Happy New Year: Breaking Down Break It Down!

It's time to Break It Down!

We have been meeting like this for sometime now; nearly 2½ years for those of you who are veterans out there in Blogland, engaged since the beginning. As you know, I try to scale it back around holidays. This is a two-fold in purpose. One, scaling back at this time is a function of the fact I recognize many readers are preoccupied with the more inviting real world matters of holiday observance and celebration. Two…it gives me an opportunity to chill a little as well.

It has been said time flies when you are having fun. I must admit, blogging is still fun for me. I hope Break It Down brings you something of substance, whether it is enlightenment, entertainment, excitement, escape, or just something to think about every now and then.

As I prepare and publish today’s blog, the last for 2009, I am reminded that we are entering what for many is a time of reflection and visioning. It is the norm to examine and review our work, our lives, and our plans. As we navigate the two days between New Year’s Eve Eve and New Years Day, we will, in a number instances, resolve in gritty and grainy details just what it is we plan to tackle and accomplish in Y2KX.

Before fully transitioning I decided to take a look back at the previous issues of Break It Down, not just in 2009, but since the inception. A couple of years ago around this time, when I had penned 27 blogs, I posted my top ten favorites of 2007. At that time I noted:

• A little over 4 months ago, I entered the world of blogdom. As we
close out yet another holiday, I am taking a pause to look back at the
summary of blogs I have written. Twenty-something posts later I believe I
have consistently delivered on my commitment and desire to engage,
entertain, and inform.

• As was the case with Thanksgiving and Christmas, I anticipate most readers
will embrace the tendency to extend their leisure-time activities, while
many others will concentrate on returning to the rigors of work. Based on
the reality associated with those choices, I have decided to borrow from
another tried-and-true, time-honored, formulaic response to Holiday
Scheduling. This week, I devised a Best Of/Top 10 List of the
items I posted in 2007.

More than a hundred blogs later, I still aim to engage, entertain, and inform. Feel free to let me know if I am hitting the mark. Now, as was the case then, there is nothing scientific or objective about the list I will share. In fact this is one instance when I will own my subjectivity in its fullness. The literal translation of that comment is, “My blog; my list!”

The phraseology and rationale I used in 2007 was, “Why do it this way? Because membership has its privileges and ownership (my blog) is the ultimate membership!”
;-)

Below are the 10 stories, I chose and the order I placed them, descending from number 10 to number 1. Feel free to go back and review any or all of the posts, including those not on this list. As always, I appreciate your interest and love to hear your thoughts about the stories, and/or my views.

Now, here’s the list:

10) Obama Plays the Experience Card – 8/20/07 (My first post)
9) The Other Obama – 4/9/08 (A look at the First Lady)
8) One Shining Moment – 4/8/09 (Tar Heels take the National
Title)
7) Three Tableaus: Three Purpose-Driven Lives – 6/10/09 (3 people I
admire)
6) Race…The Final Frontier – 7/29/09 (My take on a thorny subject)
5) Tar Heels Deliver for Obama – 5/7/08 (Obama takes NC
Primary)
4) Total Loss; Nothing Last Forever – 12/19/07 (My Porsche Story)
3) With Supreme Confidence… – 5/27/09 (Sotomayor Nomination)
2) All I Want for Christmas: Health Care… – 12/23/09 (Health Care Reform)
1) The People Have Spoken; Yes We Can! – 11/5/08 (President Obama)

The list is weighted toward this year. It includes two stories from 2007, three stories from 2008, and five stories from 2009. In pulling from 131 posts, getting down to a list of ten was difficult. Three stories in particular were hard to omit. They stand out because they drew the most, and the most intense post-blog discussion. Indeed a case could be made to form a Baker’s Dozen instead of limiting the list to ten. Just in case you are interested, here are the other three posts:

The Blame Game – 10/24/07 discusses Bill Cosby and his take on “responsibility.”

Independence Day; Free at Last – 7/9/08 underscores the irony of former North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms’ death on July 4th.

Is the White House Ready for a Rogue examines former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s methodical effort to re-write history and re-invent her image as she travels the country on a tour to promote her controversially titled book.

