HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » kpete » Journal


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Sep 17, 2004, 02:59 PM
Number of posts: 49,195

Journal Archives

USA Prescription For Relief from Stress, Anxiety, Paranoia Or Feelings Of Inadequacy


Obama Doctrine: 'Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail'

as opposed to the BUSH/CHENEY Doctrine:

SUN JUN 01, 2014 AT 12:00 PM PDT
Obama Doctrine: 'Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail'
by Ian Reifowitzr
Daily Kos

Outside of a time of crisis, the best foreign policy is often dull. But dull isn't good enough for the likes of Maureen Dowd, who bemoaned the fact that President Obama's foreign policy vision "doesn’t scare anybody ... doesn’t feel like leadership," or others who criticized it this week. And the president's foreign policy certainly isn't good enough for Dick Cheney, who called him a "very, very weak president ... maybe the weakest—certainly in my lifetime." You remember Dick Cheney, right? He was the architect of the single-most destructive foreign policy in American history. Hands down. If Maureen Dowd wants to scare people, maybe she can include a photo of Dick Cheney in next year's Christmas cards.

This past week Barack Obama laid out his approach to foreign policy in a speech at West Point's commencement ceremonies. On the fundamental point, namely how the U.S. should use its military power around the world, the Obama Doctrine offers a direct contrast to the approach of his immediate predecessor:

I believe that a world of greater freedom and tolerance is not only a moral imperative; it also helps keep us safe. But to say that we have an interest in pursuing peace and freedom beyond our borders is not to say that every problem has a military solution. Since World War II, some of our most costly mistakes came not from our restraint but from our willingness to rush into military adventures without thinking through the consequences, without building international support and legitimacy for our action, without leveling with the American people about the sacrifices required. Tough talk often draws headlines, but war rarely conforms to slogans.


"U.S. military action cannot be the only or even primary component of our leadership in every instance," said Obama.

"Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail."



Barack Obama should continue to ignore Maureen Dowd and Dick Cheney, and follow the careful, measured principles he laid at West Point. If he leaves office: 1) having ended the Iraq and Afghanistan wars without starting any new ones, 2) having maintained the alliances with the European and Asian countries that, together, dwarf the power of any potential threat to our country, and 3) having enacted agreement with Iran that deals with its nuclear program and helps move that country away from its reflexive anti-Western path, he will go down in history as a very successful foreign policy president. We are, thankfully, not facing a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao, and Obama has thus far avoided the trap of starting an unnecessary war. In terms of foreign policy, this president is on track to leave the United States significantly stronger and safer than he found it. That's a legacy to be proud of.

the rest:

“Whoa whoa whoa whoa,” O’Reilly said. “Have you ever seen me do a softball interview with anybody?"

During an appearance on the "O'Reilly Factor" on Friday, Ramos expanded upon the comments he made in an interview this week with Politico. He told O'Reilly that many journalists are more concerned about maintaining friendly relations with their sources and complained that Washington, D.C. "feels like a club."


"Of course there are exceptions, but we all have biases," Ramos said. "You have your own biases. I mean, whenever you're covering Obamacare or Benghazi or supporting the Republican Party more (than)the Democratic Party."

O'Reilly, who has called himself a "traditionalist" for years while insisting that he's every bit as tough on Republicans as Democrats, couldn't believe his ears.

“Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa,” O’Reilly said. “Have you ever seen me do a softball interview with anybody?”

Ramos said he had indeed seen O'Reilly conduct tough interviews, but he added that he's also seen O'Reilly "supporting more Republicans than Democrats."

more plus video:


Brilliant GOP Politician Suggests: MORE OF THE SAME CRAP!

Cruz: U.S. could have used military force to free POW http://www.politico.com/blogs/.....IY.twitter … via @POLITICO

“I do not think the way to deal with terrorists is through releasing other violent terrorists,” the Texas Republican said on ABC’s “This Week.” “It's not the only way. We can go in and use military force, as needed, to rescue our fallen compatriots."

more war-bull:

"Never underestimate Ted Cruz. He is off-the-chart brilliant. I don’t agree with his politics.”

One might think this was a 'domesticated' bear ...

One might think this was a 'domesticated' bear ... No, it's only very curious, and very very tired, it seems.

"He got in the hammock like he was a tourist or something," homeowner Vincent James told CNN affiliate WESH. Usually, James is the one lounging on his back in the white rope mesh hanging between two trees.

The bear enjoyed the respite enough to savor it.

He -- or she -- stayed in the hammock for about 20 minutes, said photographer Rafael Torres, who snapped pictures of the bear from 60 feet away. Torres' presence did not seem to disturb the wild animal's repose.

video & more:

Krugman: Climate Action Is ‘Remarkably Cheap,’ New EPA Rules Would Give ‘U.S. Economy A Boost’

Krugman: Climate Action Is ‘Remarkably Cheap,’ New EPA Rules Would Give ‘U.S. Economy A Boost’


What would be the cost to the U.S. of moderate carbon pollution reductions, such as the emissions standards for existing power plants that the EPA will be announcing shortly? It’s a question that we always had to answer since, as everyone knows, EPA is legally obligated to issue rules regulating CO2 from existing power plants.

In April the world’s leading scientists, economists, and governments reviewed the literature and came to the broad consensus that even aggressive climate action would reduce the median annual growth of consumption over this century by a mere 0.06%. And that’s for a scenario in which the rich countries embrace rapid and sharp reductions in CO2, as opposed to the slow and modest reductions the EPA is seeking. Nor does that analysis factor in the hundreds of trillions of dollars of economic benefit from avoiding climate catastrophe — or the co-benefits of mitigation (such as reduced air pollution).

