New York Times — In New Afghan Strategy, Obama Will Add Troops
Asked initially by military commanders for 30,000 more troops for Afghanistan, President Barack Obama went for the 17,000 he announced on Feb. 16. Today, he will announce 4,000 more troops for the effort there, but strictly as “military advisors” who won’t fight but will work with the Afghan army. And unlike the 20,000 troops President Bush sent to Iraq, though, the Obama team is adamantly refusing to refer to this as a surge.
In order to convince his fellow Democrats that he is not escalating the conflict and deepening U.S. involvement, which he is, Obama will also announce new benchmarks for the Karzi government in Kabul, a plan to make Pakistan a key player in pacifying and securing Afghanistan and a strategy to bring the Russians and others into the fray. He’s also going to convince Pakistan and India to stop fighting. He also will not call it a surge.
Writers Peter Baker and Thom Shanker recount that congressional Democrats who heard the president’s plan at the White House Thursday sounded pleased.
Republicans were standing silent.
“Republicans emerging from briefings at the White House and on Capitol Hill withheld comment. Antonia Ferrier, a spokeswoman for Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, said in a statement that he ‘had a constructive meeting at the White House’ and that he would ‘reserve public comment until the president makes his formal announcement.’”
Wall Street Journal — In the Geithner Plan, the Devil Is Lurking in the Details
A helpful but unnamed writer at the Wall Street Journal broke down Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s proposal to expand and consolidate regulation of financial markets within his department.
The plan, pitched to Congress Thursday, is so staggering that a field guide is most helpful indeed.
When Geither refused to say how much money was in the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program beyond “significant-enough money,” clarity of the kind in this article is most valuable indeed.
For example:
“PROPOSAL: Create a new resolution authority.
TRANSLATION: The government can take over and unwind failing banks, but it can’t do the same with other financial institutions. That is one cause of the ad hoc rescues of such companies as AIG. Mr. Geithner wants to give the government power to unwind — or “resolve” — institutions that may pose systemic risks.
DEBATE: Who will provide the funding? Who should be in charge of the process?”
Politico – Obama plans tough line with carmakers
Lincoln may have been able to build the transcontinental railroad during the Civil War, but saving GM and pacifying Afghanistan on the same day was still deemed too much for President Obama’s schedule.
The White House was going to announce the terms of another bailout for failing car makers GM and Chrysler on Friday, but delayed the roll-out until Monday for fear of confusing the message.
But pre-announcement leaks, like the ones reported by Mike Allen, show that the government may go for another $22 billion to prop up the companies, but only after they meet impossible-sounding benchmarks.
Come to think of it, that sounds an awful lot like the Afghan plan.
“The government already has issued $17.4 billion in loans to the two companies, and the administration has signaled its willingness to do more, in part because it doesn’t want to see the companies go into bankruptcy. The stakes for the restructuring are huge — with 140,000 employees at GM and Chrysler alone.”
Washington Post — Political Parties See Dramatic Decline in Fundraising
Republicans knew that raising money – especially from the pay-to-play types who finance much of politics – would be a tall order after being embarrassed last fall. But donor burnout and the current recession have Democrats hurting.
Plus, despite a purge at the RNC, the party has out-raised its Democratic counterpart widely, partially on fears of a Democratic supermajority in the Senate.
Writers Paul Kane and Chris Cillizza explain how deficit spending by the DNC last year and the aforementioned problems have put the winning party in a cash crunch.
“This depleted fundraising comes as Democrats face massive debts because of huge loans taken out last fall in an effort to take advantage of the favorable political climate. The party’s congressional committees have a combined debt of more than $26 million and cash holdings of about $6 million, meaning that a large chunk of donations over the next year will go first toward paying off last year’s debts.”
Hurt – “New Era of Spend and Blame”
Charles Hurt explains the political dangers for President Obama in rationalizing his huge spending and deficits by saying that Republicans were profligate too.
Mostly its because it isn’t what Obama ran on, but also because it evinces a cynical, selfish attitude Americans may find unappealing.
“Surveying the political landscape here today, Obama is thinking of that adage cherished by cutthroats everywhere.
If you and a buddy are walking through the woods and encounter a hungry, angry bear, you don’t have to outrun the bear. You simply have to outrun your buddy.”
