Finally. Obama Admits Iraq Surge Worked.

Why was something that was so obvious to most Americans, politicians & pundits, so difficult for our Commander-in-Chief to admit? What could possibly be the reason for President Barack Obama and many of his Democratic cohorts and skeptics for not acknowledging that the surge in Iraq worked better than they ever thought it would?

I really cannot comprehend for the life of me, what is it that President Obama hopes to accomplish by behaving so childish over this issue. The surge worked. Why can’t our President admit the obvious? Why can’t he hold a press conference and just come out and be upfront to the American public and finally confess, that the surge worked?

Oh, I see. What a terrible thing it would be for our President to be called a flip-flopper. A Bush sympathizer. A war-mongering President. That would be too much to bear. Admit that Bush was actually right? Never in a million years.
Not even on the day of his troop level decision making speech at West Point where half the cadets fell asleep on him, could he muster up one iota of respect for his predecessors’ contributions and success of the surge in Iraq. The best his teleprompter could spit out was:

“Today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing the Iraq war to a responsible end.”
“That we are doing so is a testament to the character of our men and women in uniform. Thanks to their courage, grit and perseverance, we have given Iraqis a chance to shape their future, and we are successfully leaving Iraq to its people.”

Never once did he mention the success of the surge or give credit to the Bush administration. Hey, Mr. Obama, the campaign is over. You are President. It’s ok to say that the surge worked. We get it already. We know that you opposed the surge all throughout your campaign and as far back as 2007. You did not believe in our troops then, and as we will see, you don’t’ believe in them now.

But this is December 2009. We all now know that the surge worked. And every soldier’s family that lost a son or a daughter in this conflict should know so as well.
So when you go in front of the American people to try and sell them on escalating the war in Afghanistan and to commit more of their children to the ravages of war, wouldn’t it be an easier sell if you simply told them that because of the valor demonstrated by their brave sons & daughter’s and the success of the surge in Iraq, millions of people there will begin to one day enjoy the same freedoms we take for granted here at home?

Wouldn’t it be easier to say that we kicked-ass and were victorious in Iraq instead of being politically correct and watering down that success? Why is it always about “Hard-earned milestones and markers?” Would it hurt our troop moral to hear from our Commander-in-Chief that Iraq should serve as a warning to any rogue nation looking to do harm to US citizens? One would think they would welcome the compliment.

Having said all of this, we all know that what President Obama says & promises is one thing when he does it publicly, as opposed to when he does in private. We all remember how he characterized small town Pennsylvanians voters at one of his San Francisco fundraisers during his campaign. In the warmth & comfort of fellow elitists whose votes he was trying to secure, he described the growing resentment & frustrations towards elitists by small town Pennsylvanians this way:

“It’s not surprising when they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Yet, while he was in campaign mode back in Pennsylvania, he praised them and explained to them how he was an avid supporter of the Second Amendment.
On another occasion during his campaign, Obama made promises about renegotiating NAFTA and actually agreed with Hillary Clinton on this issue. But as it turned out, behind closed doors in a secret meeting with the Canadian Prime Minister, he sang a different tune. The Canadians claimed that Obama had reassured them that all the talk about NAFTA during the campaign was just rhetoric to appease the public. I can go on and on but almost a year into the Obama Presidency, we all know that Obama has not been straight with the American Public.

BREAKING NEWS.

And so we now learn from General David Petraeus that Obama finally came clean and admitted to him that the surge in Iraq worked and that he wanted to model the surge into Afghanistan in the same fashion. On a Fox News Sunday interview, Petraeus opened up about how Obama came to finally realize what most of us had figured out long a go – the surge was a success.

The head of the Central Command, Petraeus spoke about his meetings with Barack Obama and how the game-plan that was used so effectively in Iraq could be implemented in Afghanistan. According to Petraeus, Obama was like a kid in a candy store. He wanted to know how troops in Iraq worked with Iraqi forces to secure the population and gain the confidence of the many different factions in Iraq. They talked about the differences between the two regions and some of elements that of each that were similar.

As we now also know, the delay in coming to a decision as to the troop level, was not about coming up with an exit strategy. Obama knew all along that escalating the war in Afghanistan would mean that our troops would be there for the next 15-20 years. This has just come to light as Afghan President Hamid Karzai told visiting Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates on Tuesday.
For 15 to 20 years, Afghanistan will not be able to sustain a force of that nature and capability with its own resources," Karzai told a news conference.

"We hope that the international community and the United States, as our first ally, will help Afghanistan reach the ability to sustain a force."

