I do not feel good about this...

Last night, in a prime time address to the American people, the president outlined his strategy for defeating the terrorist group known as ISIS. He spoke of coalitions and airstrikes and military advisors. He called his plan a “counterterrorism strategy;” never once uttering the word “war.” In fact he made a point of assuring the American people that this “strategy” would be altogether different from the “wars” that Americans had been witnessing in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past thirteen years.

Afterward I watched a host of pundits and politicians weigh in on the president’s remarks. Their impressions were as one would expect…criticism from the right…accolades from the left. The most interesting, substantive and revealing comments came from war correspondences imbedded in Iraq and Syria. Perhaps I feel that way because their impressions reflected my own.

If you follow this space you know that yesterday I posted a series of questions that I was looking for the president to address in his speech. Here are those questions and my opinion as to how they were answered.

- What is the goal? The president said quite clearly that his goal was to “degrade and destroy ISIS.”

- What is the strategy? The president said the United States would lead a broad coalition of regional partners in taking the fight to ISIS. He said that the US would conduct air strikes against ISIS targets in Iraq and that he had NOT ruled out extending those air strikes into Syria. The president made it clear that his strategy did NOT include American ground forces. He expects ground support to come from a reorganized Iraqi army under the authority of a newly installed Iraqi government. He sees additional ground support coming from more moderate rebel factions in Syria. He said that the US would also be involved in training and supplying the Iraqi army and moderate rebel forces in Syria and that he was sending an additional 475 US military advisors into the region to assist in that effort. He said that the US would continue to provide humanitarian assistance in the region as needed.

- Who are the players? Other than the Iraqi army and the moderate rebel factions in Syria the president did not name the members of his “broad coalition” nor did he outline the part they would play in his strategy.

- What is the exit strategy? Yesterday I said that for me this was the most important question of all. What happens next? The president made no mention of what he believes the future holds once ISIS is defeated.

- Will the president call on Congress to support his strategy against ISIS? The president made it clear that he believes that he has the authority to execute his strategy without the support of congress. But he said that he would welcome congressional support because he believes that America’s interests are best served when the country is unified in its efforts. He did ask congress to provide the additional resources ($) to train the Iraqi army and Syrian rebels.

I don’t feel good about this!

First of all let me say that I was disheartened to hear the president make the case for a military strategy that for me was little more than a repeat of failed campaigns of years gone by. “Strategic air strikes” supported by “local armies” trained by a handful of “US military advisors” who are not…repeat…“not combat troops.” Pull out any historical documentation of the early days of the Vietnam War and tell me you don’t get a bad feeling in the pit of your stomach.

I was also disheartened to hear the president parse his words to carefully avoid calling this “strategy” what it really is…a war. We are dropping bombs on targets in foreign countries…killing enemy combatants and most likely innocent civilians. American pilots are risking their lives in flying those missions. The “military advisors” are operating in a war zone. At some point one of those planes will be shot down. And American pilot will be captured. A “military advisor” will be killed. The result will be an escalation in the conflict. Calling this a “counterterrorism strategy” is disingenuous. This is war! Let’s call it what is.

The president says that his goal is to degrade and eventually destroy ISIS. Fair enough. By every account that I have read this cannot be done without destroying ISIS’ command and control centers in Syria. And ISIS cannot be destroyed without the use of ground forces to support the air strikes. The president said that he would not shy away from expanding the US air strikes against targets in Syria. He did NOT say that he was authorizing them. Why the reluctance?

The president said that his strategy relied on ground forces to support the air strikes. The ground support he cited is supposed to come from the Iraqi army and moderate rebels in Syria. We have already spent $25 billion dollars to arm and train the Iraqi army only to see them throw down their arms and run at the first confrontation with ISIS. What is different now? According to imbedded correspondents, many local villagers have sided with ISIS because they hate or are afraid of the Iraqi army. It is true that moderate rebels in Syria have battled against ISIS. But they are no friend of the United States. Correspondents in the Syria confirm that America journalist David Sotlof was imbedded with the “more moderate Syrian rebels” when he was sold to ISIS. ISIS later beheaded Sotlof and posted his murder on YouTube.