In May, the world’s leading energy experts said we are headed towards catastrophic 11°F warming but that if we wanted to keep warming to a far safer level, under 4°F warming, it would require investment in clean energy of only about 1 percent of global GDP per year through 2050. And that investment would be astoundingly cost-effective: “The $44 trillion additional investment needed to decarbonise the energy system … is more than offset by over $115 trillion in fuel savings — resulting in net savings of $71 trillion.”

Krugman explains that even the latest report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — “clearly meant to convey the impression that the E.P.A.’s new rules would wreak havoc” — actually shows the exact opposite.

Specifically, the report considers a carbon-reduction program that’s probably considerably more ambitious than we’re actually going to see, and it concludes that between now and 2030 the program would cost $50.2 billion in constant dollars per year. That’s supposed to sound like a big deal. Instead, if you know anything about the U.S. economy, it sounds like Dr. Evil intoning “one million dollars.” These days, it’s just not a lot of money.

As Krugman notes, our economy is at $17 trillion and growing. So “what the Chamber of Commerce is actually saying is that we can take dramatic steps on climate — steps that would transform international negotiations, setting the stage for global action — while reducing our incomes by only one-fifth of 1 percent. That’s cheap!”


AP got story wrong-Obama NOT required to notify Congress-That's Sec Of Defense Job & Here It Is:

Obama is not required by law to notify Congress 30 days before any 'terrorist' are transferred from the US facility

... rather

Sec of State is required to do that. In this case Sec of State Hagel. Hagel released this statement:

Hagel released this statement:

Release No: NR-281-14
May 31, 2014

Statement from Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on the return of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl

A few hours ago, the family of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was informed by President Obama that their long wait for his return will soon be over. Sgt. Bergdahl is now under the care of the U.S. military after being handed over by his captors in Afghanistan. We will give him all the support he needs to help him recover from this ordeal, and we are grateful that he will soon be reunited with his family.

Also today, I informed Congress of the decision to transfer five detainees from Guantánamo Bay to Qatar. The United States has coordinated closely with Qatar to ensure that security measures are in place and the national security of the United States will not be compromised. I appreciate the efforts of the Emir of Qatar to put these measures in place, and I want to thank him for his instrumental role in facilitating the return of Sgt. Bergdahl.

Sgt. Bergdahl's return is a powerful reminder of the enduring, sacred commitment our nation makes to all those who serve in uniform. The United States government never forgot Sgt. Bergdahl, nor did we stop working to bring him back. I am grateful to all the military and civilian professionals ­ from DOD and our interagency partners ­ who helped make this moment possible, and to all those Americans who stood vigil with the Bergdahl family.


Ronald Reagan Gave Iran 1,500 Missiles for Hostages. Obama Trades Five Guys? GOP Heads Explode.

SAT MAY 31, 2014 AT 08:33 PM PDT
Ronald Reagan Gave Iran 1,500 Missiles for Hostages. Obama Trades Five Guys? GOP Heads Explode.
by David Harris Gershon

I don't want to hear another word about GOP lawmakers chest-thumping and foaming-at-the-mouth about the fact that Obama traded, without the requisite 30-day notice to Congress, five indefinitely detained prisoners for the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

You know why? Because history:

In 1985, while Iran and Iraq were at war, Iran made a secret request to buy weapons from the United States. McFarlane sought President Reagan's approval, in spite of the embargo against selling arms to Iran. McFarlane explained that the sale of arms would not only improve U.S. relations with Iran, but might in turn lead to improved relations with Lebanon, increasing U.S. influence in the troubled Middle East.

Reagan was driven by a different obsession. He had become frustrated at his inability to secure the release of the seven American hostages being held by Iranian terrorists in Lebanon. As president, Reagan felt that "he had the duty to bring those Americans home."

The arms-for-hostages proposal divided the administration. Longtime policy adversaries Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Secretary of State George Shultz opposed the deal, but Reagan, McFarlane and CIA director William Casey supported it. With the backing of the president, the plan progressed. By the time the sales were discovered, more than 1,500 missiles had been shipped to Iran. Three hostages had been released, only to be replaced with three more, in what Secretary of State George Shultz called "a hostage bazaar."

So GOP lawmakers are apoplectic about Obama not giving Congress the 30-day notice required by law before transferring any detainee from Guantanamo Bay, men who have mostly been detained without charge?

But will raise President Reagan upon a pillar, a man who gave Iran over 1,500 missiles for the release of U.S. hostages?

I have one response: shut up and sit down. Class is in session.


“I don’t care about your sympathy. I don’t give a s--- that you feel sorry for me”

We hear it after every mass shooting: politicians on both sides of the aisle intoning their deepest condolences to the victims and their families. We hear a lot about thoughts and prayers and sympathies. We especially hear it from politicians who kowtow to the NRA and the gun lobby, usually framed in the language of unnamed inexplicable evil that mere humans cannot control.

But the father of one of the victims of the Isla Vista shootings put it best when he said:

“I don’t care about your sympathy. I don’t give a s--- that you feel sorry for me,” Richard Martinez said during an extensive interview, his face flushed as tears rolled down. “Get to work and do something. I’ll tell the president the same thing if he calls me. Getting a call from a politician doesn’t impress me.”

Damn straight.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 ... 1565 Next »