Amid WikiLeaks Disclosures and Democratic Confusion, Obama Goes To Afghanistan

Like his last clandestine trip to Afghanistan in March, President Obama’s secret arrival Friday in the war-torn country is officially about one thing: Thanking U.S. troops for their service.”I would stress that the focus of our trip is really to see the troops and to see those that work at the embassy,” Gibbs told reporters on board Air Force One.

But nothing is quite so simple. The last week has shown in sharp relief both the new limits of President Obama’s power at home, as he struggled to salvage his domestic agenda in the lame duck Congress, and his continued struggles with finding a legitimate governing partner in Afghanistan, as the WikiLeaks disclosures exposed again the deep corruption that infuses the current, U.S.-backed Afghan regime.

On the Air Force One flight over, Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said the WikiLeaks disclosures had little impact on the timing of the trip, which had been in the works for a month. “We’re all aware there are serious challenges in Afghanistan,” said Rhodes, adding that the White House had “weathered those kinds of revelations before as it relates to President Karzai and the Afghan government.”

But such comments do not directly address the depth of dissatisfaction, within the U.S. government and the international community, with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his government. Officially stated, the U.S. policy in Afghanistan has three goals: To break the Taliban’s momentum, to build up Afghan security capability, and to transition to an Afghan force.

The second two legs of that stool have been severely undercut by a Afghan leadership that is widely considered to be not only corrupt but unstable. The documents released by WikiLeaks have show the former Secretary General of NATO, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, speculating that Karzai alternated between two personas, “the erratic Pashtun politician” and “the rational national leader.” The files showed that Afghan Vice President Ahmad Zia Masood was caught in a Drug Enforcement Administration investigation entering the United Arab Emerites in 2009 with $52 million, money he was allowed to keep without disclosing its origin or destination. Another 2009 cable, written by Ambassador Karl Eikenberry discussed a meeting with Hamid Karzai’s half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, as typical of the challenges in the country.

“The meeting with AWK highlights one of our major challenges in Afghanistan: how to fight corruption and connect the people to their government when the key government officials are themselves corrupt,” Eikenberry wrote.

The White House national security team is nearing the end of a review og Afghan strategy that began in October. On the ride over, rather than focus on the challenges of establishing a reliable Afghan partner, Obama aides highlighted the successes that were made at a recent NATO summit in Portugal, including an agreement on transitions of international forces in the country, beginning in 2011 and ending in 2014. While in Afghanistan, on a visit that is expected to last about three hours, Obama has been meeting have a phone conversation with Afghan President Karzai, after bad weather forced officials to scrap a planned face to face meeting. Obama will also meet with Ambassador Karl Eikenberry and the commanding general, David Petraeus.

Meanwhile, back home, Obama has left behind a Democratic caucus suffering from rising tensions over the course of the lame duck Congress, which now seems unlikely to achieve many of the party’s priorities, including an ending of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, an end to tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, and the passage of the DREAM Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for immigrants who go to college or serve in the military. Shortly before departing Thursday night, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs put out a statement to try to impose some order on the rising discontent, by pointing out that political realities had forced the president’s hand on one of his signature campaign issues, allowing the tax cuts for the wealthy to expire.

“[B]ecause Republicans have made it clear that they won’t pass a middle class extension without also extending tax cuts for the wealthy, the President has asked Director Lew and Secretary Geithner to work with Congress to find a way forward,” the Gibbs statement read.

Obama has spent much of the last month, since the election, trying to reassert himself on the international stage, with trips to Asia and Europe, and extensive discussions of the need for Congress to approve a new nuclear weapons treaty with Russia. Presidential trips to war zones during the holiday season are also a longtime tradition. This week may have been one of the last windows for Obama to travel to the area, without disrupting the White House holiday party schedule which begins next week, and a planned vacation in Hawaii later this month.

