February 6, 2012
1:42 pm
by: admin

An addition $42.3 billion requested for Iraq war, Senate unhappy

The strain on the US armed forces on account of the war fought in Afghanistan and Iraq is visible. With Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates requesting for another $42.3 billion to keep the military pressure up in Iraq and Afghanistan, the funding request by the Bush administration for the year 2008 has touched the all time high of $190 billion for any war year. The total cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan war would now be around $800 billion ever since the war on terror began right after September 11, 2001. The request came in the wake of Gen. George W. Casey, Jr., making it clear to the Senate that the army was spread dangerously thin and could find it very difficult to respond to other urgent exigencies, if the need arose. Casey, in an unusual move, had requested to appear before the Senate to apprise it of the problems being faced by the armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Bush has already declared a limited drawdown beginning in December this year. The request for additional funding has also come at a time when in a rare bipartisan consensus the Senate approved the proposal of dividing Iraq into three separate and autonomous regions for shias, sunnis and the kurds. The scheme is quite well defined in the Constitution of Iraq itself, but the Senate wants the process to be hastened through diplomatic means. The Senate seemed unhappy with the war funding requests which, in its opinion, was ‘habit forming’. The Senate also made it clear that it was not willing to mechanically ‘rubber stamp’ all funding requests that the President would send in. Source

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , , , ,

February 6, 2012
1:41 pm
by: admin

‘Bush war’ over Iraq continues: Democrats use money as tool

The tussle between Bush and Democrats in Congress continues. Democrat legislators see a chance to rein in Bush administration on the question of money for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pentagon has asked for $180 billion to keep the action going in these two countries in 2008. Defense secretary Robert Gates has approached Congress to approve the budget. However, the Democratic lawmakers have made the usual taunts like a nagging wife that Bush has formed a habit of spending too much money. They also warned sending so many US troops abroad to fight is breaking the back of the army. Congress will loosen purse strings a bit now and give some pocket money to Bush – in the form of a stop-gap bill – that will keep the war going in Iraq for few more weeks. This will give them time to mull over their future course of action. Democrats lack the adequate number of votes to overrule a presidential veto on any pullout proposal. They had tried once and failed in the past. Congress had passed the war funding bill with early withdrawal of troops from Iraq, but Bush used the veto against it. Robert Gates is putting a lot of pressure on Congress to get things moving on the demand for more money. He has put the demand couched so cleverly that lawmakers would appear to be heartless towards soldiers fighting in Iraq if they dared to refuse. Gates has said the money is for the soldiers. They are doing a great job in tough conditions. The least we can do is to provide them whatever they need. The money, the administration is asking for, is for fulfilling the soldiers’ basic needs. How can anyone counter this kind of arguments? Chipped in support for Gates, the Army chief of staff and former top US commander in Iraq Gen. George W. Casey Jr. has also warned Congress that the US army is dangerously stretched and that the wear and tear on equipment is rapid. However, Gates has offered a sop too. He said the going is tough now but the moment things improve we will start pulling back troops and merely keep a small force to fight al-Qaeda and keep Iran away from interfering in Iraq. But both Democrats and Republicans united on a non binding bill, passed by Senate, to push for greater speed in making Iraq a federal state with three separate autonomous regions for Shias, Sunnis and the Kurds. The US lawmakers had something at hand to needle Robert Gates. Democrats and Republicans asked Gates whether more could be done to hasten political progress in Iraq. But finally when we balance things, Bush and his team seem to be on top and Democratic legislators still on the back foot. REUTERS WP Image credit

