Romney Is Going to Have a Hard Time Winning Michigan’s Primary: He Promised to Help the People of Michigan in 2008, But Then Got into Trouble in the Years Since

Mitt Romney’s campaign is in trouble in Michigan. 

As part of the 2008 primary season, he promised that he was going to help the people of Michigan get back to work if elected President, and people believed him.  Auto workers turned out in droves to support him.  He won the 2008 Michigan primary with their help and the support of a lot of others, but eventually withdrew from the race in favor of John McCain.

McCain lost to Obama, and Obama took office. 

The economy continued to tank.  The unemployment rate in Michigan skyrocketed, and the talk turned to bailing out the auto industry to save it.  

Romney went on record opposing the bailout and made critical comments about the bailout, which a majority of the auto workers, both laid off and current, supported.  The Obama Administration went forward with the bailout.

When Romney went public with his opposition to the bailout, it looked like he had broken his promise to help the people of Michigan to get back to work.  When he said that the auto industry should go bankrupt, that didn’t sit well with people in Michigan cities where the auto companies were the largest employers.  I can remember people down here talking about Romney’s statements and how displeased they were with him.

I think if Romney carries Michigan this time around, his majority will be a lot slimmer than it was in 2008, because I don’t see the auto industry supporting him this time around, the way they did four years ago.

There is no guarantee that Romney will carry this state at all.  It all depends on who turns out to vote on Election Day.  Whether the rest of Michigan was for the bailout, or against it, he’s lost a major block of voters.  That’s how it is.

Iran and North Korea Are Waiting in the Wings for the U.S. to Downsize Its Military: Cutting 500,000 Troops Will Lead into the Next Ground War, as History Has Already Shown Us

Every time an Administration cuts the United States armed forces, and focuses in on increasing air assets, the decision bites us hard and we end up in another land war.

That’s been the pattern since Truman downsized the U.S. military, following the end of World War II.  We went from an Army of eight million soldiers to an Army of 500,000 under arms.  The Soviets were emboldened enough to blockade Berlin, North Korea was emboldened enough to invade South Korea, then China was emboldened enough to enter the Korean War after most of North Korea was overrun by U.S. and U.N. troops.  This pattern was repeated again and again when a U.S. President would cut troops in favor of air superiority. 

We are definitely in danger of repeating history.  President Obama wants more unmanned drones instead of ground troops, but drones cannot maintain the peace as effectively as a powerful ground force can.

North Korea, Iran and Venezuela have been emboldened over the last ten years because we were fighting two major wars at the same time, and much of our military strength was involved in occupying Afghanistan and Iraq.  Before that, they were afraid of the American military, but they’re still in the mind-set that our military is too worn down to take them on at the moment. 

Those nations mentioned should be afraid of the U.S. military and where they might strike next.  Instead, if we cut the size of the Army and the Marines, we may end up fighting another ground war against an enemy who thinks they can win.  Especially North Korea.

They can make cuts elsewhere instead of getting rid of our ability to fight two major wars simultaneously.  And these kinds of cuts should not be made while we still have 97,000 troops in combat in Afghanistan.

GOP Sanctions Florida for Holding an Early Primary: Here We Go Again

The GOP hit Florida with sanctions today, because Florida had the brass to do what the remaining 48 states should have done as well: hold an early primary date.  Here we go again…

Here’s what I think of this:  New Hampshire and every other state in the union should have voted on the same day.

“That’ll never work?”  Wrong!  We hold a general election on November 7th in all 50 states, in no fewer than five time zones.  These candidates ran around to every county in Iowa, and there’s 99 of them.  They can make it work.

Instead, we are forced to follow idiotic rules of both parties that disenfranchise voters whose states who have dared to voice their opinion on the matter.

Except this time, the GOP is acting stupidly….last time it was the Democrats who robbed Florida and Michigan of their say in the selection of the respective nominees.   The GOP took half our delegates and laughed at the way the Democrats were handling it.

I don’t respect the GOP decision to punish Florida or any other state for violating the “no early primary” rule.  Every state should have pushed back after what happened four years ago, and scheduled their primary when THEY wanted it, regardless of the GOP or DNC preferences. 