Since the beginning of 2009, 784 U.S. military personnel have died in Afghanistan. Between June 2009 and June 2010, monthly U.S. military spending on the war in Afghanistan grew by 63 percent, from $3.5 billion to $5.7 billion, while the troop strength in the nation grew by 70 percent, according to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service. Troop levels were predicted to reach 98,000 in September of 2010.

Related Topics: Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • http://therealestamerican.wordpress.com therealestamerican

    The Tourist in Chief strikes again!
    .
    I read on a Real American blog that this trip is going to cost us $82 million per day! Or that was how much were spending on the War for a Free Afghanistan per day. I only skimmed the article.
    .
    Either way, Obama is spending $82 million per day in Afghanistan! Another liberal who can’t stop spending!

  • lilaland

    Oh, look! The cowardly poodle has run to Afghanistan in order to try and look strong. He is the commander and Chief. But we all know he is the republican gimp.
    2.5 billion a week. That is what is going to Afghanistan.

    You know what? Obama can take back the extra $1,000 is going trying to get me in tax breaks. You know why? Because my $1000 is coasting my children massively because he is giving the rich hundreds of thousands in tax break money he is borrowing from communist China to pay for. That sucks.
    And he is handing out another year of unemployment checks to people unwilling to work in lower position jobs.. like fast food and coffee shops. Sure it would suck to go to college to end up flipping burgers. But you know what sucks more? Not having the dignity to roll up ones sleeves and sucking it in and be willing to work a lower position job because you feel like the government owes you endless hand outs. Sure, maybe unemployment checks stimulates the economy.. but so would them making $40 a day at a fast food restaurant. They would spend that money just the same and it could not sink is in debt. 99 frigging weeks of unemployment checks is enough.
    The rich don’t need more millions.
    Take your $1000 bribe money and shove it. It’s not worth it to me.
    We need to get serious.
    I’m so disgusted with Obama right now.

  • pintortwo

    MS, I’m glad you wrote “Officially stated” in
    .
    Officially stated, the U.S. policy in Afghanistan has three goals: To break the Taliban’s momentum, to build up Afghan security capability, and to transition to an Afghan force.
    .
    because it gives me hope that you realized it is a load of bunk- it’s what they tell you (press) to tell to us. As clearly shown by your common-sense statement
    .
    But the second two legs of that stool have been severely undercut by a Afghan leadership that is widely considered not only corrupt but unstable..
    .
    yeah, no kidding. And if you and I figured that out, there can be no doubt the military brass know it too.
    .
    So please, take it to the next step. If the real goals of our military are not to undermine Taliban momemtum (because who cares? they can’t project might beyond the range of their fertilizer bombs- their most lethal weapon), and it clearly doesn’t care about Afghan security forces (the infrastructure we built “for the ANA” can’t be operated by the Afghanis! -link-) and no one in the US government trusts Karzai… then what are the real goals?
    .
    I say the Pentagon is still running the Long War gameplan– build bases to police the “arc of instability” (horn of Africa to C Asia) for the next 50-80 years. Or as the PNAC put it: perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions.
    .
    Do you agree, Mr Scherer?

  • lilaland

    Instead of republicans trying to get more borrowed money from China to give to the rich.. and democrats trying to get more borrowed money from china to give to the 99 weekers who would rather take hand outs than work lower position jobs.. why don’t both parties focus on what they are willing to give up?
    Change would do Congress good.
    Both sides are borrow and spending.. compromise seems to mean both sides get to borrow and spend more.
    It’s crazy.
    We are neck high in debt already.
    Both side should be willing to sacrifice for compromise. Not borrow more!

    Let the Bush tax breaks for the rich run out. They don’t need it. The greed is corrupting their soul. Stop giving endless handouts to the unemployed. I promise they can find lower level jobs if they really want to work. It has more dignity than taking another year of handouts after they have already taken 99 weeks. I’m not being heartless. I’m being honest. There comes a time when tough love is needed. 99 weekers need tough love. 99 weeks is enough.

