How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb?

That is the question being tested in California. Legislators have taken a step towards placing a ban on your average 50 cent incandescent light bulb in the effort to save our environment. What would replace them are CFLs. Those are those spiral bulbs which look cool, but also carry the price tag (about $7). In the long run, they work longer and save money on your electric bill.

On average 2-billion lightbulbs are sold of which only 5 percent (100 million) are CFLs. The "How Many Legislatures Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act" would permanently place a ban on incandescent bulbs by 2012. Maybe other states may follow, as global warming becomes more and more of a political concern.

Setting a date for Withdrawal

Senator and Presidential candidate Barrack Obama has suggested legislation that would withdraw American forces from Iraq by March, 2008. The date falls within the parameters offered by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, which recommended the removal of combat troops by the first quarter of next year. The Washington Post reports:

"The days of our open-ended commitment must come to a close," Obama said in his speech. "It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy. It is time to give Iraqis their country back."

I agree that our open ended agreement must end, however this is being viewed as a way for Obama to increase the level of his foreign policy work before the 2008 Presidential election. As well, it is to early to tell when the troops will come home, if President Bush's new strategy continues to work they maybe home earlier. I continue to believe that American forces will be in Iraq for eternity, like Korea.

Posting

I will start to post around 11 a.m. their maybe an article or 2 posted earlier but full blogging will start around 11 a.m.

--Reuben

"You First"

I love political cartoons and this one is amazing. It is so accurate all the politicians in Washington, D.C. can talk about pulling funding from the war but NO one will do it. It would be political suicide for anyone politician or political party to pull funding. The American people will see it as if they are pulling the funds from the troops and putting our troops in an unprecedented harmful situation. (Cartoon: Cox & Forkum)

Congress Finding Themselves Powerless

As President Bush deloys more troops to Iraq, Congress finds themselves useless against his Iraqi War decisions. Bush has previously declared himself "the decision maker" which has even led Senate Republicans to rebel. Even though Congress does hold power of purse, cutting of funding to the troops can potentially be political peril. The Senate will hold hearings this week to find alternative ways to stop what they believe not to be in the interest of the nation. Possibilities can include putting forth a resolution to stop funding troops deployed from a certain date, or even calling back troops to leave a minimal amount to continue to train and patrol Iraq. Then again Congress realizes that veto power remains in the hands of the President and overriding the veto would be very difficult.
"Congress used its war powers to cut off or put conditions on funding for the Vietnam war and conflicts in Cambodia, Somalia and Bosnia" (Yahoo! News). They can certainly do it again.

Blog the Vote - Edward's is Livin' Large

Senator John Edwards, the potential Presidential Candidate who is running to appeal to poorest people in America, announced his 2008 bid at the very symbolic background of the ninth ward in New Orleans. He certainly could have done it from his home which sits on 100 acres of land just outside of Chapel Hill. As Jay Leno puts it, Edwards can fit "both Americas" in his multi-million dollar, 28,000 square feet home.

Edwards has been criticized by a fellow Democrat who said, "its one thing to be a millionaire, it's totally deaf tone to be using Katrina victims while putting finishing touches on your multi-million dollar mansion." Edwards response, "If you're in public life, people will be critical of you because of the way you walk, because of what you eat, because of the way you talk, like this Southern accent I've got. You know, you can't worry about stuff like that," he told CBS News. Or should you worry?

(Picture: Example only, not his actual mansion)

Baker will testify

The Hill Reports:

James A. Baker III, the co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, has ended weeks of resistance and today will testify before Congress on the war, avoiding a split with his fellow co-chairman, former Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-Ind.).

Sources familiar with the efforts to persuade Baker to testify said he did not want to appear to be lobbying against President Bush at the height of his push for 21,500 additional troops in Iraq.

This testimony will not be that interesting because we no what Baker is going to say it will be based on the Iraq Study Group report. The Senate committee is just waisting their time, Baker and his commission are against the surge in troops.

President Bush Iraqi forces "are beginning to show me something"

President Bush was heard yesterday on National Public Radio stressing his new strategy in Iraq is working already. He said that Iraqi forces "are beginning to show me something"

"This fight is an indication of what is taking place, and that is the Iraqis are beginning to take the lead," Bush said. "So my first reaction on this report from the battlefield is that the Iraqis are beginning to show me something."

The initiative taken by Iraqi forces this weekend indicates a transfer of power has begun. Iraqi forces were on the front lines of this battle and American forces only played a supportive role in the battle.