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , , , , ,

February 6, 2012
1:40 pm
by: admin

Money makes the mare (US presidential nomination) go

One cannot argue that money plays a major role in determining the US President. As high funds a contender raises within his/her party, more is the possibility to win the presidential nomination and thus the chance to rule not only the US, but virtually the world by attaining most powerful position in the world. As the third financial or fundraising quarter for the US Presidential nomination campaign enters in the closing and the most crucial phase, money matters (rather speaks) seems to be the catchword of all the contenders chasing the mighty post. Many may agree with Anthony Corrado, a campaign finance expert at Maine’s Colby College, who describes handful of funds the most vital asset – after all important votes – for party nominees in their pursuit to the White House. Cash is king now. They have to start putting it to work. There is going to be a lot of money going out the door of these campaigns in October or November this year. No one can afford to wait. While all the frontrunners would like to consolidate their lead of previous two quarters, on the other hand, other candidates who didn’t perform well in earlier campaigns would certainly try their best to narrow the margin before this third financial quarter will finally come to an end on Sunday.

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , ,

February 5, 2012
1:39 pm
by: admin

President George W Bush angry over Congress’s delay

The Republicans no longer control the Congress and US President George W Bush is already emanating signs of displeasure and discontent. Now that he no longer controls the reins of the Congress and has to discuss every step with the Democrats, Mr. Bush is really finding the going tough. And it was this frustration merged with rage that was forced out a couple of days back. The Democrat-led US Congress has yet to decide on the spending spree of the government and this delay in their decision has severely angered the President. He reluctantly put his signature on a Bill to stop the government shutdown since the Democrat-led Congress has been unable to come up with an annual spending budget. The stop-gap measure would allow the US government to function through November 16 but the new fiscal year already started on Monday. With his hands firmly tied behind his back, Mr. Bush does release his venom through his moth and tall talks He didn’t fail to blame the Congress of incapability and also apprehended that the Democrats are planning the biggest tax increase in America’s history. The stalemate over the annual federal budget hangs on one major issue. The Democrats are eager to add $23 billion for domestic programs to Bush’s $933 billion request for the approximately one-third of the federal budget funded by the yearly spending bills. But President Bush is firmly against this and apparently wants the stated extra money for the funding of the ongoing war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Such a stopgap measure is nothing new in American politics. In fact, such measures have been employed since 1994. But the astonishment as well as the worries lies in the fact that not one of the 12 annual bills has been converted in law by the October 1 deadline. With the internal politics dangling like a car on the edge of a cliff, the US does seem to be losing ground. Image Source: Visiting DC Source: Reuters

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , , , ,

February 5, 2012
1:38 pm
by: admin

Does high fundraising decide the Presidential race in the US?

Hard to conjecture but in the face of recent reports, this certainly seems to be the case. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, should you want to race ahead of your rivals to become the candidate for the US president’s post from your party, you need to raise more funds than your competitors. If this be the sole mantra to success on the election polls, then Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama appear to be head and shoulders above the rest of their Democrat challengers. Mrs. Clinton, wife of the former US President Bill Clinton of course, and Obama, who could well be the first black President of the United States, have been reported to have amassed about $17 million each before the fundraising quarter ended on Sunday night. Mrs. Clinton is the most likely candidate from the Democrats for the President’s job but Obama is firmly trailing her on her heels and breathing heavily down her neck. The two other Democrat candidates have been upbeat about their chances despite recording somewhat low fundraising success. New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has reported that he has raised some $5.2 million in the past three months while former senator John Edwards is expected to have conjured up around $7 million for the quarter. Like their Democrat counterparts, the Republican candidates to displace Mr. George W Bush too have been busy for the pat three funds in raising funds for their election campaigns although they have met with relatively less success than the Republicans candidates. Fundraising in the US is held as a key issue in deciding who is elected from the respective parties for the Presidential elections and the contributions made by the people to their favourite candidates do reveal which person they next want to see at the helm of American politics. Image Source: Jones Report Source: Washington Post