    Republicans and democrats are insane with a lust to spend borrowed money from China. Both parties. Both have taken it beyond the pale.. and compromise to them means more insane spending and give aways.

  • deconstructiva

    Stop giving endless handouts to the unemployed. I promise they can find lower level jobs if they really want to work. It has more dignity than taking another year of handouts after they have already taken 99 weeks. I’m not being heartless.

    .
    Yes, you are being heartless. You really think everyone out of work is NOT looking to get back in? And that the jobs are there for everyone looking? Tell us in detail where they are, name the specific companies hiring back all those millions you tough love so much.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Amid newsweeklies’ bankruptcies and a record lack of public confidence in journalists, Scherer writes about Obama going to Afghanistan.

  • deconstructiva

    Introspection 101 may be missing from Ivy League journalism schools. Reporters writing / talking about reporting often get messy. Journalism critics (Greenwald) tend to fare better.

  • filmnoia

    Despite some of the frustration and hyberbole exhibited here, with all that is taking place in DC right now, Obama’s trip is terrible optics. It re-inforces for me his disengaged and passive nature. Here I was in 2008 thinking I was voting for a transformative leader for tough times a la FDR., but I was wrong.
    Unless something totally unexpected happens, I’ll be voting for “None of the Above” in 2012.

  • koabd

    Unless something totally unexpected happens, I’ll be voting for “None of the Above” in 2012.
    .
    Of course, in our two party system, that simply translates into a win for the party you disagree with most. In essence, you’re saying that an Obama Administration is no different than, say, a Palin Administration, therefore you see no reason to cast a meaningful vote. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but I think this type of thinking ignores reality.

  • diecash1

    I afraid that Decon is right. You wrote a steaming pile of tripe right there and you should really consider retracting it. If not, please explain where are all of the jobs that these people are ignoring. In case you didn’t notice, we are in a protracted period of high un-and-underemployment and there is an oversupply of labor as compared to the number of available jobs. Would your tough love include telling them to drop dead? That seems to be the end result you’re suggesting.

  • http://briskfeetinn.wordpress.com briskfeetinn

    SAVE YOU A LOT . YOU MUST NOT MISS IT

    http://www.briskfeetinn.com

  • filmnoia

    Koabd -

    The problem is that we only have a two party system, beholden to the exact same financial interests.
    I thought that in 2008 both sides would have admitted that we are on a downward slide, but all we have had is the GOP continuing to grease those skids. Obama is doing all he can to help them destroy him. Of course, an Obama Admin, would be “better” than any GOP cretin, but as long as one side spits in the face of the voter and refuses he work with a duly elected Dem President, the slide will continue. This is what happens when you don’t have grown ups controlling the levers.

  • allthingsinaname

    A grown up electorate would also help.

  • allthingsinaname

    So what you are saying is we get to vote for who they want.
    .
    That makes a shame out of the process.

  • filmnoia

    “A grown up electorate would also help.”

    Yes, I guess that is where it starts. Whenever I see some GOP lunatic like Bachmann, Steve King, or this guy Shadegg the other day, spout off I wonder what kind of “no minds” are in their districts.

  • koabd

    So what you are saying is we get to vote for who they want.
    .
    Who is “they”?

  • allthingsinaname

    Why the Politicians, who else? We have to vote for who they put forward.

