http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2009-01/2009-01-22-voa15.cfm?CFID=153712716&CFTOKEN=65947803&jsessionid=8830ab013f934d45db9c421b20736f747b55

The new president has vowed to withdraw troops from Iraq within 16 months. He also supports a plan to nearly double the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan, where violence has increased in recent months.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/brown-plans-to-withdraw-troops-as-he-backs-obama-over-war-on-terror-872388.html
Gordon Brown prepared the ground for a historic realignment in the “war on terror” yesterday by setting out a four-point plan for withdrawal of British troops from Iraq by the end of next year.
Although he is refusing to set a detailed timetable for withdrawal, it is clear Mr Brown is in agreement with the US presidential candidate Barack Obama on the need for military action in Afghanistan to take priority. Both appear to be working to a 16-month timetable.

http://english.sina.com/world/2008/1201/201854.html
U.S. President-elect Barack Obama reiterated on Monday his plan to withdraw U.S. combat forces from Iraq in the first 16 month after he takes office.
Obama told a press conference in his transition office headquarters in Chicago, Illinois, that he still believes 16 months is the “right time frame” to redeploy U.S. combat troops from Iraq.
He reiterated the timetable that he has been insisting during his campaign as he present to public his national security team.
The president-elect also underscored the importance to make sure that American troops are safe during transition period and Iraqi military can take more security responsibilities.

And Obama did not listen to Patreas
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/02/generals-seek-to-reverse_n_163070.html
WASHINGTON, Feb 2 (IPS) – CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 16 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.
But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn’t convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.
Obama’s decision to override Petraeus’s recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.

The point is Obama made the promise during the campagn to remove the troops with in 16 months and then changed his mind after the election. Something Rush said would happen.

If you cannot bother to face the truth on this one fact then I will not bother with the others.

And just because some nasty republican has hurt you little feelings by saying bad things about you does give you the right to blast and insult everybody who disagrees with you. I have been insulted time and time again by leftists but I have not let their small minded abuse bother me. I suggest you get some thicker skin.

I’ll give you the last word. I’m not going to bother.

I truly do love how the only time anyone calls for “civility” on this blog is when I dare to use the same language with you, that you all use for me. Tell ya what – if you make that same request the next time someone insults my family or tells me that I love it when terrorists set off bombs in a market square, then I’ll start taking you seriously, okay? Until then, I will treat you all with the same exact level of civility that you show me every day.

Obama never, NEVER pledged to remove all troops in 16 months. He pledged to remove all combat troops. After talking with Patraeus and the other generals, he moved that to an 18 month schedule. And you think that’s a bad thing on his part?

You specifically stated that Rush predicted that Obama would “gut the military”. The defense budget for next year is higher than this year. Rush was wrong. You were wrong. Admit it, or implicity acknowledge that you are dishonest.

You stated he would “placate our enemies”, when in fact he has increased the fight against Al Qaeda. Please provide proof otherwise.

“What idea did he incorporate into any of his policies? None!”

100% wrong. The stimulus bill included the largest tax cut in the history of the United States. (Which the Republicans then voted against.) He did so in a (fruitless) effort to gain GOP support. The fact that only 3 GOP Senators are willing to engage in meaningful bipartisan discussions say more about the GOP than it does about Obama.

Here’s a simple test of that: the GOP leadership on Thursday gave a nice little presentation about their “budget counter-proposal”. Please search around, and tell me what the deficit would be, at the end of any year between 2009-2019, with that “budget”.

(Hint: you can’t. Because there are no numbers in that alleged “proposal”. It’s a joke.)

Rush predicted he would do this.

His Afgan plan is nothing new. He always said we need to focus on Afgan and Iraq has taken our focus where it should be – iraq. No surprise here.

The reaching out to repubs was simply window dressing. I did not hear him complain when they were shut out of the committee meetings. What idea did he incorporate into any of his policies? None!

Rush predicted he would do this.

The repubs did not vote against the bill because the felt like it. They did it because they honestly believed it was bad policy and it will hurt America. A 1000+ pages than nobody had even read. You can disagree with them but do not attribute their decision as just some “feeling” they had.

And please lets keep the talk civil. No need to call anybody stupid. I did not insult AJ I was respectful and cordial as he is with others who disagree with him. I simply said he was wrong. You can be wrong and not stupid. If you want to be mean and nasty go back to the Kos or Huffington.

Obama is going to withdraw most troops from Iraq by September 2010, and all of them by the end of 2011.

He just announced a plan to increase the fight against Al Qaeda (our “enemy”) in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The military budget this year is bigger than last year.

He and his Admin have reached out multiple times to Republicans – he’s had dinner with conservative writers, and he’s had multiple meetings with Republicans in Congress already. Here’s a hint: if the Republicans decide to vote en mass against a bill just because they feel like it, then it is NOT the President who failing to act in a bipartisan manner.