To tell the American people that troop withdrawal will begin as early as July 2011 is disingenuous. Once again, in order to placate his base and sell this to the American public,

Obama resorts to what he does best, he goes behind closed doors and says one thing, and then gets in front of the American people and announces something totally opposite.
But at last, he finally admits that the surge in Iraq worked and said it was a success. If only now he would stand in front of Americans and finally announce it to everyone.

Species-First, People-Last Statute Destroying Millions of Acres of California Farming Land

Once again, the ESA (Endangered Species Act) has decided to put the interests of the people below that of a threatened species – this time the Delta Smelt. The Delta Smelt a tiny fish no longer than 3”, was placed on the ESA’s list of Endangered Species back in 1973 and has remained on the list ever since. Despite many years of studies by numerous Federal & State Wildlife agencies, to determine the causes and reverse its decline, they have failed to make any progress. Should anyone be surprised?

In a 20 year period from 1973 to 1993 the population of the Smelt dropped tenfold and has remained at similar levels ever since. For 20 Years the ESA has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars studying the life expectancy of a three inch fish which by all accounts will become extinct from several causes no matter how much effort or funds are expended to preserve it.
In a 2005 biological opinion, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found several contributing factors in the Delta smelt's long decline, including the projects' pumps near Tracy that transport Delta water south. But the opinion also found that the pumps, while taking some smelt, were not killing so many as to cause the smelt's extinction.

Despite these findings & constant pressure from environmentalists or “Hardcore Greens”, a challenge was brought to Federal Court and the findings of the study were basically thrown out. The new ruling charged that the pumps were indeed the cause of the Smelt’s decline.

Impact of Court’s Ruling

Bowing to the ESA's mandate to preserve listed species at "whatever the costs,” a ruling at the federal district level, has ordered the state and federal pumps shut off whenever young smelt are in the vicinity. In 2008, water exports to the Delta were reduced by 30% causing an estimated hit of $300 million to the state's economy. The cut in water supply, the biggest in California has been a major contributor to the 40% unemployment in some of the Central Valley towns where farming is the only means to earn a living.

Much of the 30% of the water that is being shut-off to the valley, continues to flow to the ocean to comply with the ESA Delta Smelt ruling. Water that in many cases could be used to irrigate thousands of acres of farmland or ease the constraints of water rationing in other nearby towns.

Opponents of these mandates which are aimed at withholding water to more than 23 million people for drinking, household and business purposes, for irrigating much of California's annual $32 billion agricultural industry and the estimated loss of 80,000 Central Valley agriculture-related livelihoods - believe will lead to very harsh health, economic and social consequences.

It is a sad commentary on the priorities of this administration that they would allow such a disaster to occur right here at home. It is a joke that politics rules the day when it comes to deciding between a species and a people. People that are hurting economically and seeing their livelihoods ruined by heartless bureaucrats who are out of touch with the problems of working class Americans.

What is being done?

Witnessing firsthand the devastation to the state’s farm economy, 50 mayors from the San Joaquin Valley signed a letter asking President Obama to come down and see for himself the impact of these antiquated water rules firsthand..

The Obama administration should bear a lot of the responsibility for this species-first, people-second ideology. As a result of their reversal of a George W. Bush ruling that would allowed agencies to move ahead with projects and programs without seeking an independent review by either the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a lot of the decision making and the power has been put back in the hands of the ESA and made environmentalists happy.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger for reasons unknown, failed to request intervention from the Department of Interior. Under a provision added to the Endangered Species Act in 1978 after the snail darter fiasco, a panel of seven cabinet officials known as a "God Squad" is able to intercede in economic emergencies, such as the one now parching California farmers. Despite a petition with more than 12,000 signers, Mr. Schwarzenegger has refused that remedy.
Other politicians including Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein, has signaled an interest in pressing the issue with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

As usual, the story has gone unreported by the State Run media and if not for the unfairly maligned Fox News, the story would not have gotten the attention it is starting to receive.
President George Bush took a beating for not reacting as quickly as possible to the catastrophe caused by Hurricane Katrina and the chaos that ensued.

Here we have a situation where again people are in dire straits and in peril of losing everything they have. Shouldn’t it be the President’s responsibility to step in turn the water on so that people can back to the business of working and farming their land? After all, hasn’t he meddled in the business of the Mass. Police dept., the Governors race in New York the resignation of 2 of his Inspector Generals? It would be refreshing if he meddled on behalf of the people for once instead of taking his marching orders form the Eco-Friendly Wing of the Party.

Sources:

Sacramento Bee - http://www.sacbee.com/740/v-print/story/1942919.html
WSJ : http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574384731898375624.html