Finally, just in case you would like to get a quick peek at the 2007 list, here it is:

10. Whatever Happened To…? (8/24/07)
9. Et Tu Marion: The Rise and Fall of a Track Star (10/17/07)
8. Will Michael Vick Ever Play Again in the NFL? (8/22/07)
7. Rising Like the Phoenix; But You Knew He Would! (11/28/07)
6. Obama Plays the Experience Card – (8/20/07)
5. Jena 6 Does Not Add Up – (8/29/07)
4. Countdown to Election ’08 – (12/1/07)
3. Is The Foundation Crumbling? (9/19/07)
2. Total Loss; Nothing Lasts Forever, R.I.P. (12/19/07)
1. The Blame Game (10/24/07)

I hope that you are having an extraordinary Holiday season, that you will have a fantastic New Year’s Day celebration/observance. Of course, I wish you a Best Year Ever in 2010.

That’s it for me; holla back at the Birthday Boy!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday.

"All I Want For Christmas: Health Care Reform!"

It's time to Break It Down!

Psych! Well sort of, anyway. Health Care Reform is not the Number 1 item on my Christmas List. But given the depth and breadth of the ideological tug-of-war that has played out since the summer, I am confident that sentiment rings true for some, if not many. Day after tomorrow is Christmas, but tomorrow is sure to be marked by the 100 members of the Senate with a big red X.

Let’s take a moment to reset. Before moving to discuss the state of the Health Care Reform debate, I must take a pause for the cause to wish you a Merry Christmas. No matter how you receive this season, I hope you make an earnest and successful effort to celebrate, according to the traditions in which you believe.

Last year at Christmas, I pulled together a Twelve-Song Youtube Christmas Collection. The list includes some of my favorite Christmas music performed by some of my favorite artists. That collection appears at the end of the blog links, along with several links that explore Christmas and other holiday traditions. Enjoy.

Now, back to regular programming, otherwise known as Health Care Reform; a topic most of you are quite familiar with. Because it is a holiday week, I will keep it brief. However, the President of the United States has labeled this initiative his top domestic agenda item. That this historic piece of legislation appears to be headed for approval in the Senate this week strikes me as worth noting.

The battle lines separating the pro and con sides of this issue have long been drawn, and by most accounts, not in sand, but in stone, or steel; perhaps in titanium. Even though there is strong evidence to support the belief that Democrats will hold on to the 60 votes necessary to force Cloture, and prevent a Republican-led filibuster, the contentiousness within the Senate is fierce enough to cause President Obama to delay the start of his Christmas vacation until after the vote. I would not say he lacks confidence; rather it is clear he is cautious, and is taking nothing for granted. No premature victory lap here.

My commitment to full disclosure requires that I remind readers that the Senate’s vote will not end the debate. If the Senate approves its version of the bill, which it is expected to do, the Senate and House bills will be sent to a Conference Committee to work on crafting a compromise that will be sent, ultimately, to both the Senate and House for consideration. In order for the final legislation to be enacted, it must gain approval by both Houses of Congress. The time line anticipated for final action is sometime early in 2010.

While there are two bills, there are several key points included in both:

• Extend coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans
• Reduce the Federal Deficit (According to the Congressional Budget Office)

• Insurers are barred from charging higher premiums based on gender
• Insurers are barred from dropping customers based on pre-existing
conditions
• Expand Medicaid
• Higher premiums charged for older Americans
• All Americans required to purchase health insurance
• Medicare spending reductions

There are also several key differences in the bills:

• House Bill
o Tax surcharge on wealthy Americans
o Public Option

o Senate Bill
o 40% tax on insurance companies providing Cadillac Health Plans
o Additional taxes on families earning more than $250,000
o No Public Option

Both plans curb options to secure abortions, but use different tacks to accomplish that end.

It has been said, governing, and the procedural idiosyncrasies tied to creating laws are a lot like making sausage; even those who enjoy the end product do not relish the messy, behind-the-scenes details of how one gets to that point. To be sure we all enjoy the freedoms we are accorded as American citizens. Yet it was difficult to endure watching and listening to the posturing, judgmental haranguing, and intemperately scathing attack-dog techniques that were on full display, and apparently necessary to get us to this point in the process.

