Wall Street Not The Only Crisis Spot

Gen. McKiernan

While the nation is concentrated on the proposed bailout of Wall Street its attention is diverted from another crisis that has been brewing for some time. This one, on the battlegrounds of Afghanistan.

There has been a renewed insurgency in Afghanistan. The safe haven the Taliban and al Qaeda has found in northern Pakistan has proven problematic as well.

Many of us feel that the war in Iraq diverted the military’s attention from the real enemy, concentrated in Afghanistan. Now the top U.S. military commander there is, in essence, echoing those concerns.

Gen. David McKiernan is making an urgent public plea for more troops and resources in Afghanistan. His comments came during a briefing with Pentagon reporters.

How sad it is that the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, responsible for the prosecution of the war against the true terrorists who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001, responsible for the safety and well being of U.S. and, by extension, NATO troops in country, has to resort to a public plea for help.

His commander-in-chief, President Bush, has, obviously, been asleep at the switch here. It’s increasingly clear that Bush has no vision of his own. That there are others in the administration, most likely led by the elusive Vice-President Dick Cheney, who are telling him what to do and what to say.

Apparently, Cheney and his cronies are far more concerned with Iraq than they are with the true battle ground – Afghanistan.

Who Won The Debate? Perhaps The Voters

The first 2008 presidential debate is over and, the morning after the night before finds a raging secondary debate being conducted. Over who “won” last night’s verbal dual.

In The McCain Obama 2008 Debate Room in Paltalk Studio A on Paltalk.com, voters were given the opportunity to share their own reactions. The lively discussion lasted into the wee hours of Saturday morning.

“Obama wiped the floor with McCain,” one Democratic said.

“Everyone is saying McCain won,” was the comment of a Republican.

But does it really matter who “won” the debate? Was that the purpose? To determine who is the better debater? Or is reason they debate to clarify their positions to the American people?

In some areas, the two, naturally, disagreed. In a few, there was agreement. And in several, what they agreed upon was that they “fundamentally disagreed.”

There was also opportunity for each candidate to correct or clarify accusations made by the other.

If one was listening closely, one heard that John McCain and Barack Obama both basically favor a bailout of Wall Street and checks and balances to prevent a recurrence of the financial mess the nation faces. Details remained elusive. So they settled on differing over the reason for the crisis.

McCain made the most dramatic suggestion about how to better prioritize the federal budget as a result of the nation’s financial woes, by cutting out huge amounts of spending … a “spending freeze” is what he called it. Obama countered that would be “using a sledge hammer when you need a scalpel.” This is the kind of fundamental difference that could help someone who is undecided determine who to vote for.