The Black Vote - Part II

While watching an episode of Affirmative Reaction on MTV, one of the questions to the "white" contestants was, "Name 5 prominent black leaders." Well off the top of your head one can think of MLK, Malcolm X, Opera, to name a few. But one of the answers that none of the contestants were able to get was Bill Clinton. Last time many of us checked Bill Clinton was a white man - not exactly. Bill Clinton has been labeled the "first Black President" by many in the black community. Now the concern becomes will the support of the this huge constituency transfer over to wifey Hillary or to the man of the season Barack Obama.
Obama who has been labeled "white" by many in the black community, says once people know what he's truely about, he will indefinately get the black vote. Most people see his ivy league education, his white mother, and find other "white" associations to label Obama. Many overlook his commitment to civil rights, and his mission to reduce the disparity between the rich and the poor.
Who'll get the black vote?

Blog The Vote-Another person to add to the long list of Republican "candidates"

The Associated Press Reports:

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister, is setting up an exploratory committee to gauge his prospects for the Republican nomination.

He's expected in Iowa tomorrow and Wednesday.Huckabee, who left office earlier this month, faces steep odds in a crowded G-O-P field that includes well-known and well-funded hopefuls such as Senator John McCain of Arizona, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Huckabee is a staunch opponent of abortion rights and gay marriage.

"We have made significant progress"

Vice President Dick Cheney says that America has "made significant progress" in Iraq.

Over the weekend Iraqi forces backed by U.S. military tanks and helicopters, had a day-long battle against insurgents. The Iraqi government estimates betweeen 250-300 insurgents were killed in the battle which took place near the city Najaf.

Iraqi security forces maintain primary control of Najaf province, and U.S. forces do not have an established, full-time presence there. U.S. military units based in Baghdad responded to Najaf when the fighting escalated.

"They saw that they needed some help and called in air support," a U.S. military official told the Washington Post on condition of anonymity. "That's exactly what they're supposed to do."

Can this be considered success in Iraq? Does this mean the Presidents new counter insurgency strategy will work? or is this not enough to change people's opinion? What do you think?

Democrats are in Iraq for the weekend.

Speaker of House Nancy Pelosi and several of her Democratic peers are in Iraq this weekend on a fact-finding mission. In which Pelosi says find a "greater understanding of the others' point of view," and "to convey to our troops the appreciation of the American people for what they're doing, to applaud their patriotism."The Pelosi delegation visited the heavily fortified Green Zone, site of the American Embassy, and met with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Pelosi has been a sharp critic of the Bush administration's conduct of the war and has led a drive in Congress against sending 21,500 more troops as part of a new security crackdown in Baghdad.

This come as several different resolutions are ciculating on Capitol Hill. My take is that the delegation is trying to show that they do support our troops but they do not support the President new strategy. As well they are gaining an education of the true situation in Iraq by being at the source, the Prime Minister has probably spoken to the delegation of how important the American presence in Iraq is and what the Iraqi government is doing at their end of the strategy. Even with the circulating resolutions their will be no change in policy, nor will a piece of legislation with holding funds from the military ever pass.

Informed Students News

We are ranked 36 out of 124 according to TopBlogger.com. Keep on reading Informed Students. Thank you for your continued support.

--Reuben

New person to lead the troops in Iraq.

Breaking News: The Senate has unanimously confirmed Army Lt.Gen. David Petraeus to become top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Authorized To Kill

The Washington Post reports that American forces in Iraq now have the power to capture or kill Iranian operatives inside Iraq as part of an aggressive new strategy to weaken Tehran's influence across the Middle East and compel it to give up its nuclear program, according to government and counterterrorism officials with direct knowledge of the effort.

The question is why has it taken this long. The reason we have been losing the war is because of rules like this, originally Iranians captured would only be held for 3 to 4 day then released, in order to keep Iran from expanding its influence in the region (that has worked marvelously). In this war, with the terrorist embedded into the Iraqi world, forces should be able to do whatever it takes to capture terrorist or insurgents. Thats why we will see results from President Bush's new strategy in Iraq because the troops can actually do something. It is ridiculous to send troops into a country and not allow them to do their job, because the Iraqi government has agreements with parts of the terrorist. No, if your intent is to kill Americans then American forces have the right to kill or capture you (in a humane way of course)

Democrats Plan=Cut Funding

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) "has scheduled a hearing next Tuesday in his Judiciary Committee subcommittee to explorewhether Congress has the authority to cut off funding for the U.S. military campaign in Iraq," The Politico reports. Feingold said Thursday "I will soon be introducing legislation to use the power of the purse to end what is clearly one of the greatest mistake in the historu of the nation's foreign policy."