  • koabd

    Obama is doing all he can to help them destroy him.
    .
    I agree that he has not delivered on the full transformative promise of his campaign, but considering the expectations he generated by running on the ephemeral qualities of “hope” and “change,” I doubt he could have ever satisfactorily lived up to them. Especially given that he was taking office at the nadir of an economic collapse brought on by decades of deregulation and Las Vegas-style financial management. That said, I don’t think he’s doing “all he can to help [Republicans] destroy him.”
    .
    Obama’s base, really, are groups that haven’t voted in mass historically: minorities and college-educated voters under 30. He’s never had the older white vote. I don’t think the GOP’s efforts are going to pull his base — minorities and 20-somethings — away come 2012. So, in that regard, I don’t think the GOP can really destroy him because his reelection hinges upon groups the GOP has done an outstanding job of alienating.
    .
    So what that leaves us with is a President who will be stymied politically. And while you can fault him for holding tight to this, he ran on a pledge to be conciliatory. It’s obviously gotten him nowhere with respect to the opposition: you’ve got Republicans calling him the most divisive president ever, a radical liberal and (in some quarters) a Lao tribesman bent on destroying America. But it seems that core to his being is a belief that if he appears to be a reasonable person, everything will work out. So, how that presents itself is as a guy who doesn’t seem willing to really fight for anything.
    .
    But again, that’s the guy we elected. He didn’t promise to be a firebrand. He promised to be even-tempered and to work across the aisle. And I think he’s really had a bad hand from the get-go. As much as we like to talk about the Democratic majorities, the truth is the DLC’s 2006 strategy sattled the Democratic Caucus with “Blue Dog” Democrats who hailed from conservative districts and had to behave accordingly. That was the legislative reality. And because Obama’s inclination was to not throw executive weight around the Congress, as his predecessor did, he was left with legislation that reflected the nature of that branch of government.
    .
    Now he’s got a Republican House and we can expect more of the same: a guy who wants to appear reasonable trying to work with a group that really wants to see him fail above all else. And he’ll have a sympathetic base (minority voters, particularly, and some of those younger voters) who will come out for him again because they’ll perceive unjust treatment of the nation’s first black president.

  • koabd

    Why the Politicians, who else? We have to vote for who they put forward.
    .
    Well, a politician, by definition, is an elected official. So, are you, as a voter, abdicating any responsibility for the people who put people forward to be voted on (if you’re indeed blaming “Politicians” for giving you people who you don’t want to vote for)?

  • allthingsinaname

    No you are. You said that we have to vote for Obama because the alternative is….????? What has Obama done? Played to whom? You or the Politicians?

  • allthingsinaname

    Belongs to thread 6

  • koabd

    No you are. You said that we have to vote for Obama because the alternative is….?????
    .
    I didn’t say you had to do anything. I stated two things:
    .
    1) We have a two party system
    .
    2) The viable choices are within that system
    .
    You can spend your vote, though, however you choose.
    .
    As far as this:
    .
    What has Obama done?
    .
    I know it’s en vogue to deny the President any accomplishments, but he’s actually done a lot of things in his two years. I tried to post a link to a site running down some of them, but it got me stuck in moderation. So, if you Google the phrase “What the **** has Obama done so far?” you’ll find the site.

  • filmnoia

    Koabd -

    I’ll grant you some of your points in your lengthy post. However, I think you are a bit too sanguine in thinking that Obama’s base will come out for him in 2012
    The enthusiasm that was there in 2008 won’t be at the same level in 2012. Enthusiasm peters out, and Obama hasn’t helped to maintain it. Old white folks regularly vote in most elections. That’s why the GOP won the House this time around, and this is why Obama’s best move is to have Hillary Clinton run with him.
    By nature Obama is cool ,composed, and conciliatory. To the GOP this is a Kick Me sign. I can see where he could still get elected, but if he is left with a GOP House and Senate, the game of personal destruction with continue. I think we are in a downward spiral that shows absolutely no sign of abating.

  • allthingsinaname

    Well you spent many lines talking about the reality. Here is another “Reality”, I and many others are not happy. They can choose to ignore it or do something about it. It their choice to make, after that I’ll make mine, they may or may not like it.
    .
    What is in my best interest for the short term and what is my best interests or, best interest of my grand kids in the long term may or may not be the same.
    .
    These are decisions that have to be made, frankly I do not give a damn about Obama, it isn’t about him, it is about what I see that needs to be done, with or with out him. So far he has not giving me any indication that we think the same.

