Are you ready for a new Vietnam?

I have feared the president is playing politics with the war in Afghanistan. I couldn't think of another reason he'd take 86 days now to make a decision on giving our troops some help — especially considering the recommendation by General Stanley McChrystal to send 40,000 more troops within the year or else the conflict "will likely result in failure."

So I figured he was just playing politics. I now believe I was wrong about that. I believe the president or, at the very least, the extreme far left in his party are playing the redistribution of wealth game instead.

How? Well, first of all, the president wanted to make absolutely certain he was making the right decision. So, after weeks of waiting, deliberating and pondering, the president has finally decided that he will... make his decision on December 1st. After Thanksgiving.

I'm sure the troops in the field appreciate being blown off once again. Enjoy your turkey.

The President is expected to announce plans that he will, "settle on a middle-ground option that would deploy an eventual 32,000 to 35,000 U.S. forces to Afghanistan." the President said.

That's less than the 40,000 the General wanted and it would take two and a half years for full deployment. That's more like a "drip" than a surge. Now, I've been told there are some reports that say the full two years are needed for logistic reasons. Well, if that's true, then why would McCrystal request 40,000 within the year?

But that may not even be the worst part. Democratic lawmakers are now calling for — well, let's have you guess. Democrats — thinking of a way to raise money to pay for the extra troops — what brilliant solution do you think they arrived at?

If you said, a "war tax" on the wealthy, then you're a winner!

Congressman David Obey tells CBSNews.com that the cost of additional troops could "destroy the other things we are trying to do."

I don't know what a bigger priority is than making sure that those you are asking to fight and die are given every imaginable resource to keep them alive and well.

In the health care bill, there's a surtax on "Cadillac plans" along with at least three pages of additional taxes and fees that total $572 billion. Cap-and-trade is just one big energy tax; it will end up costing each family more than $1,800 a year by 2020. And, how about the ultimate tax: the devaluing of the dollar.

Now, on top of all of that, a 5 percent war surtax.

They have to tax you — squeeze you of every penny — for two reasons:

First, because they have spent us into oblivion. It's great you are suddenly concerned with making sure we find a way to pay for the war, David Obey. But where were your concerns over the last six years as the debt as more than doubled? No amount of surtaxes would help. You could take 100 percent of profits from all Fortune 500 companies each year and 145 years later you'd finally be done paying our debt. And that doesn't include interest!

So please, spare me the phony "oh, how are we going to pay for this?" concern on the war. You clearly do not care about paying for things. I've seen the debt clock.

Second, this is just another excuse for you to help bring about that redistributive change. The final chapters — if we don't wake up, America — are being written of the economy and of our country. We cannot sustain this.

And when our framework is destroyed from the reckless spending, what will the old be replaced with? A Venezuelan-style utopia wonderland. Oh, it will be great. And we're getting closer to it. Progressivism has finally reached our troops as they are now being used as a tool for the redistribution of wealth, in the form of a war tax on the rich.

Does the bagger at the grocery store not enjoy the same security and freedom I do? Are farmers exempt from their "patriotic duty," as Joe Biden called paying taxes? Did only the rich die on Sept. 11?

If there is one thing in the universe that should qualify as a "shared sacrifice," it's war.

As someone who believes in a strong military, you are not sharing sacrifice already if you are an uber-liberal. ROTC not allowed in schools, kicking them out of San Francisco. Shared sacrifice? Shave your armpits and sign up for a tour of duty! Some of us have family in the military — you've never even heard of shared sacrifice. Your shared sacrifice is not getting part of the $300 million in bribe money in the health care bill.

But Washington only seems concerned with sharing the wealth, not shared sacrifice. The right thing to do is sell war bonds and get everyone involved. But that doesn't fit with their agenda.

And they don't want to sacrifice any part of their domestic agenda. God forbid we take budget money away from "any other initiative" or "investments we need to make in our own economy" to pay for additional troop support in Afghanistan.

Where are our priorities? How can the president sit around and twiddle his intellectual thumbs while he plays professor and takes a semester to make a decision on our troops in the field?

Oh he can't rush this decision!

Really? I don't accept that excuse.

Not from the guy who rushed through the stimulus because of an imminent financial crisis. Not from the guy who tried to jam cap-and-trade down our throats because global warming is coming. Not from the guy who is ramming health care through, because there is a crisis of coverage.

Well, guess what: I don't see Americans dying in the streets as they are waiting in line at our hospitals. But do you know where I do see them dying? In Afghanistan.

I saw the four American soldiers who died in a bombing in Kabul this week. I saw the 59 soldiers who died last month — the deadliest month for U.S. troops in the entire eight-year war. I saw the 51 who died in August and 45 this past July.

But what I don't see are the media flashing the pictures of our fallen heroes every day. Why not? Where is the outrage? Four Americans died in Kabul this week. It's Tuesday. Nobody died because they didn't have health care. Nobody.

You fought so hard to make sure the press was allowed to take pictures of the caskets coming back home — well, where the hell are you, media? You only cover the caskets when it shows President Obama saluting in what was definitely not a photo op.

How can the media sit by and pretend they don't notice that the generals in the field are saying one thing and the president is either saying nothing or something different? How can the press sit idly by as this administration basically admits they care more about the redistribution of wealth than helping our soldiers?

Either we fight this thing to win or we get our men and women the hell out of there. I will continue the fight to give them every bit of help they deserve. If there is one thing we can all agree on, it's our troops deserve the very best. And they deserve, just as I said to President Bush, to be unleashed with the full force of the American military behind them or to be sent home. It's one or the other. There is no grey area.

But apparently that's a little too much for our brilliant Harvard president to grasp. He's got to think that one through. And the decision is reportedly "middle ground." You know what happens when you don't choose one side of the road or the other and you stand in the middle, right? You get run over. I've seen presidents try to micromanage wars before. It does not end well. Remember the job President Linden Johnson did in creating his conflict.

Mr. President, send them in guns a-blazing or send them home. It's that simple. You'll never please everyone, so stop trying. Do what is right. Don't just try to make it palatable for your good ol’ buddies in Washington who are in the business of supporting and maintaining your ego.