It would be political suicide for the Democratic party, if even a piece of legislation was brought fourth in the Senate to stop funding the war in Iraq. A resolution in opposition of the Presidents new strategy and asking for "benchmarks" are great ideas, however cutting funds would be leaving our troops to die. To "use the power of the purse" to end the war would bring fourth thousands of American deaths and an angered armed forces. Cutting funds would show congresses lack of support for the troops themselves. It would be the end of the Democratic parties hopes for any chance in 2008 and any chance in the next 20 years (atleast) of political success.

Senate Iraq Resolution

The Senate foreign relations committee took a shot at the president Wednesday, voting 12-9 for a non-binding resolution against the troop surge. Nebraska Republican Chuck Hagel was the only senator to stray from his party. The Republicans are trying to create their own resolution, reports the Washington Post. Senate Republican asked for "benchmarks to measure progress in Iraq and possibly a new diplomatic effort to end the war."

The troop increase is clearly the only way to resolve the conflict in Iraq, we need to put more troops in order to restore law and order. Until that happens the Iraqi government is powerless. These resolutions should only be asking for benchmarks, any words against troops will only hurt the United States more. I understand that many Americans no longer support the war but we all need to support our troops.

What do you think?

I just found this on Slate.com, it has a great message. What do you think?

Pelosi's Upset

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said yesterday that President George W. Bush did not consult her before announcing his new strategy for the war in Iraq -- a sign that, despite the cozy rhetoric, the relationship between Washington's two powerhouses has already had its share of friction. Her interview according to the Politico continued on to say that the Democrats will now take hold of domestic policy, leaving Pelosi as the top dog.

Pelosi said she thinks that if the President gathers enough Republican support for his immigration and energy proposal, we will see legislative progress. However we will not see anything in regard of President Bush's tax cuts for Health Insurance plan.

I think that Pelosi is right when she was angered that the President did not consult her on the new Iraqi strategy, although he does not have to. She is the third in line to the Presidency and therefore deserve some respect. Although Pelosi was thankful for the Presidents salute to her at the beginning of his address, I think that it is all political "fluff." He is really trying to appease the Democrats rather than compromise with them, appeasing the Democratic party will just not work.

What do you think?

Enjoy the political cartoon, posts will be up shortly.

What's up with the Minimum Wage bill?

After being passed in the House, the Senate has voted the Minimum wage increase bill down. This does not mean they do not support an increase, rather simply not the way the House wants it done. In fact the Senate is taking President Bush's suggestions of including a tax breaks for small businesses into consideration.
Today the Senate voted on a version of the bill which allows for states to set their own minimum wages. That too had been voted down. As you may have realized New York's minimum wage is higher than the national rate of $5.15. The national rate simply sets a bare minimum standard, but most "blue" states where the cost of living is higher the minimum wage is as well. Hence even if the minimum wage was set to $7.20 (which is what Congress currently wants) it would not affect some states at all whose wages already pay such an amount.
To battle that concern a Senator has proposed raising $2.20 from the current minimum of every individual states.
We'll have to wait and see where this goes, but you can bet something will definitely happen by the end of this fiscal year.

John Kerry Will Not Enter the 2008 Presidential Race

The long awaited announcement has finally come and former Presidential candidate will not enter the race for 2008. A spokesmen for John Kerry announced that he intends to run for another term as Massachusetts state senator. Kerry plans to disclose his political plans in remarks on the Senate floor later in the day, according to this official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting a formal announcement.

Reaction to the State of the Union

Former New York City Mayor and 2008 Presidential Contender Rudy Giulliani appeared on NBC's Today Show saying that he wants the U.S. to succeed in Iraq because it's important to the overall war on terror. According to Giuliani, failure means "a big defeat against terrorists."

Illinois state Senator Barack Obama says a phased redeployment of U-S troops would work just as well. The Democratic Presidential Contender says keeping American troops in the region would send a message that the U-S still wants to help the Iraqi government while telling other countries such as Iran that "we're not abandoning the field."

U.S. Stikes in Somalia

The WashingtonPost.com Reports:

A U.S. Air Force AC-130 gunship staged an airstrike against suspected al-Qaeda operatives in southern Somalia on Monday, the second such attack this month, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

There was no immediate information on specific targets or the strike's results. The United States has said that at least three senior al-Qaeda operatives were being sheltered by the Islamic Courts movement that was ousted from power in the Somali capital, Mogadishu, by the Ethiopian military last month.

Word of the new attack came the same day as a long line of Ethiopian artillery, armored vehicles and trucks loaded with soldiers rolled toward the edges of Mogadishu, beginning a withdrawal from a fragile capital that many residents fear will now slip further into chaos.