  • koabd

    I and many others are not happy.
    .
    I never disputed this. The last three American election cycles have been driven by displeasure. And we have a substantial right-wing movement right now driven exclusively by anger. It’s the prevailing American emotion.
    .
    frankly I do not give a damn about Obama, it isn’t about him, it is about what I see that needs to be done
    .
    That’s fine. Most people do vote based on what they perceive as need. Still doesn’t change the fact that this is a two-party system and in the absence of a viable third party (or solid primary challenge to the incumbent) it comes down to a choice between the two established-party candidates.
    .
    And if that’s the case, you can have the attitude of “I’m taking my ball and going home,” but I don’t actually see how it benefits this:
    .
    What is in my best interest for the short term and what is my best interests or, best interest of my grand kids in the long term may or may not be the same.
    .
    Are you really seeing an equivalence between the two parties in this regard? Because I’m sure this was the line of thinking in 2000 when people decided Gore and Bush were essentially the same.
    .
    Alas, you’re entitled to your opinion. I agree with you in the broad outlines that the two party system has reached its dysfunctional nadir, but I see differences between the two — particularly at this moment in history.

  • lilaland

    “Yes, you are being heartless. You really think everyone out of work is NOT looking to get back in? And that the jobs are there for everyone looking? Tell us in detail where they are, name the specific companies hiring back all those millions you tough love so much.”

    In 99 weeks do you really believe that most those people could not find, at the least, work that pays minimum wage?
    Gold Gym is hiring cleaning staff right now. It’s a Grind is hiring cashiers. Ihop is hiring wait staff. Walmart is hiring greeters. Fast food chains are hiring. I know Nursing homes are hiring because I got a job offer to make $32,000 a year last week just because at the pool I managed to get a 82 year old woman into the water and want to exercise. I was just swimming and got talking to her and she talked about wanting to die. After 30 mins talking with me she felt empowered enough to try. I was offered a job right then and there. I was in George town Tx. I don’t need a job but I could get one. At the very least I would set up a booth on a corner and offer Tarot card reading for $10. I would find a way to support myself. 99 weeks of hand outs takes away a persons dignity and creativity. They lose their self worth and confidence. And I’m a liberal. I think oil should be nationalized as a natural resource. But, I also know that people will scale down their life style to the money they get.. if the money keeps coming. most trust fund children do not thrive. Many people who receive governmental assistance will stay on it until it runs out. I 100% believe we must have safety nets.. but I also know that safety nets can turn people into dependents.
    For all my passion.. I’m rational.
    How about this? After 99 weeks, I don’t care how many degrees a person has, after 99 weeks people who receive unemployment must prove that they apply to at least 2 minimum wage jobs a week?

  • koabd

    Enthusiasm peters out, and Obama hasn’t helped to maintain it. Old white folks regularly vote in most elections.
    .
    I don’t disagree that enthusiasm peters out, but I don’t think the displeasure expressed by our friend “allthings” is universal to the groups that showed up to get him elected:
    .
    Blacks (88% approve as of Nov.22-28)
    .
    Hispanics (52% approve as of Nov.22-28)
    .
    18 – 29 year olds (53% approve as of Nov.22-28)
    .
    College graduates (53% approve as of Nov.22-28)
    .
    Source: Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx)
    .
    So, I don’t think I’m being sanguine — I think I’m just not being reactionary: Mid-term elections are usually bad for the incumbent; mid-term voters are older, whiter, and more conservative; and the economy has been bad. And I think those groups that elected him are hanging with him (as they did with Deval Patrick here in Massachusetts).

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks for providing examples. Now walk the walk: quit your job now and Monday go find a new one. How many offers will you get? How many real people are applying for those countless lovely positions you mentioned? Then report back to us without sugarcoating or making sht up (it’s really hard to find hyperbole here but some commenters are keen to pick it up).