Most troubling of all was the absence of an exit strategy. What happens the day after ISIS is defeated. Do we pull up stakes and leave? History tells us that if we pull out another ISIS like terrorist group will takes its place. History also tells us that re-entering the region without an exit strategy is a very, very bad idea. If the president’s strategy includes an exit plan he didn’t bother to share it last night.

It appears to me that the public beheadings of two American journalists has caused a seismic shift in American foreign policy in the Middle East. The suggested plan has all the underpinnings of failed plans that have come before.

I do not feel good about this. Not good at all!

A Call to Arms.

The president will address the nation tonight when he is expected to lay out his strategy for defeating ISIS. The president will make the case that ISIS poses a serious threat to American national security that needs to be addressed.

There are those that believe that the president is late in coming to this conclusion. Popular opinion supports that analysis. The president comes to the podium tonight weighted with some awful polling numbers. His overall approval rating is 40%. Less than half of the country supports his foreign policy.

It is somewhat surprising that the country seems to be way ahead of the president when it comes to dealing with ISIS. 75% of the people believe that ISIS poses a threat to national security and 61% believe that the president should take military action against the militants. A nation once eager to leave Iraq behind now appears eager to take the fight to ISIS.

This mood swing is no doubt caused to some degree by the published videos of the barbaric beheadings of two American journalists by ISIS militants. 94% of those polled were aware of the journalists’ fate. In terms of awareness of a specific event…that 94% is the highest number every recorded in polling history.

Keeping the country safe is the president’s first priority. Sending American men and women into battle is the most difficult decision that a president has to make. It is easy to beat the war drum when you are not the one making that decision. I believe that military action should only be used as a measure of last resort. If slow and thoughtful deliberation is what it takes to exhaust all other options and unify a nation in support of military action; then I’m all for it. We have all too often witnessed the failed results of knee jerk foreign policy. I for one support the president’s thoughtful approach.

As I watch the president tonight I’ll be looking for the answers to these important questions:

- What is the goal? What do we hope to accomplish?

- What is the strategy? I’m not looking for the president to give away military secrets but I want to know in some specific terms how we intend to accomplish our goal.

- Who are the players? I’m tired of the definition of “American Leadership” being “America Goes It Alone.” Are we going it alone again, or has the president put together a coalition of nations to join us in the fight against ISIS? Who are the participants and what roles will they play. I expect that the president will say that our participation will focus on bombing runs against key military command and control centers but will NOT involve US ground troops. That would be a lie. You don’t order bombing runs without first inserting reconnaissance troops to scout out the targeted areas and get a sense of the situation on the ground. There are already some 600+ American “military advisors” in the region. These are CIA black-ops personnel who have been in theater for weeks; providing the president and his military advisors with the critical intelligence they need to develop their strategies. We already have boots on the ground and you can be certain that more will be added in the future.

- What is our exit strategy? This may be the most important question of all. ISIS consists of 15-17,000 well armed troops. But they are no match for the US military. If the president were to give the order at the conclusion of tonight’s speech, ISIS would be nothing more than a bad memory by the end of this weekend. A military victory over ISIS is a foregone conclusion. The more important question is what happens after ISIS is defeated. While we are very proficient at blowing things up, our track record in handling the aftermath is horrific. It took but a minute to drive the Taliban out of Afghanistan only to have them return as we were pulling up stakes. We brought down an evil dictator in Iraq only to have an even more dangerous civil war fill the power vacuum that we left behind. We brought justice to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, eliminated al Qaeda’s leadership and scattered the remnants throughout the region; only to have even an even more dangerous group like ISIS take al Qaeda’s place. So for me perhaps the most important thing that I want to learn tonight is what steps the president intends to take after ISIS is defeated.