If it is true that these missions have been successful, we are not going to see much of anything new. The media is completely centered on the Iraq issue and that doesn't look to be changing. Although it is appearing on the Front Page of the Daily Nation, I doubt we will see much of a shift in public opinion. President Bush will use this to his advantage in order to promote "success" in the War on Terror. The question remains what really is success in the dwindling War on Terror?

State of the Union 2007 Final Update

To read the full transcript of the President speech click here.

Its been along night of blogging about the speech, I hope that I have been able to provide some insight for you on the speech. I continue to encourage your comments and discussion.

--Reuben

My thoughts on the State of the Union

Tonight's State of the Union address had few surprises to me. Personally I think a lot of his proposal cheaper health care, immigration reform, et cetera are things he has been trying to accomplish for a few years. I do not see this speech changing his popularity level or changing much of the policy over the next 2 years, he really is a lame duck.

Let me discuss Iraq. In a post-speech interview with Anderson Cooper, Senator Kit Bond (R-Missouri) said "the President has given us a new direction." Which is completely true it is important to realize that his new policy is more than a surge in troops but a brand new strategy. The strategy holds Prime Minister Nuri al-Malaki and the Iraqi government to a new level and saying that they must act. I feel that the legislation coming out of Congress is not helping bring an end to the War in Iraq. The Democrats continue not to offer another strategy. I agree with the President that we must "give the strategy a chance" to work. The new strategy forces Iraqi's take on al-Sadar's army and take political control. I agree that this policy is our best chance for success. The Presidents statement that we are no longer in the war that we entered is completely true but it is not a war which we can leave unfinished.

I feel that the Presidents speech was an out stretched arm to Democrats and opposing Republicans to work together over the next 2 years on the domestic and foreign agendas. An early CNN poll says that 41% of Americans see the speech as "very positive." I agree that it was positive and that we will see some changes in partisanship.

What do you think?

Did you like the Presidents State of the Union address?
	Yes!
	No!
	I didn't watch!
pollcode.com free polls

State of the Union 2007 Summary

After 8 pages of notes, the Presidents speech was just under 50 minutes. Prior to the start the President was asked "ready to go?" by Nancy Pelosi his response "let's do this."

He opened the speech with an anecdote reference to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's father and said it his "distinct honor to be the first President to say Madame Speaker" and he expressed his congratulations to her and new "the Democratic majority." He continued by saying "we are all held to the same standards," and that bipartisanship is clearly important.

The meat and potatoes of the speech concentrated half on domestic policy and half on the War on Terror, his foreign policy. In his Domestic agenda the President neglected to mention the situation in the Gulf Coast.

He stressed the growing economy in America. Saying inflation and unemployment are down, while wages are up. He wants Congress to keep the economy growing and set his economic priorities. His economic goals are to balance the federal budget without raising taxes. He asked Congress to cut the deficit in half 3 years prior to the current goal of 2009. He also touched upon the issue of earmarks which are added to bills "when not even CSPAN is watching." The President ask to expose them and cut them in half by the end of this session of Congress. Lastly he asked Congress to fix Medicare and Medicaid and finally save Social Security.

He touch on the "No Child Left Behind Act," and asked Congress to reauthorize the law. He also discussed the need for more affordable and available health care.

He then discussed immigration and said we must "resolve the status of illegal immigrant with out animosity or amnesty." He conceded to establish a temporary worker program, which allow immigrants to come and work in the United State as well would allow the newly expanded Border Patrol to chase down criminals, drug smugglers, and terrorist.

Before he touched on the War on Terror, he discussed the U.S. Energy Policy. He asked to reduce Americas use of oil by 20% over the next 10 years. As well said that it would cut Middle Eastern fuel imports by 3/4. He closed by asking for Congress to double the capacity of the strategic petroleum reserve.

"To win the war on terror, we must take the fight to the enemy." He said that every time we overturn a terrorist plot "is a reminder of how hard working the enemy is." The strategy has changed in Iraq and our troops are no longer barred from doing their job but have the "orders to find the terrorist and clear them out," with no resistance from the Iraqi government. It is time for the Iraqi government to act and they know our commitment is not open ended. The government of Iraq must help Iraqi's return to their normal daily lives.

He defended his strategy by saying "it provides the best chance for success" and asked Congress and the American people "to give this strategy a chance to work." Bush also conceded that "this is not the fight we entered, but it is the fight we are in."

He closed the section on the War on Terror by saying "Nothing is more important than to succeed in the Middle East and to succeed in Iraq."

His speech touched on the United Nations sanction on Iran, and said the world cannot allow the government in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. He also discussed in little detail the nuclear problem in Korea. The President said that America continues to "awaken the world, to save the people in Darfur." He asked Congress to continue the fight on HIV/AIDs, especiall on the continent of Africa.