If every state scheduled an early primary, these rules would collapse and a fairer system would emerge.   But when one or two states buck the system, the national Dems and Reps try to make examples out of them and end up punishing the people who they need to turn out on Election Day.

12/14/11 Update

Politics has taken a back seat for a while.  I should be back into it after the New Year, with the upcoming elections, and the 2012 nonsense just around the corner.

Finance Super-Committee Says “We Blew It”: Are We Really All That Surprised that Congress Can’t Get the Job Done?

The Congressional “Super-Committee” (that really isn’t all that super) is preparing to announce that they “blew it” and have failed to come up with ANY cuts to the budget whatsoever.  So now they’re wasting time, arguing over how they’re going to announce that they’ve failed.

Are we really all that surprised?  This is Congress we’re talking about, after all.

If they were serious about this, they would have begun meeting three months ago, when the “super-committee” was announced.  They just started meeting a week or two ago.    The only thing super about this committee is the super-hype.   I hope they all get voted out of office.

And so should any Congress person who votes to remove the triggers, which were put in place by the last budget ceiling bill.  If anything, they should be ADDING to the triggers that will go into effect in 2013 (which was also a mistake.)  They should be going into effect the day after Thanksgiving.  That would give the cuts some teeth.

Unfortunately, the military will take the brunt of the cuts, amounting to some $600 billion.  It’s unfortunate.  The military has a lot of rebuilding to do to get into trim to fight the next war, as they should be, and always are, preparing for.  Getting out of Iraq will help the military do that, and will also help our budget.

Hard choices will need to be made, but not by this Congress or President.   They’ve wasted far too much time; we’re at 101% of GDP, and it’s getting worse.   Talk about lame ducks---we’ve got 535 of them in Congress.

I’d be in favor of a financial blockade of all 535 members.  No contributions to any of their campaigns until they come up with a way to make steep cuts, in the trillions, not in the billions like the Democrats want.  It would only work if established donors joined this blockade.

When austerity comes to this country, it isn’t going to be pretty.   The government should make the changes now, while there’s still a choice over what to cut.  Because the day is coming when entire departments will be slashed, and the national government budget crashed, and the prized entitlements that the Democrats are so viciously defending will go away too.  I would think they’d want to make changes now, so that their entire program, whatever it is, doesn’t collapse.

This Congress must not delete or delay the triggers.  The only thing they should change is the start date—move it from 1/1/2013, to 1/1/2012.

That’ll never happen either.

Why Are We Surprised That Gadhafi Was Executed? The Libyan Rebels Said What They Were Going to Do, and Then They Did It

What’s with all this international racket about Gadhafi being executed?  

The Libyan rebels said what they were going to do, and then they did it, regardless of the international community’s wish to place him on trial for crimes against humanity.   This madman murdered tens of thousands of people over the last 40+ years to stay in power, including many thousands more in the last six months alone.

It’s their country; we’re only interfering in their internal affairs.  If they wanted Gadhafi alive, NATO shouldn’t have bombed his convoy to begin with.   It’s a final fiasco to the international fiasco that this intervention has been from the get-go.

If they really wanted Gadhafi alive, they could have tried for a capture in Niger with no Libyan rebels around.  But they chose to attack his convoy on Libyan soil with Libyan rebels already firing on the convoy.  We will fit that decision into the “well, DUH!” category.

No investigation into Gadhafi’s death is necessary.  Everyone already knows what happened.  Gadhafi was captured after being wounded, and summarily executed by his own people.   The international community ought to get off its high horse and let this nightmare that they’ve contributed to reach its final conclusion. 

Instead of wasting time on investigating how Gadhafi came to die, perhaps the international community would best be served by investigating where Gadhafi put billions in Libyan money, and how best to return that stolen money to the new Libyan government.

Liberal Media Asks “Who is Responsible for Organizing the “Occupy” Movement?” Their Friends Are, That’s Who!

Some liberal media outlets are asking who is responsible for the “Occupy” movement across America.

Their liberal, socialist and anarchist friends are, of course.   

The strength of the protests seems to be dependent of how bad off the local economies are.  In the United States, the range of protesters is anywhere from 16-5,000 protesters.   The largest protests have been in Los Angeles and in Washington, DC (an estimated 5,000 protesters each). 