- Will the president call on congress to support his strategy against ISIS? The White House says that the president does not need congressional support to expand current military operations against ISIS. Mitch McConnell says that “the president should seek congressional support whether he believes he needs it or not.” For perhaps the first time in my life I agree with McConnell. It’s time for our fearless elected leaders to leave the safety of the sidelines and take a stand. If ISIS is a threat to our national security to the extent that the president is going to send additional American military personnel in harm’s way, expand our military operations into another sovereign country (Syria) and join forces with an international coalition; then congress should state for the record its support or opposition to the president’s position. The country is engaging in an act of war. I’ll be curious to see if the president calls for their support.
T
onight the president will give the most important speech that any president can give. Asking a nation to follow his call to arms is the most serious business.

I’ll be watching.

Money, Power and Celebrity Rule

It is impossible to turn on the news, surf the internet or pick up a newspaper without being overwhelmed by the saga of Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice.
In the event you have been living in a cave, here is the Cliff’s Notes version.

Security video surfaces showing Baltimore Ravens’ running back Ray Rice hauling the lifeless body of his then fiancé out of a public elevator and dropping her to the floor like a sack of flour. Rice admits to striking his fiancé. Rice and his fiancé are charged with assault. Rice pleads out. The New Jersey state prosecutor gives Rice a slap on the wrist with no jail time. His fiancé apologizes for her part in the incident. The NFL suspends Rice for two games and fines him. Ravens’ head coach John Harbaugh addresses the media and says in part: “It’s no big deal. We are moving on.”

Yesterday the rest of the security video is made public. This portion of the video is from inside the elevator. It shows Rice knocking his fiancé to the ground with a vicious punch. The NFL, claiming to have never before seen the portion of the video showing the actual punch; suspends Rice indefinitely. The Ravens immediately cut Rice from the team. Ravens’ coach Harbaugh says that seeing the rest of the video: “…changes things a little bit.”

The outrage against the NFL is palpable. How could the NFL suspend Rice for only two games for assaulting his fiancé when they routinely suspend its players for four games for smoking pot? How does a powerful organization like the NFL, that has eyes everywhere and contacts deep within law enforcement, claim to have not seen this video? And having seen the entire video, how does the NFL in good conscience issue their original ruling of a two game suspension? Critics call for NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to resign or be fired.

The outrage is justified…yet at the same time misplaced. The NFL and its misogynistic attitudes toward women is not the issue. The problem goes much deeper than that. This is not just about violence against women. It is about a culture of violence that is rampant in our country. And it is about a societal tumor that values money, power and celebrity above all else…even to the extent of dismissing a violent act against a defenseless person.

This isn’t just a case of a powerful organization turning a blind eye toward violence against women. It is a case of rich and powerful people protecting at all costs their multi-billion dollar institution…their national brand. It is a case of the justice system letting the perpetrator of a violent crime off with a slap on the wrist because of his celebrity status in the local community. It is a sad case of the importance that money, power and celerity play in our society.

I have written many times before that we are a violent society. The US of A is the murder capital of the world. Mass shootings occur with such frequency that we are numb to them. Assault, rape, sexual abuse, child molestation and domestic violence are commonplace. Faceless victims fall prey to the violence every day; their stories not even a blip on the national conscience. But let the crime involve those with money, celebrity and power and our moral outrage knows no bounds.

Lost in the frenzy over the NFL’s insensitive handling Ray Rice’s deplorable actions is a story being quietly played out in State College, Pa.

While everyone was screaming at the NFL the NCAA announced that it was reducing previous sanctions against Penn State for the university’s handling of the Jerry Sandusky incident.