The speech ended with:

"The State of our union is strong, our cause is strong and,
tonight our cause goes on"

State of the Union 2007 Update

State of the Union 2007 Update

Excerpts from the Presidents speech can be found here.

Who is sitting next to the First Lady? Find out here

Who's not sitting in Congress tonight?

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will skip President Bush's State of the Union address Tuesday, as a precaution to ensure continuity of the federal government in the event of a national catastrophe.

Gonzales, who is seventh in line of presidential succession, was chosen by White House officials to be protected at an undisclosed location. In addition, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, chose Rep. George Miller, D-California, to remain at an undisclosed location during the speech and House Republicans tapped Rep. John Carter of Texas to do the same.

State of the Union 2007

In a little over an hour President George W. Bush will walk into House of Representatives chambers to address the nation. His speech the White House says:

The President will unveil a positive, comprehensive agenda that will improve the daily lives of the American people and explain how our actions in the world will make our Nation safer and more secure. The President believes we can find practical ways to advance the American Dream and keep our Nation safe without either party compromising its principles.

Currently the President has the lowest approval rating (37% approve of the President) any President has had on the eve of the State of the Union. A full report will follow the Presidents speech. For now click here to see the 2007 State of the Union Facts Sheet and other documents concerning the speech. Be sure to watch the speech tonight at 9 PM.

BLog The Vote- Kerry Can Wait...Not

Kerr "Can afford to take his time" aides say. With the 2008 Democratic presidential field taking shape fast, Senator John F. Kerry still hasn't decided whether to join the race, and maintains that the early announcements from other candidates won't push him to act in haste, according to Kerry aides and associates. Kerry has indicated that he will announce his intentions by the end of January, in keeping with his publicly stated intention to do so "shortly after the turn of the year." His aides have drafted a "John Kerry for President '08" financial plan that will restart his fund-raising efforts with a series of house parties organized by activists around the country -- if he decides to pursue the presidency again. With $13 million still in his campaign account and wide name recognition stemming from his failed 2004 run, Kerry advisers feel that the senator can afford to take his time, unlike some other Democrats already in the race.

I feel that Kerry chances are null, he has no shot at winning the nomination. He was not one of the big campaigners for 2006 and that shows he is a washed up Democrat with little clout. The only remaining person from 2004 is John Edwards because he took a step out of spotlight following the election and has come back looking like a Presidential candidate. Kerry on the other hand, should probably go to his home and write a book or do something worthwhile.

What do you think?

Blog The Vote- HILLARY WILL MAKE OBAMA "FIGHT FOR EVERY BLACK ENDORSEMENT AND EVERY BLACK VOTE"

Far from conceding African-American support to the most credible candidate ever of African descent, Sen. Barack Obama, the Clintons are pushing aggressively for the help of their longtime allies in the black business, political and entertainment elite. [Hillary] Clinton's supporters say she intends to make the Illinois senator fight for every black endorsement and every black vote. It's a strategy that pushes Obama to decide just how black he can afford to be: Will he pitch himself to African-American voters as the black candidate, or hew to the post-racial line that's helped make him sensationally popular with white Democrats? "He's not built to be the black candidate," said a Clinton adviser.

"Mr. President go back and look at all the options"

Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, one of Congress's leadingauthorities on the military, presented a bipartisan proposal on Monday that soundly rejected President Bush's plan to send more American troops to Baghdad and urged the administration to find a new course in Iraq."Mr. President," Mr. Warner declared, "go back and look at all the options."

I believe the President has looked at every strategic option America has in Iraq. I feel that for the first time he himself and his aides have done a very thorough study on what changes need to be made. Many Congressmen continue to bad mouth the Presidents new plan but have yet to offer their own strategy and not a strategy for complete withdrawal. I think Congress is being very vocal because they want to gain the support of the people, they, in particular the Democrats are very interested in consolidating the power. I feel that we will soon see the end to bipartisan resolutions and the start of a war on Republicans.

What do you think?

State of the Union Buzz Words

Tonights State of the Union will provide the President a chance to gain support not only from the people but from congress. Many of his own party brethren have turned their back on him since his Iraq strategy shift.

Here's a list of a few of the President Buzz Words, that will appear tonight several times.

"Terrorists"
"Iraq"
"Freedom"
"Economy"
"Insurgents"

State of the Union Address

Be Sure to watch the Presidents State of the Union address tonight. CNN has a Special edition of the Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer Starting at 7 PM

According to White House Senior Administration staff the speech is expected to run between 45-50 minutes, almost the same running time as the Presidents last SOTU. Original reports said the speech would be shorter however, the increasing length of the speech is due in part to the fact that the President plans to cover a lot of ground on the international and domestic fronts.