  • allthingsinaname

    “Are you really seeing an equivalence between the two parties in this regard? Because I’m sure this was the line of thinking in 2000 when people decided Gore and Bush were essentially the same.”
    .
    To some extent yes. I see the Democrats moving to the right in response to the crazies. This, if nothing else, tells me that the Party is not the Party I voted for. I think at this juncture, Obama, as he said, all things are on the table, is not what I need.

  • diecash1

    I think you are missing the point. There are millions of people out of work. The longer they are unemployed, the harder it will be for them to get hired. One of the first screens done when many (especially large companies) companies seek to fill a job is to eliminate all those applicants that are currently unemployed. The reasoning being that if they are unemployed, there must be something wrong with them, etc.
    ..
    Secondly, there are, at best, thousands of job openings in a given month, significantly fewer than there are unemployed applicants. As such, most job openings have a very high number of applicants. You espouse this “get tough” attitude that just doesn’t fit with reality. If you think it hurts someone’s morale and dignity to take long-term unemployment benefits, see what being unemployed and homeless will do for them. Picture Depression era bread lines followed by torches and pitchforks.

  • lilaland

    I don’t have to quit my job because I’m self employed. I had a mother who killed herself and a blind father. I dropped out of school at 16 and worked in a bakery and then as a stripper in my 20′s and saved my money. I bought 3 rental homes and am now a landlord. I married a man who works for Dell and puts in 18 hours a day. I have two children in magnet schools who are 10 and 11 and both could demolish Sarah Palin in a geography test.
    I know what hard times are. I know what being hungry feels like.
    I know that unlimited assistance hurts the spirit. It creates dependents. I don’t have to walk the walk because I’m not asking for help. However, if anyone asked me to help them for 99 weeks and wanted more help.. they sure the hell would have to prove they were looking for work. Even minimum wage jobs… no matter their schooling.

  • earljr1

    lilaland makes an excellent point and decon misunderstands (as usual) Calls it hyperbole and asks for proof those jobs are there. Open your mind just once in awhile, decon and consider the fact not ALL liberals share your point of view on each and every issue. Your usual tactic is to now accuse lilaland of not knowing how to swim, so how could she possibly have been at that swimming pool. Old stuff, decon…quit your attack mode and start listening, you just might learn something. I found your commentary informative and quite interesting, lilaland…please keep posting.

  • deconstructiva

    FTW, diecash, good one. And earl, still waiting for your blood and guts + correct terminology / details to prove you’re a doctor. Oh, I’m listening …and waiting for you to back up your claims.

  • deconstructiva

    lila, congrats on your situation but alas, it has no bearing on anyone else or the job market as a whole …or in addressing diecash’s point in 12.2. So seriously, how would you plan to put millions back to work?

  • paulejb

    Leave it to Barack Obama to beat it out of town when the heat is on.

  • lilaland

    I would ask that after 52 weeks of unemployment checks that they must start applying to minimum wage jobs, no matter their degrees. After 99 weeks if they have been applying for at least 2 minimum wage jobs for a year of it, then I would extend the unemployment assistance to them. These people are asking us to help them.
    All of us. Ask your self on a personal level if you would give someone a free check for two years out of your own money with out asking them to look for even minimum wage job. That what we are doing.. but we are asking our children to support these people. Seriously.
    My mind has a hard time believing that most those 99 weekers could not have found a minimum wage job in all those weeks. Would you support a boyfriend for two years with out being damn sure he was looking for work.. any work… all that time? If they can prove they are seriously looking.. even for minimum wage, then I can feel compassion.. but you know.. I have a hard time feeling sorry for people who are not willing to work jobs they feel are beneath them… while taking hand outs.
    And I’m a liberal. Think how middle America swing voters are going to react about another year of free money to people who have not worked in two years.. once they think about it. They will start to feel contempt for the people. Maybe that is not fair.. but it is true. I promise you it is true.