Sandusky, a long time assistant football coach, was found guilty on 52 counts of child molestation involving at least eight underage boys. Sandusky used his celebrity status to attract impressionable young men into his lair. The grand jury found that a number of high ranking school officials including the university president, athletic director and head football coach knew about the abuse and were guilty of covering up the incidents and failing to inform the authorities. PSU officials turned a blind eye in order to protect the institution, the legacy, the cash cow; even at the expense of ruining the lives of eight young men. Local authorities, even after hearing complaints on the abuse from multiple sources, failed to act; showing deference to the celebrity status of the football program, its iconic head coach and the unwitting popularity of the perpetrator. Two years later all is forgiven...sanctions lifted. "It's not theat big of a deal."

I am not condoning the actions of Ray Rice or the NFL. Ray Rice should be sitting in a jail cell like any other violent perpetrator. Roger Goodell should step down or be fired. His response to the initial video exemplifies the lack of understanding and sensitivity that permeates the league. Ravens’ coach John Harbaugh should be suspended for the same reason. But these corrective measures will do little to cure the illness that resides at the very core of who we are as a country.

Ray Rice’s actions and the NFL’s response offend our sensibilities. Like Jerry Sandusky and Penn State before them they will be a part of our national conversation for the days and weeks to come.

And then… what?

What will we do when the latest flames of fury grow cold? Will we strive to curb the violence that is so much a part of our culture? Will we strive to lessen the importance of money, power and celebrity when it comes to things that really matter?

I think you know the answer.

So much to do...so little time!

The most ineffective congress in American history returns to the Capitol today where they will spend the next three weeks engaging in their unique version of “conducting the people’s business.” (That’s right; they will be in session for only three weeks.) Three weeks hence they will return to their districts until after the elections…during which time they will try to convince their constituents that their inept leadership warrants another term in office. They have a lot on their plate.

The most pressing issue facing congress will be deciding what to do about ISIS. Appearing on Sunday’s Meet the Press, an engaged President Obama informed viewers that he will lay out his strategy for defeating ISIS in a Wednesday address to the nation. The president made it clear that his intent is to explain his strategy to the American people, garner their support for his actions and to call upon congress to go on record in a united show of support of his efforts to defeat this latest terrorist threat.

We have already heard the war mongering rhetoric from a handful of the usual neo-con suspects. Even a small group of Democrats have weighed in; calling on the president to be more aggressive in his approach to ISIS. But if you listen closely you will notice that a vast majority of our fearless elected officials want no part of an up or down vote on military action. Far better politically to sit quietly on the sidelines and Monday-morning-quarterback after the dust has settled.

You see political careers have been inexorably altered on the basis of a “yea” or “nay” vote to send our troops into battle. Not too long ago an unknown junior senator from Illinois named Barak Obama voted against the war in Iraq. The presumptive Democrat nominee for the presidency, Hillary Rodham Clinton, voted for the war. The rest, as they say, is history.

It is easy to find a microphone and question the president’s leadership. It is far more difficult to go on record for sending our children into harms’ way. The president wants congress on the record.

One of the topics congress will not have to address is immigration reform. The president made it clear that he is breaking his promise to enact immigration reform measures via executive order by summer’s end saying that he will delay taking action until after the elections. Apparently the president is bowing to political pressure from vulnerable Democrat senator’s who fear their election prospects will be negatively impacted by any additional executive orders by this “imperialist” president.

The president denied charges that his change of heart was little more than pure partisan politics saying: “What I’m saying is that I‘m going to act (after the elections) because it’s the right thing for the country. But it’s going to be more sustainable and more effective if the public understands what the facts are on immigration, what we’ve done on unaccompanied children and why it’s necessary.”

I don’t know what that means. What I do know is that everything that needs to be said about immigration reform has been said over the past six years. There is nothing more to be learned between today and the day after the ballots are cast.

This president was elected in part because he promised to change the self-serving culture in Washington that fails to put the peoples’ best interests first. This president was elected in part because he promised Hispanics and other minorities that he would repair the divisive immigration laws that bring so much grief to their communities.

The president’s decision NOT to act is nothing more than politics as usual. His statement is clear…the self serving interests of a few challenged Democrat politicians outweighs the interests of the minority communities that the president vowed to protect.