Press Secretary Tony Snow said, that the President will cover the War on Terror but will also focus on domestic issues. Such as, health care, education, immigration, energy and energy security.

I am not expecting much from this speech, I think it will contain a lot of fluff in order to gain more support from the people. Currently over 70% of Americans do not think the President is doing a "good" job. He will probably touch the War on Terror very briefly this will not be a podium to gain support for his new Iraq strategy, I think he will try to shift the focus from foreign policy to domestic policy. The President will ask for bipartisanship and for the Congress to support our troops. A precursor to the bipartisan resolutions circulating through congress in opposition of the President Iraq war strategy.

Expect full commentary following the speech tonight, as well I am trying to attain a copy of the speech before this evenings broadcast which many news outlets will attain.

The New Strategy in Iraq

As you all no I was unable to catch the Presidents speech a few weeks ago due to my busy schedule on my tour of Israel, however since home I have read the speech as well as a few commentaries on the new strategy.

I feel that Americans as a whole are to focused on the part of the new strategy which sends 21,000 more troops to Iraq. I feel that it has been necessary for several months now to increase the troops in order to bring an end to the war. Their was however, a completely separate part of the speech which many seemed to have overlooked or missed which outlined a new strategy in Iraq. President Bush said in his speech:

“Now let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations -- conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them -- five brigades -- will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.”

The change in strategy is as follows, the new Iraqi government needs to gain the support of its people. The primary role of any government is to protect its people without doing so, the Iraqi citizens will continue to look towards others for security which insurgents seem to do very well. Once the Iraqi government gains the support of its people violence should slow. The new larger American force will be set-up as a support system which the weak Iraqi military and police needs in order to succeed.

The Small Wars Journal says:

What matters here is not the size of forces (though the strategy will not work without a certain minimum force size), but rather their tasks. The key element of the plan, as outlined in the President’s speech, is to concentrate security forces within Baghdad, to secure the local people where they live. Troops will operate in small, local groups closely partnered with Iraqi military and police units, with each unit permanently assigned to an area and working its “beat”.

This is different from early strategies which were enemy-centric (focusing on killing insurgents), or more recent approaches that relied on training and supporting Iraqi forces and expected them to secure the population.

The new strategy reflects counterinsurgency best practice as demonstrated over dozens of campaigns in the last several decades: enemy-centric approaches that focus on the enemy, assuming that killing insurgents is the key task, rarely succeed. Population-centric approaches, that center on protecting local people and gaining their support, succeed more often.

I think that this plan is a great opportunity for America to finally see some sort of victory and to see some of our boys come home. However I do believe American forces will be in Iraq for eternity, just like we continue to keep forces station in Korea and Vietnam.

What do you think?

Blog The Vote-Who is running for President?

2008 Presidential Candidates
(In Alphabetical Order)
See the candidates defined here at the WashingtonPost.com

Republicans
Sam Brownback
James Gillmore III
Newt Gingrich
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Huckabee
Duncan Hunter
John McCain
George Pataki
Mitt Romney
Tom Tancredo
Tommy Thompson

Democrats
Joe Biden
Hillary Clinton
Chris Dodd
John Edwards
Al Gore
Mike Gravel
John Kerry
Dennis Kucinich
Barack Obama
Bill Richardson
Tom Vilsack

Blog The Vote-Gov. Bill Richardson Presidential Aspirations

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson began a run for the Democratic presidential nomination this morning. He believes his vast resume and his Hispanic heritage will boost him over his Democratic rivals. Richards wrote to his supporters, "I am taking this step because we have to repair the damage that's been done to our country over the last six years," he continued "Our reputation in the world is diminished, our economy has languished, and civility and common decency in government has perished."

I feel that the Democratic ticket is wide open. Many bloggers and political analysts are saying Hillary has the nomination in the bag, I do not. I feel as if the Democrats are going to have to many individuals running for the nomination and all are going to split support. In turn voters will not be able to nominate a winning candidate.

Political Cartoon

What do you think of the new strategy for the war in Iraq?

Blog The Vote- HIllary says "I'm in and I'm in to win"

Just a few days after Barack Obama announce his Presidential ambitions, former First Lady and current New York State Senator Hillary Clinton says she's "in to win." This means that come November 2008 a women or an African American could be on the ticket. This illustrates an amazing advance for the United States. Will this change the face of politics forever? I do not think so because I do not believe either will be nominated for the Presidency, they may receive the Vice President spot. I feel this because the Democratic National Committee is interested in winning and they [Obama and Clinton] are not likely to receive the moderate support which Democrats received in 2006.
What do you think?