Viewed in that light, I have reconsidered. Indeed, “All I Want For Christmas: Health Care Reform!” Merry Christmas! I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. Don’t forget to listen to your concert by checking out the twelve youtube links.

A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Reid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Baucus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Schumer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Nelson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_McConnell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanjay_Gupta

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/22/health.care.senate.vote/index.html

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2009/12/22/senate-prepares-for-final-vote-on-healthcare-reform.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm

http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/21/real-life-effects-of-reform-getting-lost-in-the-noise/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJO_kdkrj1g (This Christmas - Donnie Hathaway)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga-qd5FYUjA&feature=related (Stevie Wonder – What Christmas Means To Me)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf6fTRTQrG4&feature=related (Natalie Cole – The First Noel)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tht9KD_pB0U (Nat King Cole – Silent Night)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jk34lUQoyQ (Kem - The Christmas Song)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxv88-euQtE (Lauryn Hill – Little Drummer Boy)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhVvB0r5l7E (Brian McKnight & Christina Aguilera – Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG8abNRsabk&feature=related (Dianne Reeves – Christmas Time Is Here)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_9JJc2zNhI (Boney James – Let It Snow)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWQzmb3xjn8 (Mariah Carey – Hark The Herald)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_n-gRS_wdI (John Coltrane – My Favorite Things)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzd6oCP3FKk Eartha Kitt – Santa Baby)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanukkah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramadan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwanzaa

"Joe The Mercurial!"

It's time to Break It Down!

Chances are you do not know Samuel Wurzelbacher; at least not by that name. Mr. Wurzelbacher’s middle name is Joseph. Adding that information may have provided some political junkies the all-important clue needed to solve the puzzle. If you guessed, inferred, or otherwise concluded that this name should be a correspondent appellation to Joe the Plumber, give yourself a gold star.

Now that we have identified the more familiar moniker, it is likely you recall the Rise and Fall of Joe the Plumber during the 2008 Presidential Campaign. During October 2008, Mr. Wurzelbacher became more familiarly known as Joe the Plumber when he was recorded posing questions of then-Democratic Senator and Presidential Candidate, Barack Obama, about his proposed small business tax policy. Mr. Obama was campaigning in Joe’s Ohio neighborhood three days before the final Presidential Debate, held at Hofstra University, October 15, 2008. The rest is history; the McCain-Palin Campaign immortalized Joe, effectively making him a symbol of their claim that Obama’s tax policies would penalize the middle class.

Fast-forward a month and another Joe was catapulted to the forefront. Previously, in 2006, Senator Joe Lieberman, Democrat, Connecticut, lost in the Democratic primary, but won re-election in the general election as a third party candidate. He characterized himself as an Independent Democrat; he attended the Democratic Caucus. However, he was an ardent supporter of the War in Iraq, and during the 2008 Presidential Campaign, Lieberman was an outspoken backer of John McCain.

After Senator Obama won the election, the newly elected President prevailed upon Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada, to work with Senator Lieberman as he attempted to broker his return to the Democratic Caucus, and to retain Chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. Ultimately the President persuaded his fellow Party members to accept Senator Lieberman back into the fold.

Many Democrats, and especially their more liberal and progressive supporters found this decision disappointing. There was a strong belief within the Party that Senator Lieberman was not in sync or aligned with the general thrust of Democratic Party priorities. President Obama, however, fresh off an historic victory carried the day on this matter.

The President’s vision of Change incorporated precepts such as unity, bipartisanship, and reconciliation. In his big-picture world view, he believed “welcoming” Senator Lieberman back (in spite of the Senator’s speech at the Republican National Convention, filled with Anti-Obama rhetoric) into the Party was an act of reconciliation. In fact at the time, Senator Lieberman described the Democratic Party’s decisions to accept him and to permit him to retain his Chairmanship as acts of reconciliation.

The President is a pragmatist. He understands the virtue of the elusive 60 votes in the Senate. The Senate is steeped in ritual, and tradition. One particularly longstanding practice in the Upper Chamber is the Filibuster, which is basically the art of speech making to prevent an item from being voted upon; essentially, talking a measure to death.

