The Political Bridge

Jack Conway, Democratic U.S. Senate Candidate, Expresses Reservations About President Obama's Plan for Troop Surge

For Immediate Release        

Contact: Allison Haley

December 2, 2009    

 Office Phone: 502-632-1820

Mobile Phone: 859-539-5430

[email protected]

www.JackConway.org      

Democratic candidate for US Senate Jack Conway, today released this statement in response to President Obama's speech last night:

"I think it is apparent that the President has given this issue of escalation in Afghanistan great deal of serious thought, and I appreciate the appropriate tone of his remarks, as well as the laudable goals he set forth.

"Success in this venture will mean leaving behind a stable government in Afghanistan that does not provide safe haven to Al-Qaeda.  In order to do that, the United States will need serious commitments from NATO partners as well as political cooperation from partners in the region.  While I agree with the President's goals, I heard too little about political cooperation from Pakistan and the threat it poses.  Pakistan harbors the most dangerous mix of terrorists and nuclear weapons in the world. This is where our focus should be. We must have a policy that roots out terrorists from their hiding places, eliminates their threat, and brings our troops home quickly.

"As a United States Senator it would be my primary duty to help keep Americans safe. I would also weigh how any plan of action would affect Kentucky , our troops, their families and our standing among other nations.  I know our military men and women will serve valiantly, but I have reservations about the President's position to send more troops. I do not feel President Obama has adequately explained how he will get Pakistan involved in the effort to combat Al-Qaeda. At its core, we are dealing with a regional issue which requires the cooperation of regional partners to ensure success."

###

 

 

 

Daniel Mongiardo, Democratic Candidate for U.S. Senate in Kentucky, Supports Troop Increase to Defeat Al-Qaeda

NEWS RELEASE

December 1, 2009 
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Kim Geveden
(502) 682-2010
[email protected]

Annette Lee
(502) 498-4008x230
[email protected]

 

Statement by Daniel Mongiardo in response to President Obama's Presidential Address:

 

"I believe the President has thoughtfully explored the various options, gathered diverse view points from his political, national security and military advisors as well as our international allies and arrived at a sound decision. His deliberative process is a refreshing departure from his predecessor’s shoot from the hip, secretive approach to making difficult decisions that impact our men and women in uniform, their families and our nation.

 

I support the President’s proposal to increase our troops in Afghanistan to defeat Al-Qaeda and their terrorist supporters. I believe we have to defeat the Al-Qaeda terrorists responsible for the attacks on 9/11 who are still present in the region and remain a threat to our national security.  I believe the President clearly defined the mission, how he intends to accomplish that mission and equally important a reasonable time frame for when we can expect to bring the war in Afghanistan to a close.

 

With Fort Campbell and Fort Knox and thousands of Kentuckians serving in uniform, I believe we must do everything we can to make sure they have the resources necessary to complete their mission as safely and quickly as possible.”

 

- Daniel Mongiardo

 

CBS News: President Obama Wants New Options for Afghanistan War

(AP)  President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official…

To Read More: Click Afghanistan War

Watch the Former U.S. Ambassador to Uzebekistan Discuss the U.S. and U.K Governments Involvement with Uzbek Torture Efforts to Create False Intelligence

A Preliminary Analysis of the Effects of HR 2454(The Waxman-Markey Climate Legislation) on U.S. Agriculture

 Office of the Chief Economist

Economic Research Service

U.S. Department of Agriculture

 

July 22, 2009

 

Executive Summary

USDA performed a preliminary economic analysis of the impacts of House-passed climate legislation, HR 2454, on U.S. agriculture. The analysis assumes no technological change, no alteration of inputs in agriculture, and no increase in demand for bio-energy as a result of higher energy prices. Therefore, it overstates the impact of the climate legislation on agriculture costs in the short (2012-18), medium (2027-2033), and long-term (2042 to 2048). In USDA’s analysis, short-term costs remain low in part because of provisions in HR 2454 that reduce the impacts of the bill on fertilizer costs. In fact, the impact on net farm income is less than a 1% decrease. In the short run, agricultural offset markets may cover these costs. Over the medium-term and long-term, costs to agriculture rise but remain modest (3.5% and 7.2% decreases in net farm income, respectively). However, benefits to agriculture from an offsets market rise over time and will likely overtake costs in the medium and long term. Other studies that account for the impact of higher energy prices on input substitution and demand for bio-energy find that HR2454 leads to higher agricultural incomes, even without offsets. In summary, USDA’s analysis shows that the agricultural sector will have modest costs in the short-term and net benefits – perhaps significant net benefits – over the long-term.

 To read the entire report, Download HR2454

 

NY Times: VP Biden is Saying No to Additional American Troops in Afghanistan

NY Times, October 13, 2009

Mr. Biden does not favor abandoning Afghanistan, but his approach would reject the additional troops sought by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and leave the American force in Afghanistan roughly the same, 68,000 troops. Rather than emphasize protecting the Afghan population, he would accelerate training of Afghans to take over the fight while hunting Al Qaeda in Pakistan using drones and special forces. His view has caught on with many liberals in his party.

A You Tube Presentation: Eight Years in Afghanistan, the 'Graveyard of Empires'