Blog The Vote-MoveOn.org Hurts McCain

MoveOn.org a national anti-war and liberal advocacy group is launching a media blitz criticizing Arizona Sen. John McCain for his support in sending more U.S. troops to Iraq. MoveOn will be airing television commercials in Iowa and New Hampshire, the 2 Presidential battleground states. McCain has been advocating for the past year or so that troop levels in Iraq were to low to begin with and that the only way to end this war is to send more troops. He has continued this by supporting the Presidents announcement last week to increase troop levels. The only way to look at this is that if the American people see success in Iraq, John McCain will be our next President. If the population does not witness any change in Iraq the Republican will have committed political suicide. I feel as if the surge in U.S. forces was our only option, anyone who says we should "just bring our boys home," is ignorant to the fact that if we leave Iraq in the state it is now we will never be safe from terrorism at home again. We may have gone in for the wrong reasons however now we must reach some level of success. McCain spokesman Danny Diaz said "MoveOn.Org is an out-of-the-mainstream organization that has a long history of airing inflammatory material, even comparing the president to Hitler," He continued, "It is not surprising that a liberal group opposed to military action after Sept. 11th would attack Sen. McCain's conservative values, as well as changing strategy and securing victory in Iraq."

What do you think?

Blog The Vote-Where's Hillary?

Since the Presidential hopefuls took a break over the holidays, many have announced their decision to run for president or not. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the leading Democrat has yet to announce her Presidential ambition. Chicago's ABC News Reports:

"A news conference Wednesday by Hillary Rodham Clinton failed to answer whether she will join Senator Barack Obama in launching a possible bid for the White House. Senator Clinton kept the focus on U.S. troops in Iraq. Clinton made no reference to Obama's announcement Tuesday that he has taken the first step towards launching a presidential bid." Read more.

The question on everyones mind is has she made her decision and what will it be? Personally, I believe she has a shot at the Presidency, however she needs to get into the race ASAP. Otherwise Obamamania will continue its cross country tour.

What do you think?

DISARM, or DIE.

The message here is strong, we must disarm the terrorist abroad or be forced to die. What do you think of this Political Cartoon?

Blog The Vote- Obamas announcment turns up the heat

“Barack is seen as a rock star. People see him as an idol,” said Morgan Felchner, editor of Campaigns and Elections magazine. “Kerry needs to get in soon.” I think it would be political suicide for the Democrats to nominate John Kerry again. He is has been out of the spotlight for to long and if he threw his hat in the nomination race he would only hurt his party. His few supporters would draw votes away from many of the 2008 hopefulls. Obama feet first jump into the race turns up the heat on all Democratic hopefuls to get into high gear.

Blog The Vote-Obama Takes Official Steps

Yesterday Senator Barack Obama filed the initial paperwork to establish his Presidential Exploratory Committee. According to Reuters, the 45-year-old from Illinois will make an official announcement about his candidacy in his hometown of Chicago on February 10. I feel as if Obama is riding on the coattails of the 2006 Democratic victory, and that soon enough Obamamania will come to a screeching end. All of the conservative states that voted Democrat in 2006 did so for moderate candidates, Obama is not a moderate. As well I don't believe the conservatives will look past the fact that he is African American. I think that the Democrats are interested in victory and their two front runners (Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton) will not, in my opinion take hold of the White House in 2008.

I'm Back

Israel was amazing and I had a great time. On my flight to Israel I met an extraordinary individual, Steve Rubinowitz. He was a Press Aide for the Clinton Administration as well he is responsible for coordinating the handshake photograph between Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat at the White House. He has given me an incredible amount of information which will change the way I gather information for the blog.

Blog the Vote - Getting the Black Vote

Nowadays MLK Day goes unnoticed. To many its just another day off from school, or an opportunity to extend their weekend getaway. The man behind that day may be making a comeback, as his dream may become reality. As Presidential hopefuls have already begun making their speeches, the possibility of a black man becoming President is ever so great. It's only a matter of time until our nation breaks with it presidents. Black people are finding a closer bond with their identity as they see that it's possible for a man of color may make it into office. Rev. Jesse Jackson, once a candidate himself, backed a man he has high hopes for - Senator Barack Obama, in a speech he gave in Chicago blasting Confederate flags still hanging at the South Carolina legislature. The black vote is ever so important, and the crisis will come when many of the conservative blacks face the challenge of whether to vote for their beliefs or racial identity.