Lost in all the noise about ISIS and immigration reform is the fact that the government will run out of money on September 30. The government will be forced to shut down if congress fails to agree on a continuing resolution to keep it funded.
We’ve seen this movie before. It doesn’t end well.

Three weeks to govern.

So much to do…so little time!

Buy a Burger! Support a Worker!

“All across the country right now there is a national movement going on made up of fast –food workers organizing to lift wages so they can provide for their families with pride and dignity. There’s no denying a simple truth. America deserves a raise.”

The president made these remarks in a Labor Day speech before heading off to the NATO summit in Wales. His comments are part of a White House initiative to push Congress to pass a Democratic proposal to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10.
Today fast food workers in 150 cities across the country will march in support of increasing the minimum wage. The “Fight for $15” campaign is seeking a $15 minimum wage and union representation.

In spite of the groundswell of support to increase the minimum wage, Republicans stand in opposition. Republicans say that small businesses are the engine that drives the economy by creating jobs. They believe that increasing the minimum wage will hurt small businesses, increase unemployment and weaken the economy.

Over the past 30 years the American economy has been rigged to benefit the business community. Corporations have received the benefits of the Bush Tax Cuts, tax loopholes, tax abatements and government subsidies. As a result corporate profits have soared; the DOW routinely posting record highs. Since 1980 the nation’s productivity is up 31% and its GDP has grown by 29%. Corporate executives pull in huge seven figure paychecks. Even incompetent chief executives who run their companies into the ground walk away with multi-million dollar golden parachutes.

Meanwhile hourly wages for everyday Americans remain flat…rising only 15 cents in the past 30 years. And as if refusing to pay a livable wage isn’t bad enough; businesses exacerbate the situation by cutting employees’ hours in order to avoid paying for their benefits.

History tells us that one of the greatest threats to the survival of our republic is the ever widening gap in income inequality. As the economic plight of the masses deteriorates the climate for unrest and upheaval grows exponentially. Economic equity breeds stability. A flourishing stable economy encourages an atmosphere of creativity and advancement in science, industry and the arts. None of that is possible when the vast majority of the people cannot make ends meet no matter how many jobs they work. Paying employees a livable wage is the fastest way to generating the income equality necessary for a health, vibrant, growing society.

The argument that increasing the minimum wage will harm the business community and increase unemployment is pure partisan nonsense. The Republican mantra that small businesses create jobs is false. Small businesses do not create jobs. Demand creates jobs. You can make the best whatchamacallit in the world. But if people can’t afford it they are not going to come into your shop to buy it. Find ways to put money in peoples’ pockets and you will see more of them in your store searching for your wonderful whatchamacallit. More money = more demand = more employees needed to service the demand.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage increases the unemployment rate is also false. Studies show (and there are several to choose from) that the unemployment rates in those states which adopted an increase in their minimum wage saw NO measurable increase in unemployment rates as compared to bordering states that chose NOT to increase their minimum wage.

Will some small businesses operating on the margins fail due to a mandatory wage increase? Yes! But the vast majority will have to hire more workers to meet the demand created by more customers looking to spend the new found cash in their pockets.

Republicans are being disingenuous when they express their concerns about the affects of a minimum wage increase on small businesses. They give the impression that they are worried about the mom and pop grocery store on the corner. In fact their real concerns are the profit margins of millionaires and billionaires who fund their campaigns. Remember, depending on the type of industry, you could have 500, 1000, or even 1500 employees and still be considered a small business. Billionaires like Warren Buffet, Steve Forbes and Michael Bloomberg are small business owners. You have to question the veracity of Republicans’ statements when they are advocating for businesses employing 500 or more people.

If republicans want to win national elections they need to get on the right side of this debate. Agree that an increase in the minimum wage is good for the country…but get something in return. Perhaps Republicans could agree on an increase in the minimum wage in exchange for the president’s approval to begin construction on the Keystone pipeline. Everybody gets something they want and the country moves forward.