During the last several weeks, President Obama and the Democratic leadership have been trying to craft and shepherd a Health Care Reform Bill through the legislative process. This is where the President’s pragmatism and vision of unity, bipartisanship, and reconciliation have run headfirst into the brutal force of politics as usual, courtesy of “Joe the Mercurial!”

Be careful what you ask for. After Democrats devised a proposal that included a Public Option, Senator Lieberman lined-up with a group of Senators that opposed such an option. In response to this not surprising development, Senator Reid led an initiative to eliminate the Public Option, and replace it with a provision for an early-buy-in to Medicare. It was at this point, to the surprise; make that exasperation, of many Democratic Senators, the Independent junior Senator from Connecticut opposed the inclusion of the Medicare buy-in provision, and threatened to join a Republican filibuster.

With his eyes always on the prize, President Obama once again emerged to urge Democratic Senators to coalesce, not implode, in the face of this hostile resistance from what took on all the characteristics of “the enemy within.” In the quest for Health Care Reform, it appears the shadowy fringe area where one vote determines the outcome is perpetual ground zero. In October, Republican Senator Olympia Snowe, Maine, cast the deciding vote to get the then Health Care proposal out of the Senate Finance Committee. President Obama was instrumental in securing Senator Snowe’s vote then.

The Senator from Maine made it quite clear at that time, her Committee vote was not an indication she would support the full bill. Republican Senators have given every indication their full complement will vote against the Democratic sponsored legislation.

That brings the matter full circle. President Obama asserted yesterday that despite remaining differences to be worked out, “Congress is on the precipice of passing a sweeping Health Care Reform bill." I am sure, if the bill passes; The President will praise the legislation, and offer thanks to “Joe the Mercurial.”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/14/politics/main5977243.shtml

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/health-care-reform-in-peril.php

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091214-709441.html

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/58482

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/13/lieberman-nelson-oppose-medicare-buy-/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Reid

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/04/lieberman-public-option_n_381005.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://washingtonindependent.com/19199/lieberman

http://bucknakedpolitics.typepad.com/buck_naked_politics/2008/11/lieberman-wat-1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_Snowe

http://snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=9be136e6-802a-23ad-4167-7a1305f4fff9&Region_id=&Issue_id=d694210e-a855-b510-43be-f20b134100cf

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/15/health.care.lieberman/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstra_University

"What America Needs Now!"

It's time to Break It Down!

Among the latest flaps in Washington is a tiff that began Monday when Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, Democrat, Nevada, stood within the hallowed halls of the United States Senate and likened Republican tactics to stall Healthcare reform to efforts to forestall enacting Civil Rights and Women’s Suffrage legislation. Republicans recoiled immediately. Party Chairman Michael Steele accused Senator Reid of “Cracking under the pressure” of the Healthcare debate, and said of the Senator’s remarks, “It was an ignorant moment for Harry Reid.” Painting with a broad stroke, Mr. Steele accused Democrats of resorting to “Playing the race card, the slavery card, and the civil rights card” when they get in trouble.

Mr. Jim Manley, Senator Reid’s spokesman countered by calling Mr. Steele’s statement “feigned outrage.”

In related developments, former GOP Presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, Republican, Arizona, said he was “Astonished and taken aback” by Senator Reid’s remarks. He went on to express the opinion the Senator Reid should come to the Senate and, if not apologize, clarify his comments.

And clarify he did. In a subsequent statement, Senator Reid signaled there would be no retraction. He noted:

• “At pivotal points in American history, the tactics of distortion and
delay have certainly been present.”
• “They’ve certainly been used to stop progress.”
• “That’s what we’re talking about here. That’s what’s happening here.
It’s very clear.”
• “That’s the point I made — no more, no less. Anyone who willingly
distorts my comments is only proving my point.”