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , , , ,

February 5, 2012
1:37 pm
by: admin

US shedding off duality, reducing its nuclear stockpile

The US has long been accused of hypocrisy. On one side it keeps on piling its arsenal with advanced nuclear technology, on the other side it gets enraged when any other nation attempts to do the same. It is this dual character that is at the heart of the controversy over Iran’s nuclear ambitions but the US is fast cleaning itself. And cleaning itself of the unwanted and dangerous nuclear warheads. In the latest report released by government officials on Sunday, the United States of America is rapidly dismantling its nuclear warhead and purifying itself of plutonium, uranium and non-nuclear high explosive components. The announcement does arrive as a signal that the most powerful country in the world with the most advanced nuclear technology is on a mission to trim down the amount of nuclear stockpile currently available worldwide. That the US is slimming down on its nuclear warhead not only on its own internal initiative is made clear when one realizes that the US does have an international commitment to fulfill. The US and Russia went into a treaty in 2002 according to which the former agreed to decrease its number of nuclear warheads somewhere between 1,700 and 2200. The National Nuclear Security Administration is a vital part of the Energy Department in the US. It reports that there has been an astounding 146% increase in dismantled nuclear warheads during the 2007 budget year. But as with all other issues currently circulating in the US, this matter too cannot escape any debate. A lot need to be accomplished before a new crop of nuclear warheads can be certified without the dangerous underground testing. The opponents of the warhead policy in the US Congress are all too eager to pick on these findings. Yet the fact that the US is decimating its nuclear stockpile is reason enough for the world to smile and applause. Image Source: Nature Source: USA Today

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , , ,

February 4, 2012
1:36 pm
by: admin

Democrats hatch new plan to force troops withdrawal from Iraq

The Democrats have never been in favour of the war in Iraq. Time and again they have been deciphered cropping up with new plans and reports that have lambasted the Bush administration. And now the Democrats have once more hatched a strategy to force the withdrawal of troop from Iraq sooner rather than later. Majority of the American were in favour of a retaliation to the 9/11 attacks and that’s what they got. But 6 years down the line and support for the war in Iraq has decimated to less than 50%. Yet the war goes on and the cost of maintaining the thousands of US troops stationed in the Middle East country goes on mounting. The Democrats now want to shift the burden of the cost of war from the federal reserves onto the Americans themselves. Advocated by the House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey and supported by Rep. Jack Murtha and Jim McGovern, the proposed measure plans to add 2% to the tax bills of low- and middle-income American taxpayers and 12-15% additional tax to higher-income taxpayers. It is still to be decided whether this additional tax is shaped into a draft or is structured as surtax. The Democrats say that this move is to let all Americans share the burden of the ongoing war in Iraq so as not to make the country slip deeper into debts. They say that such a move would secure the future generations from paying off the debts. But scratch the surface and you would come up with another angle. What the Democrats scheme to do with this proposed measure is to force the Bush administration to start pulling out of American troops from a constantly disintegrating Iraq. It is clear to them that the public would become ferocious should the measure be adopted and the Iraqi situation would become even more unpopular. Such a shrewd tactic is quite admirable indeed but could Mr. George W Bush come up with a counter-plan? Image Source: Visiting DC Source: CNN

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , ,

February 4, 2012
1:35 pm
by: admin

President Bush vetoes a critical children insurance bill

He knows that he is in the wan months of his Presidency and knows better than anyone else that he has to increase his attention to the domestic issues. Since the 9/11 attacks, US President George W Bush has been ridiculously busy in paying attention to offshore issues such as the Iraq war. But now with the increasing unpopularity both of the post-Saddam Hussein occurrences in the Middle Eastern country and Mr. Bush’s ignorance of the Americans themselves, the President is gradually diverting his focus towards sensitive matters at home. And one such overly sensitive matter in the US is healthcare. Medicare, the nationwide healthcare programme that aspires to provide health service at minimum costs to the poor and needy who cannot afford the otherwise hefty expenses of meeting with the healthcare demands, has often been censured for not properly fulfilling its objective. A good fraction of the scheme provides financial care for the children in the country and it is this particular programme that has been at the heart of yet another debate on Medicare. On Tuesday, President Bush decided to use his veto for only the fourth time in his Presidential rule when he nullified a bill to expand a children’s healthcare insurance scheme. The scheme proposes to increase the tax rates on tobacco to generate $35 billion to secure insurance for some 10 million children. Passed by a large majority of the US Senate, the vetoed bill proposed to help lift those families of the gloom who might be rich enough to cover the expenses of their children’s healthcare but cannot afford their insurance. President Bush argued the scheme was too costly and would hit the already shrinking federal reserves hard. Moreover, this scheme would allow a small window of opportunity to open for private sector users to switch sides to the government sector which would be additional burden for the government. The State Children’s Health Insurance Programme (SCHIP) is a hugely popular scheme among the Americans and Mr.Bush’s refusal to allow the Bill to pass through could easily trigger one more grievance to the public. Image Source: Visiting DC Source: BBC