Catch 22 - Raising the Minimum Wage

For many of us college students who work at minimum wage, the news that Congress has voted to raise the minimum wage comes as a blessing. We can get more of the sneakers the Chinese kids make or buy that new car to pollute the environment. Whatever it is our materialistic heart desires consider yourself warned, prices will go up along with your salary. It's a lose to lose situation. Raising the minimum wage forces the employer to raise prices and cut costs (possibly cutting jobs). At the same time one has to realize minimum wage workers have been receiving the same pay for the past 10 years. But the assumption can be made, the person who made $5.15 an hour in 1997 is not making that today being at the same job unless they're an idiot. According to economists (not me), our economy is fairly sound and now is the best time to make this change. Also, minimum wage jobs are only taken up by a fraction of the population, so it would not make such a great impact than we've blown it up to be.
This would mostly hurt small business owners. President Bush brought up an initiative to give these businesses tax reliefs along with their new found burden. Money pinching Democrats will have to make this concession to make this transition go smoothly.

So who is really coming out the winner here?

Not you, or me, but the smart-ass Democrats. The voting population will remember what a great deed they did, and the Dem's can brag about it during their convention. The Republican performed such actions through tax breaks. The Democrats are doing it through raising the minimum wage. Putting money in people's pockets = votes!!

Blog the Vote - Laugh if You Will

Al-Sharpton is seriously considering a run for President. "If we're talking about the urban agenda, can you tell me anybody else in the field who's representing that right now?" asked Sharpton. The Reverand had previously set out a bid for the 2004 Presidential run. This time he seems more determined and says he sees nothing that may change his mind.

Sharpton has a long history of failed campaigning. Since the late 80's he has tried to become Senator and more recently ran for mayor of New York.

You got to give the "Most Persistant" award to this man. The Reverand is a true believer, may be God will be on his side this time.

Pelosi's Fight Words

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has indicated she will give President Bush a hard time should he choose to increase troop levels. The Congress, who still has the power of the purse, can choose to block the flow of money being dumped into Iraq. Pelosi carefully stated she will always support the troops currently there, but does not want to recklessly place more troops in a detering situation.
Pelosi used the last election to support her arguments, saying the people have spoken and want to steer this war to a new direction. Congress has already approved $500 billion dollars for the War of Terror, and is expected to face Bush's proposal of another $100 billion.

Bush's New Braintrust

As the day comes closer for President Bush to make his decision on weather or not to increase troop levels in Iraq, he has appointed new people as his top military, diplomatic and intelligence advisors. This follows the replacing Secretary of Defense Rumsfled after the elections last year. The much feared decision by Congress is a plan to increase troop levels by 9,000 alone in Bagdad. From the very beginning Bush has been adamant about "accomplishing" the mission. Bush hopes to reach his final decision with the help of his fellow advisors. One thing is for sure, he isn't throwing in the towel.
Actions of fellow Republicans should be watched carefully in this senario. Should they attach themselves with their leader's decision, they will attach themselves with his success. That has cost them heavily thus far.

A Message to Our Reader

Dear Readers,

Sorry about the last couple of days and the lack of posting I have been a little under the weather as well as I was getting ready for my trip to Israel. I leave early tomorrow morning so Tanvir will take care of the posting, for the next 10 days. I will try to Post when or if I am near a computer, furthermore when I return more editorials will be posted. We will not stop posting the "Blog the Vote" articles that we have been but we will balance it out with current event editorials, which many of you have asked for.

Keep reading Informed Students.

Reuben

Blog The Vote-Romney to File Paperwork

Capitol Hill Blue Reports:

Gov. Mitt Romney this week will submit the necessary paperwork to form a presidential exploratory committee, but not until funeral services for former President Gerald R. Ford have concluded, according to a top aide familiar with his plans.

Romney will file by Wednesday with the Federal Election Commission, the aide said, a registration that will allow the Massachusetts governor to raise and spend money in pursuit of the 2008 GOP nomination.

Romney, like Ford, is from Michigan. Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, have already taken the same step

Blog the Vote-Edwards "The McCain Doctrine"

In appearance on ABC's This Week with his John Edwards coined the term "The McCain Doctrine"

"I actually believe that this idea of surging troops, and escalating the war, what Senator McCain has been talking about, what I would call now the McCain doctrine it's ..."

"McCain doctrine?" interrupted host George Stephanopoulos.

"McCain doctrine," Edwards responded. "He's been the most prominent spokesperson for this for some time."

Blog the Vote-Giuliani's Secrets Out

The New York Daily News has released information regarding Rudy Giuliani's campaign plans.
The document "clearly laid out in 140 pages of printed text, handwriting and spreadsheets: The top-secret plan for Rudy Giuliani's bid for the White House."

The detailed handbook set out the budgets, schedules and fund-raising plans "that will underpin the former New York mayor's presidential campaign - as well as his aides' worries that personal and political baggage could scuttle his run." Read More