Of course Senator Reid is not operating in a rhetoric-enriched vacuum. This kind of intensely volatile commentary used to describe “The other Party’s position” is par for the course. Just a day earlier, Senator John Cornyn, (R-Texas), Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), while on Fox News, invoked Stalin-era Soviet prison to portray Senator Reid’s reform plan. He argued:

• “It will limit people's choices to, in many cases, to a government-run
program like Medicaid which is essentially a health care gulag”
• “People will not have any choices but to take that poorly performing
government plan”

In fact, the GOP passed a resolution this past spring condemning President Obama and the Democrats for leading the United States toward socialism. As far back as the Presidential campaign, GOP candidate for Vice President, Sarah Palin, issued virulent denunciations of then Senator Obama, calling him a socialist. Presidential candidate, John McCain made frequent allusions to Mr. Obama’s associations with terrorists, even though he disavowed similar assertions by some members of the GOP.

So while there is a long and storied history of partisan sparring over a variety of issues, it is apparent the Healthcare debate is escalating inter-party rancor in a sort of juvenile, you are; no, you are, way. Each side appears predestined to default to a polar-positioned space, 180-degrees removed from the opponent. The unfortunate result of investing irrevocably in such an ideologically comfortable space is that we the people are ill-served.

Alas, for many, the process has been reduced to a spectator sport; one in which the masses file into the political “arena” to observe the action. It is time to get a grip. This is life; not recreation. Our continued national health and well-being depend on deriving a thoughtful and suitable outcome to this thorny challenge.

Ultimately, it will be neither sufficient, nor acceptable to simply be against everything. At some point, if we are to remain a prosperous society, and rekindle our collective mojo, our valiant members of congress must trade their adversarial armor for the banner of statesmanship. It’s “What America Needs Now!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Reid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Steele

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Pelosi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cornyn

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j_r37b1Vzj0JN8ye8HroFJiZsGrwD9CF4CCO1

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/08/calls-mount-reid-apologize-slavery-remark/

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/dec/08/health-care-debate-heats-reid-slavery-remarks-and-/

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/12/08/gop-blasts-harry-reid-for-slavery-remark/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Republican_Senatorial_Committee

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1209/Reid_compares_health_care_foes_to_slavery_supporters.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/21/gop-condemns-socialist-obama-democrats/

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/mcca-o10.shtml

"Disrupt, Dismantle, & Defeat!"

It's time to Break It Down!

So…the Commander-in-Chief donned his Harvard power tie, jetted up to West Point, NY, and faced an audience that routinely does more before 9:00 AM than most of us do all day. Of course this was not a casual or disinterested group of early risers. West Point is the home of the U.S. Military Academy, and the audience was comprised largely of cadets; some, the men and women who will be part of the troop deployment the President was there to announce.

For several months and over 20 meetings of the President’s War Council, there has been a buzz surrounding when President Obama would reveal the latest evolution of his Afghanistan strategy. Many who actively oppose the President complained bitterly about the lapse in time. Former Vice President Cheney went as far as to accuse the President of dithering. Before last night’s speech by the President, Mr. Cheney upped the ante and rendered a scathing attack, accusing President Obama of “Giving aid and comfort” to a terrorist enemy. Of course, the phrase giving aid and comfort to the enemy is a euphemism for treason.

This chilly blast was issued even before the President had a chance to formally articulate his policy initiative. Given the propensity of a segment of the loyal opposition to engage in such intemperate invective, it is fairly easy to understand why the President and his advisers went to great length to thoroughly vet the strategy before presenting it to the public.

In making the case for deploying 30,000 additional troops in Afghanistan, Mr. Obama started at the beginning. He reminded those in attendance and a worldwide viewing audience that nearly 3,000 men and women were murdered in a series of terrorist attacks in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania September 11, 2001. After those attacks, Congress acted almost unanimously, voting 98-0 in the Senate, and 420-1 in the House of Representatives, to pursue Al-Qaeda, and founder Osama bin Ladin.

Mr. Obama discussed how the decision to wage war in Iraq siphoned resources and focus from the mission in Afghanistan. Now, on the advice of General Stanley McChrystal, Commander of U.S. Forces, Afghanistan, and significant input from his War Council, and a plan heavily influenced by Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, the President spent yesterday, telling allies and members of Congress, and last night, telling cadets at West Point, “It is time to finish the job!” He reiterated the goals he stated March 27, 2009, when he laid out his initial Afghanistan strategy (From the White House Blog):

• “To “Disrupt, Dismantle and Defeat” Al Qaeda in Pakistan
and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in
the future. That's the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that
could not be more just.”