Overseas, the protests have been much bigger as they have huge problems in places like Spain, where their big protests have drawn anywhere from 40,000 to 500,000 people.  They’re protesting against austerity measures being taken by their governments.  And they’re already accustomed to Socialist governments in Europe.  Greece has had huge protests, and they’ve turned really violent.

The protests that are taking place in Arab countries are part of the ongoing Arab Spring protests and happened to coincide with the protests taking place in the West. 

The “Occupy” protesters in America are calling for an October Revolution and should be taken as a  warning.  What are they proposing to replace our current economic system with?  A Soviet-style economy?  That’s already a proven failure.

Those protesting do not represent the other 98% of people who disagree with them.  They have their own agenda, except for the idiots who have joined in and have no idea of what they’re protesting, or even what they want if they should gain any traction.

I think the political impact that these protests will have in 2012 will not make much of a difference.  Obama’s going to have a very tough re-election bid, and many incumbents, regardless of which party they belong to, will also be out of their jobs as well.  We already know that’s going to happen.  Congress is at an 11% approval rating.

I also think that the press coverage is out of proportion to the actual protests taking place, and that they’re trying to cash in on the unhappiness of the American public, most of whom have no intention of joining the Occupy movement and do not feel their interests are represented there.

Florida Goes After Unfair Primary Election System Again: They’ve Scheduled Their Election for Late January, In Violation of Rules that Favor Four States Over All the Others

Florida has again violated the peculiar primary election system that allows Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada to hold their primary elections first, at the expense of the other 46 states. 

They’ve gone ahead and scheduled their primary election for January 31st, which violates RNC rules that state there can be no elections, except for the four favored states, prior to March 6th.  If a state does, they risk losing half of their voting power at the convention under the GOP rules, and all of their voting power at the Democratic convention. 

Florida and Michigan bucked the system four years ago and were punished by the DNC for doing so, and to a lesser extent by the GOP.  (The DNC discounted all Florida and Michigan votes, the RNC docked half the votes).  

The other 45 states should also schedule their primaries prior to March 6th.   What better way to force both parties to change their rules and come up with a system that addresses the needs of ALL the states, and not just the current four?

I have nothing against voters in those four states.  But it’s a system that never should have been agreed to by either party in the first place.  

Liberals Should Remember That They Created the Very Environment that Allowed Right Wing News Media and Talk Radio to Thrive In: If They’re Unhappy With Getting Trounced on TV and on Radio, They Should Realize That The Ones They Should Be Blaming Are Staring Back at Them in the Mirror

Lots of liberals blast Fox News for leaning right (aka pointing stuff out that the liberals would rather sweep under the carpet.)  They go after people like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and other conservative talk-radio people for getting people fired up about the never-ending conservative vs. liberal debate on just about every issue.

And they cannot figure out why liberal talk radio programs and channels do not succeed on the air.  Air America went bankrupt because their business model set itself up to fail.  They couldn’t match the audiences that Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage get, nor could they attract the kind of advertisers who purchase airtime by the bushel from their conservative rivals.

And they don’t want to admit that by dominating the news with their own viewpoints for decades, they gave birth to an audience that got tired of the liberal slant on things and was hungry for the other side of the story.  And when conservative talk radio and Fox News came around, their appetites increased. 

Perhaps if the liberal media had done their jobs in presenting the news, without trying to influence it as they have tried to do over the decades, the audience for conservative news and talk radio wouldn’t be so huge and liberal news networks wouldn’t be getting creamed in the ratings, week after week after week.

I don’t have a lot of sympathy for those who cry about Fox News not being a “true” journalistic entity due to THEIR slant on stuff.  Reap what you’ve sown, liberal media.

Key to Saving U.S. Postal Service is Quite Easy: Congress Needs to Quit Making Them Prepay 75 Years Worth of Pensions in Ten Years

In 2006, the USPS made money, and their outstanding debt was $2.1 billion.

In 2011, their projected losses exceed $11 billion, and they’re running into their outstanding debt ceiling of $15 billion and are looking at closing 3,700 post offices, laying off 100,000 people, ending Saturday deliveries and overnight deliveries, and closing down the USPS in mid-2012.

What happened?

People started paying their bills online, and doing other things via the Internet.  That accounts for part of the drop.