    How do we get them to work? Well, we don’t give hand outs to the rich in the form of unlimited tax cuts. That clearly does not work. Job growth is created by demand for product. Giving the rich and mega corporations more money in tax cuts creates a false impression of demand. Capitalism is not working because the masses are not making selection by purchasing the best products and businesses. The stocks go up because they report profit but the profit is not real and main street receives very little of the trickle down. Innovation is stifled when we give too much corporate welfare. And that is what the Bush tax cuts are. Monopolies dominate and suffocate fresh entrepreneurship and false profit creates bubbles that bust.

    However, giving the masses fish without teaching them how to fish creates dependents.

    The answer is found in education. We must invest in schools that train workers for the absolutely huge infrastructure projects that we as a nation must invest in soon. Businesses can bid on governmental contracts to equip all governmental buildings with soler panels. Those soler panels will pay for themselves in 10 years. After that the extra energy they produce can be resold for an actual profit.

    There is one idea.

    From the first civilizations found in ancient Mesopotamia, the first empires, the first super powers.. the nation that has the most advanced technology becomes dominate.

    If America has an honest desire to remain a dominate world force.. leading the way in the newest technologies is the only way we can achieve it.

  • diecash1

    The answer is found in education. We must invest in schools that train workers for the absolutely huge infrastructure projects that we as a nation must invest in soon.

    That’s a fine plan for the future but what do you do today for the millions of unemployed workers that have little in way of prospective employment?
    ..
    Instead of paying unemployment (“for nothing” as you might say) to people that have exhausted their normal benefits, what about financial assistance and job retraining linked to actual jobs? I would much rather pay for supporting someone while they are retrained for an existing job. It seems like a better use of money to me, especially when we have so many workers lacking for a variety of skills and knowledge.

  • earljr1

    My credentials are very much intact, decon and if there were not so many weirdo’s online, I would gladly share them with you. My occupation is one that I take a great deal of pride in and contrary to your opinion, I practice with a considerable degree of enthusiasm….who knows I may even be treating you or a family member, some day. Stranger things have happened, you know.

  • lilaland

    That is a pretty good idea, diecash1!
    Also, maybe they could do something like put in 10-20 hours of community service a week if they want extended unemployment benefits? They would be “working” to better our Country. It would give them dignity and would be very patriotic and even compassionate.
    Compassion extending compassion. It could be healing to our nation and people. Help cleaning community centers. Help restocking food banks. Help picking up litter in parks. Help with phone banks. I mean, there is just some much good they could do. Even with just one day a week of community service. We could start to rebuild. People helping people.

  • diecash1

    Also, maybe they could do something like put in 10-20 hours of community service a week

    Well, I would prefer mandatory national service for that. People could choose a military or non-military option for their service.
    ..
    My point regarding living assistance and job retraining is that long term unemployment is an intractable problem requiring unconventional solutions. In most cases, people will find new employment in less than 52 weeks but currently the job market is anything but “normal” and the chronically unemployed need additional aid in order to avoid becoming unemployable.
    ..
    Your point about national infrastructure projects is also a good one. People could be trained (or re-employed) in many of these jobs over the next two or three decades as much of our infrastructure is crumbling.

  • lilaland

    “Well, I would prefer mandatory national service for that. People could choose a military or non-military option for their service.”

    Hm.. maybe those who have already been in the military could put in 10-20 hours a week of service. It’s a matter of national security that those allowed on base and what not should be screened. And that takes a bit of work. It however is a worthy idea for consideration, absolutely no doubt.

    But yeah, something like that. After 99 weeks people need to prove to potential employers that they are capable of work and want work. Getting them into a program that extends unemployment assistance which stimulates the economy while also requiring them to do some kind of work or training each week would benefit them, in that regard. It could also benefit our country. It would be a win-win.