The President argued that in order to achieve his stated goal, we must pursue three objectives:

• Deny Al Qaeda a safe-haven
• Reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow
the government
• Strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's Security Forces and
government, so that they can take lead responsibility for
Afghanistan's future

Ultimately, the President stated, those objectives will be met in three ways:

1. First, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the
Taliban's
momentum and increase Afghanistan's capacity over the next 18
months.
2. Second, we will work with our partners, the UN, and the
Afghan people to pursue a more effective civilian strategy, so that
the government can take advantage of improved security.
3. Third, we will act with the full recognition that our success in
Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.

In laying out the sequencing for sending troops to Afghanistan, the President indicated the US would begin sending additional forces early next year. Partly in response to the “dithering” salvo, the President noted that never had there been an option presented to him to deploy before 2010. To that end, contrary to all the fuss, there has been no delay. Undoubtedly, that observation will be lost on many.

There will be a compelling transmutation of opinion on the issue of Mr. Obama’s decision. Many Party mavens and talking heads will play a game of political musical chairs based on this deployment. Democrats, including many that form Mr. Obama’s Democratic base will part company with him over this decision. In fact, CNN reported one of Mr. Obama’s long-time allies, Illinois Representative Jan Schakowsky voiced her displeasure, saying, “He’s made up his mind that at this point there ought to be a troop increase, and I have to say I am very skeptical about that as a solution.”

Conversely, much of the support he is likely to get will come from Republicans who, as a group, often support more troops. For example, Ed Rollins, one noted Republican adviser, and frequent Obama critic, said of the President’s decision in his CNN Commentary, “I call it leadership.”

Interestingly, the President acknowledged the naysayers, and addressed three central concerns:

1. There are those who suggest that Afghanistan is another
Vietnam. Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad
coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our actions.
2. There are those who acknowledge that we cannot leave Afghanistan in
its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the troops that we
have. This would simply maintain a status quo in which we muddle through,
and permit a slow deterioration of conditions there.
3. Finally, there are those who oppose identifying a time frame for our
transition to Afghan responsibility. It must be clear that
Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security, and
that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in
Afghanistan.

In closing, President Obama exhorted Americans to draw on the strength of our values, noting that while "The challenges we face may have changed, what we believe must not." He added, Our message must be clear: “that our cause is just; our resolve unwavering.”

The irony of the likely “road to deployment” is that this most divisive of issues may be the most bi-partisan initiative to date, during the Obama Presidency. There are certain to be stalwarts among Democrats who stick by their President. Yet, many are subject to reject the notion of a surge authored by their Party’s Leader. Alternately, there will be members of the GOP who believe this is the first sensible action this President has taken.

Ultimately, this Afghanistan troop deployment may "Disrupt, Dismantle, and Defeat" Al Qaeda, Osama bin Ladin, and the Taliban, or...Barack Obama. The President could easily have chosen to navigate this one differently, deciding to the read the polls, and side with many in his Party. That would have been a clear example of political expediency, and playing/pandering to the base. Mr. Obama had an opportunity to be the change he lauded during his campaign. In spite of the fact this action flies in the face of Party orthodoxy, President Obama decided to take a stand, and lead…not follow. That’s a “Change I Can Believe In.”

The Congressional debate begins today; can't wait to see how that goes. I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com . A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/july-dec09/obamaspeech_12-01.html

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/01/obama.afghanistan/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Military_Academy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_A._McChrystal

http://themoderatevoice.com/54824/cheney-blasts-obama-on-afghanistan-before-speech-accuses-obama-of-giving-aid-and-comfort-to-the-enemy/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30069.html

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/01/rollins.obama.decision.afghanistan/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/12/01/sot.obama.afghanistan.troop.numbers.cnn

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&source=hp&q=narrative+of+obama's+afghanistan+speech&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=N_sVS8LdAseXtgfBjMHuBA&sa=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CA8QsQQwAA

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/03/27/a-new-strategy-for-afghanistan-and-pakistan/