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , ,

February 4, 2012
1:34 pm
by: admin

Anti-war block sets troops’ withdrawal deadline for Bush

Just two months and not a day more. Talks of pulling out of American troops from Iraq have been gaining momentum since last year and now the anti-war bandwagon has run out of patience. US President George W Bush has long been advocating the increasingly failing war in Iraq to be gradually proceeding towards success but, if anyone needs telling, the truth is far from what the President tells it is. Mr. Bush now has just two months to come up with a strategy to withdraw troops from Iraq. On Tuesday, the House emphatically voted to allow the Bush administration only two months to present the US Congress its plan for the withdrawal of US troops from the war-ravaged nation in the Middle East. 377 votes were in favour of the draft to just 77 against the motion. The passing of the motion by such an overwhelming majority doesn’t only demonstrate that the President and his Republican party have already lost the plot and the support of the US house but it also reveals how strong the House Democrats have become since last year. According to this newly drafted bill, the US Defense Secretary would now have just 60 days to deliver to the Congress the scheme to be adopted for the withdrawal f troops from Iraq. He would also need to sketch an outline on how to make a transition from the military mission to a counter-terrorism assignment. Although the measure adopted by the House appear to be a hard blow to the Bush administration which has consistently upheld its decision to go on fighting in Iraq, the fact is that this measure doesn’t guarantee the immediate pullout of troops. It doesn’t set a definite deadline for the withdrawal process o begn and doesn’t even force the Bush administration to implement the plan. So Mr. Bush is still apparently safe at the moment but the question is for how long. Image Source: Chris Abraham Source: Washington Post

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , ,

February 3, 2012
1:29 pm
by: admin

A Republican, A Democrat and a target: New wine in new bottle

How often do you find a Republican and a Democrat in the US openly exhibiting their friendship, let alone campaigning for an election? The question is of course a rhetorical one and the answer is pretty much obvious. It would be startling then to know that two professors at Concordia University, just north of Milwaukeehave paired up together to run for elections. Republican Jim Burkee teaches history and Democrat Jeff Walz teaches political science at the same University. The red-blue difference must have been the source of a plethora of debates and arguments between the two intellectuals and it would indeed be a lie to deny that there haven’t been any. But instead of fighting in public and demonstrating that they are a couple of old fools following the paths of politicians, Burkee and Walz have had their discussions in churches and university halls. But those discussions were mostly tied by common objectives. And what better way to explore ways to fulfill those common objectives than pair up together and get into politics? The pair is now busy joint campaigning to unseat Republican F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (Wis.). The entire concept of a Republican-Democrat joint campaign is so novel that the phenomenon has hit the national headlines in the US. Burkee and Walz are promising a campaign purified of negative advertisements, personal attack on any politicians and 100 debates in 300 days before the September 2008 party primaries. The dynamic duo’s philosophy leans toward conservatism. Both are firmly against abortion, embryonic stem cell research and same-sex marriage. Burkee and Walz feel that a long awaited wave of change is needed for the state and are confident of their capabilities to bring about that change. They might not have the nuance of hard core politicians but being two respected intellectuals and university professor, the duo do have the intelligence and common sense, elements which are unfortunately discerned lacking in most politicians. Image Source: CCD.EDU Source: Washington Post

Posted in Democrats Tagged , , , , ,