The other thing that happened is that Congress passed a law in 2006 that stated  the USPS must prepay 75 years of pensions in 10 years in order to keep their pension plans in good shape for the future.   According to this article, within three years of implementation, the Post Office was $10.2 billion in debt.

Who is the idiot who thought up this dumb law?

75 years worth of pensions in 10 years?  I think prepaying 5-10 years is much more reasonable than 75 years.

If Congress wants to save the Post Office, they should revoke and then rewrite this insanity.   They can fund the retirement program at a much more reasonable rate than what they’re doing now.  And without killing the Post Office too.

WikiLeaks Blames Guardian Newspaper for Allowing Previously Blacked Out Information in U.S. Government Cables to Be Seen: Baloney! WikiLeaks Posted the Information, So They’re Ultimately Responsible and Should Take the Responsibility

All of the data (251,000+ documents) that WikiLeaks has is now accessible on the web, with names of informants included.   All one needs is the password, which is being circulated online.   WikiLeaks is blaming the Guardian newspaper for posting the password, but who posted the material in the first place?

That was not the Guardian, or any other publication who did that.  WIKILEAKS did that.  And they should take total responsibility for any harm that comes to people whose identities were not protected, as WikiLeaks promised that they would.

This is all on WikiLeaks, and Julian Assange,and no one else.  They should quit trying to throw blame onto others.

U.S. Espionage Act of 1917 is Outdated and Needs to Be Fixed: Current Law Can Convict People Without Judges Ever Seeing the Materials

In the last three years, five people have been charged with violations of the 1917 Espionage Act, including one fellow who disclosed that the FBI and the NSA were spying on the Israeli Embassy in Washington.

But at the time that he was convicted, no one knew that; not even the judge assigned to the case.  The man who was convicted was a former FBI Hebrew translator who came to be in possession of top secret material in the form of wiretaps from the Israeli Embassy.  Entire conversations between Embassy officials, their top supporters in this country, and Embassy  conversations with members of Congress were captured electronically, as were emails, faxes and other digital mediums. 

The Obama Administration buried what had happened deep so that it would never come to light, as spying on an ally isn’t a very nice thing to do.

The translator, who was afraid that Israel was going to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, passed the information on to a blogger, who held onto the information for a while, then broke the story in the last few days. 

The government uses the Espionage Act to discipline federal employees who violate government secrecy.   I don’t have a real issue with that point, as the government does need to keep some stuff classified and expects its employees to be secret-keepers and to keep the trust. 

But once someone is charged, like the translator mentioned above who WAS correctly charged with breaking the law, if the government sees fit to bring the case to court, the judge should have an idea of what sort of materials were disclosed.   To blindly allow a conviction without seeing the materials reeks of star chamber justice, which is illegal under U.S. law.

The next time the government brings a case, the judge should tell the government to give him/her more information, or face the possibility of the judge throwing the case straight out of court.

Once the material is given away or sold, the cat’s out of the bag anyways.  Assuring the judge and the jury that a crime by others isn’t being covered up under a veil of secrecy isn’t as big a deal as the original loss of the data or material. 

FCC Drops Fairness Doctrine: This is a Step in the Right Direction

The Federal Communications Commission decided to drop the Fairness Doctrine, and 83 other obsolete measures that were media-related as part of its reorganization (“reform agenda”).

The dropping of the Fairness Doctrine is good news, as it will protect talk-radio, both conservative and liberal, from being effectively silenced.  It will give the consumer the choice of what kind of talk radio they prefer to listen to.

I don’t know about the other measures that they dropped, but the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine from the agenda is a step in the right direction.  I’m still looking at all the others.

British Riots Make No Sense: Rioters Come From a Wide Variety of Backgrounds, Have Nice Jobs and And Are Not Gang Members

Like many, I’ve been watching the riots taking place across Britain and find myself wondering…why are people over there doing this?

I thought that it was gangs at work, as described by the Prime Minister, but the British courts have started dispensing justice to accused rioters, and it’s a veritable who’s who of British society: primary school workers, lifeguards, organic chefs, musicians, children of millionaires (I did a double take when I read that), college students, real estate agents, opera stewards, postmen, charity workers, hairdressers, professional and semi-professional football (British) players, Olympic ambassadors (another double-take), and dozens of other respectable sorts.   And tons of kids are standing before the judges too.

