About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

BLUE DOGS OBEY THEIR MASTERS!!

Wednesday, July 29, 2009





Why the southern and border states congressional representatives are called 'blue dogs" escapes me. But just like my two Labrador dogs obey when I call them, the blue dogs apparently have responded to the commands of their master.
The master is the leadership of the House that had numerous meetings with these Democrats who publicly had said they would not vote for the House version of the Obama Care bill.
I can imagine that these meetings were also attended by the Obama enforcer Rahm Emanuel, and the conversation probably went like this.

You can either vote with your leadership or the next time you stand for election we will select an opponent to run against you, and you can expect that we will use the money needed, to see that you are beaten. Do you like the princely life you live here in the House of Representatives? If so you better vote with us not against us!!

As a result the "Blue Dogs" made this announcement today. "Democratic leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives have reached a deal with a group of fiscal conservatives in their own party on how to move forward with healthcare legislation, a leading lawmaker said on Tuesday.

Representative Mike Ross, who leads the so-called "Blue Dog" conservative coalition, said they had reached a deal with leadership after days of long negotiations. There are presently 51 Blue Dogs.

CNN said that under the agreement, a healthcare bill would be moved to committee by Friday but that the full House would not take the issue up until September after it returns from its month long break.

Prior to this meeting the fiscally conservative Democrats wanted the House bill to not increase the already soaring deficit as this report indicates.
The Blue Dogs say they want to wring out hundreds of billions of dollars in additional cost savings from the medical system before agreeing to legislation that would extend coverage to uninsured Americans. They also insist that Congress find a way to pay for the plan without increasing the deficit.

“The bottom line of the Blue Dogs has not been met at this time,” North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy told reporters.

If you have any doubt that coercion was applied by the White House Chief of Staff. Then this quote from Bloomberg.com should be enlightening to you.
"With the Senate already planning to leave for its recess without voting, Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, went to Capitol Hill to meet with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and members of the so-called Blue Dog coalition of Democrats, who object to the cost and structure of the legislation.

The House would only stay in session a few days after the start of the August break if an agreement can be reached to allow the bill to clear the Energy and Commerce Committee, where the Blue Dogs are holding up the legislation, Hoyer said earlier. It looks like the agreement was to vote after the August recess, but I would not make book on "Queen" Pelosi going along with this decision!

The Blue Dog Coalition was created in 1995 and came about to promote positions "...which bridge the gap between ideological extremes" according to their House web site. "Many of the group's policy proposals have been praised as fair, responsible, and positive additions to a Congressional environment too often marked as partisan and antagonistic," say the Blue Dogs in their mission statement.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CIVILIAN AFGHANISTANS MORE VALUABLE THEN OUR TROOPS?

Tuesday, June 23, 2009





Beginning during the Viet Nam war the Press and the anti-military ilk began to decry the death of indigenous peoples more than they did our own soldiers.
What was once considered the cost of winning a war, a tactic that was used in Germany and most notably in Japan. The killing of civilians to break the will of the people to continue fighting, was called "collateral damage". An unfortunate part of winning a war, but a necessary evil that was accepted in the battle plans of military leaders and the public at large.

Now it appears the lives of the people who are dressed in civilian clothes, and appear to be non-combatants are more important than the lives of the men and women our government puts in harms way!
This directive is reported in the Wall Street Journal as coming from the new general in charge of the troops in Afghanistan, but as anyone who has had any association with the military knows. The directives come from Washington, where, these days, being in a war seems to be more important, then winning a war!

The new U.S. commander in Afghanistan is finalizing a far-reaching change in tactics that will generally require U.S. troops taking fire in populated areas to break contact rather than risk civilian casualties, military officials said.

The rules being crafted by Gen. Stanley McChrystal are the clearest indication yet of how the new U.S. command team in Afghanistan plans to reduce civilian fatalities, a cause of public anger against U.S. efforts there.

When did our military get off track, and start worrying about what the civilians feel about the our presence in their country. If we are trying to win the hearts and minds of those who don't like us, we should withdraw all forces from Afghanistan now. Every man, woman and child could have a rifle or bomb inside their burka , as they all hate Americans. Send the peace corps. not the military if the object is to win the hearts and minds!

U.S. officials said the rules were designed to reduce the use of bombs, missiles and other heavy weaponry in populated areas. They will require U.S. forces that come under fire from militants operating out of houses and other buildings that may contain civilians to end the engagement and leave the area, officials said.

The restrictions could force commanders to be more cautious in the mission-planning stage and eschew operations likely to require operations in populated areas, according to an officer serving in Afghanistan.

The rules make clear exceptions for situations where the lives of U.S., North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Afghan personnel are in danger, U.S. officials said. The guidelines allow U.S. personnel to call in airstrikes or use powerful weaponry if they fear being overrun, can't leave the area safely, or need to evacuate wounded colleagues.But this is a decision that men and women in harms way should not have to make!

Gen. McChrystal, who arrived in Afghanistan last week, is "trying to make it as clear as possible that risking civilian lives for the sole goal of killing the enemy is not acceptable," said his spokesman, Rear Adm. Gregory Smith.

I am sorry, but if we don't kill the enemy, they will kill us! There is no way this war cannot turn into another Viet Nam if we try to fight a "clean surgical" war. Besides the direct order to wait until the field commander in the battle determines that they are about to be "over run" will result in more casualties of our troops you can be sure. As any captain who wants to advance in rank will not want to be brought up on charges that he applied excessive force! This is no way to fight a war, but it is consistent with our current presidents attitude toward our enemies. Talk, talk, talk and they will do our bidding. Bovine excrement!!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »