THERE ARE MORE AMERICAN SOLDIERS DYING UNDER THE POTUS BHO IN AFGHANISTAN IN THE LAST 4.5 YEARS 1,575 BRAVE AMERICANS SACRIFICING THEIR LIVES FOR US ALL, WHICH GOES TO SHOW THIS POTUS AND DEMOCRATS DOES NOT GIVE A DAMN ABOUT PROTECTING AMERICANS CONSIDER THE 4 DEAD IN BENGHAZI, LYBYA ONE YEAR AGO AND NO ANSWER AS TO WHY AND NOTHING ABOUT ANY LESSON LEARNED NOR ANYONE CONVICTED AND NOW THIS POTUS WANTS AMERICANS TO GO TO WAR IN SYRIA, A WEAK LEADER DOES NOT INSPIRE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHEN THIS POTUS BLAMES AMERICANS FIRST OVER MUSLIM TERRORIST

In the war that Congress authorized against al Qaeda only three days after that attack, the vast majority of the U.S. casualties have occurred in the last four and a half years during the presidency of Barack Obama.

In fact, according to the CNSNews.com database of U.S. casualties in Afghanistan, 73 percent of all U.S. Afghan War casualties have occurred since Jan. 20, 2009 when Obama was inaugurated.
The 91 U.S. casualties in Afghanistan so far in 2013 are more than those that occurred in the first two full calendar years of the war (2002 and 2003) combined, when 30 and 31 U.S. troops were killed there.

On Sept. 14, 2001, Congress approved a resolution authorizing the president “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.”

By October 2001, U.S. forces were engaged in Afghanistan, seeking to remove al Qaeda from the sanctuary it had used there to launch the Sept. 11, 2001 attack.

Since then, most of the leaders and participants in the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been killed or captured. But the United States not only remains at war in Afghanistan, it continues to suffer significant casualties there.

In total, 2,144 U.S. military personnel have given their lives fighting in and around Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.
1,575 of the U.S. military personnel who have sacrificed their lives in this cause were killed during the presidency of Barack Obama.

That means 73 percent of the casualties in the Afghan War have happened on Barack Obama’s watch.

Under President George W. Bush, from 2001 until Jan. 20, 2009, 569 U.S. military personnel were killed in and around Afghanistan fighting in Operation Enduring Freedom.

- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/dennis-m-crowley/12-year-war-73-us-casualties-afghanistan-obamas-watch#sthash.YFFRSnOQ.dpuf

MR BACKDOOR LEGISLATOR HIMSELF THE GREAT SENATOR HARRY REID (D-NV) WHO PASSED EVERY AGENDA BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND IN THE DARKEST OF NIGHTS FROM THE POTUS BHO NOW CAN’T FIND ENOUGH BACKDOOR VOTES TO PASS THE WAGE WAR ON SYRIA–THE DEMOCRAT WAR HAWKS HAS TURNED THE POLITICAL TIED NOW THAT THE GREAT BHO IS IN OFFICE TO FINALLY GET RID OF ERRR BLOODY THE NOSE OF ERRR TO SLAP THE HAND OF SYRIA

Congress slammed the brakes Tuesday on all legislation authorizing military action against Syria, quashing the possibility of a vote this week that could have handed President Obama a major defeat.

The day began with a bipartisan group of senators working on a new resolution authorizing military action that took into account offers from Russia and Syria to put Syria’s chemical weapons under international control.

It ended with members agreeing that votes on any Syria resolutions were on hold.

“I’m not guaranteeing anything,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said after his conference met with Obama, who asked members to hold up on any votes on Syria.

“I do know this. Our schedule’s being driven by developments that are taking place, not by some artificial timeline that we have here,” he said. “It’s important we do this well, not quickly.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/321531-congress-slams-brakes-on-all-syria-legislation#ixzz2eYEis2AD

NEW YORK MAYOR PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS TO REPLACE THE NEUTER BLOOMBERG

DEMOCRAT SIDE

BILL de BLASIO IN THE LEAD AND THE PRONOUNCED WINNER – CONGRATULATION

FOLLOWED BY BILL THOMPSON

THEN CHRISTINE QUINN

 

GOP SIDE

JOE LHOTA WINS – CONGRATULATION

COMING FROM BEHIND

JOHN CATSIMATIDIS

http://liveblog.nydailynews.com/Event/Brawl_for_the_Hall_New_York_Primary_Election_Day_Sept_10_2013

THE AUSTRALIANS HAVE LEARNED THAT BEING OVER TAXED, EXCESSIVE IMMIGRATION, OBSESSION WITH GLOBAL WARMING CALLING FOR CARBON TAX, AND EXCESSIVE FOREIGN AID CAN LEAD TO A CENTRE RIGHT PARTY WIN FROM TONY ABBOTT –AS IF ONLY THE BRAINWASHED PEOPLES OF AMERICA MAY SOON REALIZE FROM THE DEMOCRAT RUN LEADERS LIKE OBAMA, PELOSI, AND REID

Well done Australia!  A centre-Right party manages to win a landslide election by standing to cut immigration, lower taxes, end the obsession with CO2 emissions and reduce foreign aid.

Who would have thought it, eh? Not, it would seem, those in Britain who have spent the past two decades trying to convince the Tory party that the way to win elections is to drift towards the soggy centre.

On immigration, Abbott’s party takes the view that those who enter Australia illegally should be removed. On tax, Abbott’s centre right coalition are committed to scrapping some and lowering others (no doubt the Institute of Fiscal Study-types will disapprove).

Just like in the UK, in Australia in recent years swathes of public policy have been moulded by an obsession with CO2 emissions. Here in the UK, that has meant renewal targets and higher energy prices. In Australia, it has meant a carbon tax. Abbott has made it clear that he will undo the damage to wealth creation being inflicted by global warming dogma.

In terms of foreign policy, Abbott is committed to strengthening ties with the Anglosphere, while reducing overseas aid.  Good – not just the right thing to be doing, but a vote winner, too.

“But what works for Australian conservatives might not work in Britain,” I am sure the SW1 pundits will tell us. “Australia's a different place”.

Indeed it is. The Aussies have banks, rather than state-subsidised basket cases, for a start. They have growth and rising living standards. But all that aside, we continue to share many similar outlooks and assumptions as two members of the Anglosphere.

“But it wasn’t really a case of Abbott winning the election,” the Guardianistas are starting to say. “It was a divided, poorly led Labor Party that lost it”.

Poorly led and divided like Gordon Brown’s Labour Party, you mean?

Hmm. I still think we UK Tories have much we could learn from Tony Abbott – without simply aping Australian conservatism.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglascarswellmp/100234389/the-lesson-from-tony-abbotts-victory-in-australia-tories-stop-drifting-to-the-soggy-centre/