They have been charged with a wide variety of crimes, including stealing, various forms of theft, concealment of stolen property, throwing bricks at police and police vehicles, violent disorder, assaulting an ambulance crew, mugging, lying to police, racial crimes, inciting violent disorder (Facebook), arson, destruction of property (public and private), handling stolen goods, carrying weapons, using weapons during the commission of a crime, obstructing police, assaulting police officers, and up to eighty other crimes not listed here.

The sheer volume of what was taken is extraordinary too.  One guy broke into a bicycle shop and stole the equivalent of $32,500 worth of cycles.  What was he going to do with all those bikes?  Ride them around?  Try to sell them?  He was also accused of breaking into two other shops and stealing money, cigarettes, and other assorted stuff and causing major damage to both shops.

Another idiot stole the equivalent of $65,000 worth of plasma TVs, computers, and other electronic equipment.  He’s been denied bail and will be back in court next week.

The police are also said to be going after people who were invited to attend the riots on Facebook, and very stupidly said “yes” to the invites as well, or joined the pages.   The police really like having their suspects lined up in a row like that on a Facebook page.

I’m sure there are some gangs involved in the mischief, but the majority seem to be unthinking and greedy people who took advantage of the trouble.

Unbelievable.

Point of Order: Changes to the Electoral College Require a Constitutional Amendment; States Can’t Write Laws to Arbitrarily Change It Without Taking a Few Steps First

I’ve become aware over the years of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or an agreement between several states to throw their Electoral College votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

It’s back in the news as California governor Brown signed the compact, making California the eighth state to join the compact.

This smells of election rigging, and here’s why.  If the majority of voters of California choose, for instance, a Republican candidate for President, but his/her Democratic candidate wins the popular vote nationwide, all of California’s electoral votes go to the candidate that the majority of California voters didn’t choose.

This is inherently unfair, and runs the risk of disenfranchising large blocks of voters (the other 49% of their populations??!)

I also couldn’t help but notice that the eight states (and DC) that are in this Compact either lean or are heavily Democratic:  Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, Vermont and California.

Definitely smells of election tampering.

States can decide themselves how they determine their electors, as enshrined in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 2.   However, it is unknown if this compact needs Congressional approval, as it seems to indicate in the same article, same section, under Clause 3.   The whole thing may not even be Constitutional. 

I think one of more of the small states will challenge it in court if their influence is threatened, and it’ll end up going to the Supreme Court eventually. 

Veterans Administration Really Needs to Get It Together and Start Taking Better Care of Our Returning Veterans Who Are Suffering from PTSD and Other Mental Issues

There’s a report out that eighteen veterans a day are committing suicide.

And the VA continues to make veterans who are already feeling suicidal wait a minimum of eight weeks for someone to see them.   They can’t continue doing that!  Nor can they just hand a suffering veteran a pamphlet and a bag full of sleeping pills and anti-depressants to deal with their Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Delaying disability paperwork for months is irresponsible, too.  It’s gotten to a point that lawsuits are underway, and one judge called the VA’s handling of veterans as “unchecked incompetence.”

Would the veterans do better seeing civilian medical experts, rather than government ones?   I think the answer is “yes.”  SOMETHING’S got to change, because the current system is failing those who need it the most.

We can do much better than this.

The Way That the U.S. Government is Releasing Bin Laden Information, They Have BECOME WikiLeaks: We Don’t Need to Know Everything

The government has released much more information than they should have concerning materials seized during the raid on Bin Laden. 

Particularly troubling is the release of information contained in Bin Laden’s diary, which describes new specific terror plans to disrupt the U.S. and the West.

Anyone in counterintelligence will tell you that you don’t tip off the enemy that you know about their plans.  You allow it to continue, while turning some of the operatives involved, so that the entire operation can be taken down in one stroke, instead of having them disappear into the shadows, only to have them reappear months later with plans we don’t know about.

Our government should keep al-Qaeda guessing as to what we actually do know, while chasing down every lead.

The government needs to control the information much more than they have.

Double Standard Hypocrisy: It’s OK for the Muslim World to Celebrate America’s Failures, But When Our Citizens Do The Same to Celebrate Bin Laden’s Downfall, the US Gets Criticized for Offending Muslim Sensibilities?