    We need to start thinking outside the box. Repeating the same stagnant ideas over and over will not provide different results in the long run. We already know how this movie ends if we don’t start trying new innovative ideas, like yours. There is no reason we can’t ask those who are requesting additional extensions in their unemployment assistance to give back to their country a little or to learn a new needed and employable triad.

  • deconstructiva

    lila, I like your idea of community service + diecash’s other options, thanks for that. One risk about retraining / education is that much of it now is done thru private means (tech schools, colleges) and jobs are NOT guaranteed upon graduation …but the loan debts are. I’m leaning toward bringing back more apprenticeships. While famous in unions it’s used heavily in Europe, esp. Germany. Getting trained AND paid at once with job assurance is a good deal for both employers and employees. Getting companies on board will take time, though. I would’ve favored an outright Fed work program on a temp basis like the WPA during the Depression. Alas, the R’s will not allow that.
    .
    Speaking of infrastructure projects, for those who don’t know, there’s a site to track projects:
    http://www.recovery.gov

  • deconstructiva

    Yes, earl, identifying yourself by name and state of residence would solve the matter immediately and permanently: we could go to the state board and verify your license #. But don’t do that; I don’t insist on it. You can demonstrate your trade skills in other ways; people do here in comments indirectly quite often if you pay attention.

  • diecash1

    One risk about retraining / education is that much of it now is done thru private means (tech schools, colleges) and jobs are NOT guaranteed upon graduation …but the loan debts are.

    That’s why, wherever possible, I would like to see job retraining tied to a job and apprenticeships are one way of doing that. Many community colleges have programs tied (nearly) directly to jobs. Some of the programs require OJT so that workers can gain experience and make business contacts. These type of programs often lead to offers of employment upon completion. We need to do this on a much broader scale to begin to solve the unemployment and under-trained workforce problems.

  • lilaland

    “Getting companies on board will take time, though. I would’ve favored an outright Fed work program on a temp basis like the WPA during the Depression. Alas, the R’s will not allow that”

    Well, we could at least start with the give back to your country in community service to get unemployment extensions, idea rolling. Or, work for some kind of national program for 1 day a week.. something like that. It would be a good way for the unemployed to network and meet new people and would give those who have been unemployed for long periods back a little pride and confidence. Proving that they can work and want to work would help them in job searches.

    I think it is a win-win. I know that if I were unemployed for a long period of time that I would personally be eager to prove I wanted to work and could. I would feel proud about helping my country and not so embarrassed about the unemployment extensions. It would be a way of proving I wanted to work and was not a free loader begging for years of endless handouts. It would give me back some dignity.

  • earljr1

    Decon, I have yet to see any story line about the clinical aspects of my chosen profession and it would be odd for me to start name dropping the surgical procedures I do on a daily basis. For instance, I did a segment resection to remove a malignant mass from a seven year old boy’s lung this morning….it actually could have been worse, because the scan showed the mass larger than it actually was and we were anticipating having to do a pneumonectomy (removal of the entire lung) Post op, he was doing well and should make a full recovery. I also did two CABG’s ..Coronary artery bypass grafting. This is where I take a section of vein from the leg (or chest) and create a new route for oxygen rich blood to reach the heart. So, do you see what I mean? The commentary on this blog is no where remotely related to what I do for a living. I comment with a conservative’s perspective on today’s events and you, of course, are of the liberal persuasion. I have NO problem with that, two different viewpoints are the only reason we find swampland so interesting. Have a nice evening and stay well.

  • http://rbmatudan.wordpress.com rbmatudan

    It might be good that these leaks are happening. I see it as a refreshing look at how the rest of the world actually operates and how false their public face is. I for one will be happy to leave these despots to their own hells and stop policing the world. It is time for the children to take care of themselves. It is time to help our own people first, then, if some remains (NFW) we can help others. http://www.pathtoasia.com/jobs/

blog comments powered by Disqus