future. But to have value, they have to know global trade and international finance to avoid pushing the wrong button that leads to disaster instead of opportunity...I can't say that I see a lot of those types around. Know anyone?
Mr. Risk Goes to Washington
No, not me – Business Week is referring to Mr. Paulson, the new Treasury Secretary. They say he is well suited to today’s environment, which is at a dangerous point:
“Both liberal and conservative economists warn that the bulging trade deficit, now roughly 6% of gross domestic product, poses a danger of sending the dollar plunging and causing a financial meltdown. The federal budget deficit for 2006 will hit at least $300 billion. And current projections call for Social Security and Medicare to run up enormous deficits in the long run.”
Check out the article. It makes sense. This line also jumped out at me:
“Facing intense competition from around the world, the only way the American economy can thrive is through risk-taking. Indeed, some economists have characterized the U.S. as a giant venture capital fund that sucks in money from overseas and invests it in high-risk, high-return projects.”
Bottom line: There are greater issues facing us then most politicians and voters realize. We will need more “Mr./Ms. Risk” types in leadership to deal with these global issues that impact our future. But to have value, they have to know global trade and international finance to avoid pushing the wrong button that leads to disaster instead of opportunity...I can't say that I see a lot of those types around. Know anyone?
“Both liberal and conservative economists warn that the bulging trade deficit, now roughly 6% of gross domestic product, poses a danger of sending the dollar plunging and causing a financial meltdown. The federal budget deficit for 2006 will hit at least $300 billion. And current projections call for Social Security and Medicare to run up enormous deficits in the long run.”
Check out the article. It makes sense. This line also jumped out at me:
“Facing intense competition from around the world, the only way the American economy can thrive is through risk-taking. Indeed, some economists have characterized the U.S. as a giant venture capital fund that sucks in money from overseas and invests it in high-risk, high-return projects.”
Bottom line: There are greater issues facing us then most politicians and voters realize. We will need more “Mr./Ms. Risk” types in leadership to deal with these global issues that impact our future. But to have value, they have to know global trade and international finance to avoid pushing the wrong button that leads to disaster instead of opportunity...I can't say that I see a lot of those types around. Know anyone?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