I’ve got a bone to pick with the double standard that we’re seeing in international relationships between America and the Muslim world.

It involves the take down of Osama bin Laden and the subsequent spontaneous outburst of celebration of Americans around the country, that was widely reported in the media, both here and abroad.

Before continuing, I need to say that I was not one of the ones who was out there who was celebrating the death of a mortal enemy.   I was relieved that the SEALs got him, that’s for sure.  And I was glad that our enemy had been delivered into American hands, thanks to the tireless efforts of the military and our intelligence community.  

But I do NOT celebrate death, even to a misguided soul like bin Laden’s.  I would have preferred taking him alive, in spite of the dubious state of our legal system when it comes to habeas corpus and military commissions.

But now, four days after bin Laden’s death,  those who were out at all hours of late Sunday night and early Monday morning who chose to celebrate bin Laden’s downfall are being criticized for being insensitive to Muslim sensibilities.  HOLD IT RIGHT THERE!

It occurs to me that the ones who are criticizing the outpouring of emotion over here show NO such awareness or sensitivity to AMERICAN sensibilities in recent years when Muslim governments organized anti-American demonstrations over OUR misfortunes. 

The hypocrisy in the media and the Muslim world is ASTOUNDING!

After ten years of sacrifices, I think our fellow Americans have earned the right to observe the passing of bin Laden HOWEVER THEY CHOOSE TO.  And the rest of the world should GET OVER IT! 

Pakistan is No Ally of Ours: They’ve Been Playing Both Sides From the Get-Go, Got Caught Red-Handed, and Has Egg in Their Faces

Is there anyone out there who REALLY believes that Pakistan had no idea that Osama bin-Laden was living less than eight hundred yards from a Pakistani Army base? 

I don’t.

It appears our government doesn’t buy that idea at all. 

They launched the operation to get bin-Laden without Pakistani involvement, penetrated Pakistani airspace, mounted a major attack within eyesight and earshot of thousands of Pakistani troops, killed bin-Laden, blew up one of their own choppers after it suffered engine problems, loaded bin-Laden’s body and the booty from his hideout and withdrew from Pakistani airspace in a back-up chopper.  Our leaders then notified the Pakistani leadership that the attack had taken place, but not while the U.S. task force was still within Pakistani airspace.

The reason why is they couldn’t trust the Pakistanis. 

They might well have notified bin-Laden to head for the hills as the choppers were inbound.   Or had their troops fire on the SEALs.

There are elements of the Pakistani military and intelligence service who have been actively aiding the Taliban and al-Qaeda, and there was no guarantee who the Pakistani President might have notified in the Pakistani military hierarchy, or if foreknowledge of the attack would reach those bin-Laden supporters.

Pakistan doesn’t know what they’re doing with their internal security.   I think Pakistan is a bigger risk than Iran is right now, as Pakistan already has nuclear weapons, has a major Taliban presence, and is protecting them.

I do not believe that the Pakistani President knew that bin-Laden was where he was.  But I think that ObL had to have the help of elements of the Pakistani military to camp out half a mile from a major Pakistani military base.  And I don’t think that the Pakistani President looked hard enough, or asked the right people the right questions.

And the fact that bin-Laden’s been there SIX YEARS?

Pakistan can’t be trusted.  They were never really on our side to begin with; they were the ones who STARTED the Taliban in the first place.  

The mujahedeen that we supported in Afghanistan against the Soviets in the 1980s ended up fighting Pakistani-backed Taliban forces in the 1990s Afghan civil war, and lost.   Surviving mujahedeen formed the Northern Alliance, which the U.S. supported against the Taliban in 2001.

Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism.   The aid needs to be cut immediately; they aren’t doing what they pledged to do with the funding and fight terrorism…they’re aiding people like bin-Laden.  Why are we giving them billions of dollars?

Congratulations to the U.S. Military on Getting bin-Laden

After nearly a decade of war and covert operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the U.S. military went after bin-Laden, after intelligence confirmed his location.   And they got him.

Congratulations and THANK YOU to the U.S. military for closing the book on bin-Laden.   Hopefully it’s a step closer to bringing the Afghan war to a close.