It’s time to increase the minimum wage. A citizen working a full time job in the richest most “exceptional” country in the world should not be living in poverty.

Today, when you feel those hunger pangs, head to your local fast food restaurant. Buy a Big Mac, a Whopper, or a Double Cheese with everything on it. Shake the hand of a fast food worker. Give them your support. Buy a burger…support a worker.

Obama, International Community Organizer

The president will attend a meeting with NATO allies later this week. On his way to the summit in Wales he made a pit stop in Estonia. Early this morning President Obama joined Estonian President Toomas Ilvek for a joint press conference which focused primarily on ISIS and the Ukraine.

The president addressed the media mere hours after the release of a new video showing the beheading of yet another American journalist by ISIS forces. Needless to say tensions were running high; emotions raw. Yet here was the president, calm in demeanor, patiently addressing facts on the ground and explaining the steps being taken to address the ISIS threat.

The president spoke about “building a coalition,” “working in partnership with out NATO allies” “engaging our Arab partners in the region,” “appealing to all Muslims…Sunni, Shia, Kurds…” to come together in a joint effort to defeat ISIS.

This was Obama the community organizer at his best. Clearly engaged and well versed on the conditions on the ground; trying to bring all the affected factions together to find a joint resolution. No threats, no bluster, no “line in the sand.” No talk of “the full force and might of the US military.” It was the type of response that the president’s critics hate; one that drives neo-cons to call him “feckless” and “weak.”

It was the exact response that a war weary nation wants to hear.

The president understands that Americans are not interested in becoming the “tip of the spear” in a war against ISIS. He understands that the country wants see other nations in the region take up some of the heavy lifting. He understands that there is no quick fix; and that a long term solution will take months if not years to coalesce. He understands that the solution does not lie at the point of an American soldier’s gun. We have already seen what happens when the bombs stop falling.

Obama, the international community organizer! Carrying out the will of the people and displaying the right temperament and leadership skills for this very difficult task.

It's Time For This President To Act On Immigration Reform

The president has had a change of heart.

Over the past few weeks the president has been vocal in his frustration over the failure of House Republicans to act on a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
This past June Speaker Boehner informed the president that the House would not be voting on an immigration bill this year. A defiant Obama responded with a Rose Garden address during which he informed the nation that in the absence of congressional action he was “…beginning a new effort to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress.” He announced that he had asked his team to provide by the end of summer a list of executive actions that he could take. The president promised that he would act quickly on the recommendations. Subsequent White House briefings made it clear that the president had every intention of taking action before November mid-terms.

Evidently the president has changed his tune.

It now appears that the president will delay issuing any executive orders on immigration reform until AFTER the mid-terms. The word is that the president is taking heat from vulnerable Democrats who don’t want to spend the critical weeks before the election distancing themselves from the proclamations of an “imperialist president.” Republicans are trying to attach Democrat candidates to the president in any way they can. Finding oneself labeled as a surrogate for a president who would rather violate the constitution than work with congress can have an adverse affect on one’s political future.

Then candidate Obama promised he would pass immigration reform during his first term as president. President Obama repeated that promise during his campaign for re-election. And in past weeks President Obama promised that he would that he would act alone “without Congress” to fulfill that promise. Now we learn that he’s humming a different tune.

I for one appreciate that we have a very deliberative president; particularly when contemplating matters of war. But you can only ruminate about a given subject for so long before it becomes obvious that you really don’t know what the hell to do. At some point paralysis by analysis takes over.

I understand that a handful of vulnerable Democrat politicians may not want to get beat up over the president’s executive orders. But millions of immigrants and minorities are looking to THIS president to fulfill his promise. And they all vote.

Immigration reform is essential to the economic viability of this country. Open borders and the freedom of all races, colors and creeds to live together as one nation lies at the very soul of who we are as a country.

The time for deliberation and political posturing is over.

It’s time for this president to act!