Congratulations: every single point you made in that comment was completely and utterly wrong. You just proved AJ’s point for him, through your own stupidity.

“The rich will not be rich enough to cause the swings in the economy because the government is going to take away their money. Obama will so tie up money that we will all be a big middle class country.”

Wow. It’s amazing you could be so wrong on that one. How can you take the message of “It’s probably a good idea to live within your means”, and turn that into “The gov’t is going to take all of your money away”? Geithner wasn’t talking about the super rich there – he was talking about people making $40K/year who took out $500K sub-prime mortgages. Do you think that’s responsible behavior?

As for the “big middle class country”:

The top tax rate is going to go from about 36% to about 39%. Please explain to me how that is going turn someone making $250,000 per year into “middle class”.

I would also add that Rush has been right on many other secondary issues as well – that he would gut the military, that he would seek to placate our enemies and that he would not act in a bipartisan way toward Republicans.

To lump Rush in with the whining pessimistic far right crowd is wrong his analysis has been quite good and almost prophetic.

I think Bush was trying to make nice after the whole President Select business. He should have fired Tenet anyway.

However, I think we would all be surprised at how many people are in the permanent government and they never leave. No matter who is in the WH.

Obama is staffing positions with a wide variety of people, in terms of color, gender and background. More then any other president.

I wonder why you said it and what is your basis? it’s hard to imagine more variety than G.W. Bush appointed.

and does it matter what color or gender a person is when doing political jobs? Shouldn’t they all work equally well in fulfilling their objectives?

Just wondering.
,

Next Saturday I buy a Toyota.

I think the plan will become very clear when Obama presents the new tax code. The $250,000 earners will become more middle class. There will be new brackets for those who earn $500,000, and on up. More like what they are presenting for New York state taxes. So if the rich can keep only say 20% of their earnings, they will not swing the economy to such highs and lows.

So going forward the government will have the fruits of our labor, therefore it can stabilize all things, including the mind of ideas, innovation, and why bother to take a risk, why bother to think big.
Soon you believe that all people a inherently good, so there is little need for defense. This is old Europe redo. I just hate this idea.

First I agree with you on certain foreign policy matters that Obama is more in the center. However this does not come as a shock to me. We saw Obama clearly backtracking in the campaign season on Iraq. I thought he would take this stance on Afghanistan though I had no idea that VP Biden would oppose it. Items dealing with the FIS did not surprise me because the Executive rarely gives up power

Chas Freeman and his wild views were a slip. But I take that more as a vetting malfunction

In some I think Obama realized that much of the anst over several of these issues was Bush derangement syndrom.

Let me say as to the leftward swing of Obama there are issues you left out. Such as social concerns. Obama in the first 60 days has shown nothing but a far left attitude on life issues. The fact that he is about to appoint the most far left on abortion Governor as Sec of HEalth and Human Resources is troubling.

In a telling op-ed by the Director of Public Policy and Social Justice in the Archdiocese of San Fran he pointed out quite bluntly the Honeymoon is over. That is quite a statement from a Diocese that has to walk a tightrope as to these things.

Further the people that PResident Obama has vetting his Federal Judges don’t seem like screaming “moderates” to me.

On economic issues the Fact that the Obama administration wants unheard of powers for the Govt to take over now non banking business is well jawdropping.

As to these budgets is it Obama has lost control of congress or really doesn’t care? It seems to me that he is steaming full steam ahead on rather ambitious and yes on the more left plans.

THe last time I looked Obama had not got off the Card Check bandwagon and it has been only a full assualt and pressure on the blue dog Seantors to derail this. (If it is derailed but it looks better than it was just weeks ago)

What concerns me most is the complete lack of the promise of bipartisanship on these issues. Obama could have got that but for some reason is letting Reid and Pelosi freeze everyone out. I have to think that is through design.

SO besides on military matters and some areas of foreign concern I am not sure Obama is some gray area of niether right or left

His stand on abortion without restraint is an abomination. Embedded in his health care bill/agenda are significant issues that will not only continue the battle on the beginnings of life, but will make end of life part of the same plan. And as someone in health care, I can tell you that translates to middle of life moments as well. No longer productive, no longer useful, you cost to much to maintain. That is Hitler’s Germany, not America.

Good point about Clinton regarding school uniforms, but, there is a huge difference between a school uniform (I went to Catholic school) and adolescents in uniform, doing mandatory service to the state.

Why do I fear what he is doing? Everyday, I turn around and there is a new bill that will significantly impact our simple everyday lives. Look, at the regulation of produce, farming bill-can’t recall name this moment, but we should all be concerned about it

One last thought, I don’t believe that he is absolved from anything about that pig of a “porkulus” bill. He could have told Pelosi and Reid no. All of his spending is to achieve his social engineering agenda, it is only partly about the economy.

Our fears, and reactions to Obama are magnified because there is a Pelosi and Reid and almost all leftist Democrats in power. Radically intent on advancing their agenda and thus far succeeding.