The 'Know Nothings' Are Back

For those of you who didn't pay attention during history class (or were educated recently in public education), this title probably means nothing.  Don't feel bad.  It's probably because you knew nothing of the first incarnation of the 'Know Nothing' Party as it came to some prominence in the United States during the 1850's; when xenophobic Americans were concerned over the swarms of Irish and German immigrants who chose to try and start a new life in a new land rather than starve in their own.  Others whose parents had made much the same choice 200 years earlier were terrified by these newcomers and convinced that the nation was in danger of being taken over by hoards of Irish Catholics and Germans (and perhaps eventually the Pope).  Their party eventually settled as the American Nativist Party, but is far better known for the instructions that members were given in the event that they were asked about their semi-secret movement, answering "I know nothing" to their interrogators.  Though the party had mostly disappeared only a few years later, it seems that some part of it may have survived and has, without fanfare and without much bother,  taken over the the current leadership of the Federal Government.  This latest incarnation of twisted political leadership is being fully demonstrated in the troika of crises facing the current Administration.

While many believe that the this latest incarnation 'Know Nothings' may have reared its ugly head as early as October of 2009 by taking control of the DEA's and ATF's disastrous efforts more commonly known as "Fast and Furious", most believe that this peccadillo was little more than a practice run to determine if a multi-year campaign of dissimulation, obfuscation, and prorogation could succeed with the Mainstream Media (MSM), Congress, and the American people.  Having thus proven the success of their tactics, their dedicated membership now seems ready to hunker down in the trench warfare of endless Congressional hearings in which information is dribbled out in leaks slower than maple syrup in winter, while placing tourniquets on information of events viewed under a media philosophy of 'if it bleeds, it leads', and counting on a general population with the attention span of a 3 year-old that still believes that 'Reality Shows' and wrestling are unscripted.

Eight months after Benghazi, a hundred pages of emails tell us that the talking points for UN Ambassador Susan Rice were rewritten more times than the last episode of "Duck Dynasty".  While the CIA had the facts of story straight to begin with, behind the scenes movers and shakers felt the need during the run up to election to 'correct' them.  In a bizarre game of 'Telephone', these departmental power brokers throughout the Executive branch managed to edit out the truth and substitute a rather unconvincing plot that four people were murdered as a bad review on a YouTube movie.  What we still don't know however, is who initiated the plot change and who approved it.  

More importantly however, as the government and media argued over this script approval, is that we don't know who staged the scene at the Benghazi compound.  The British and the Red Cross abandoned the area as too dangerous; but after the US compound had been attacked months before, it not only remained, but reduced rather than beefed up its security force.  When the inevitable attack occurred, defense forces in the region that might have assisted were told to stand down, in spite of (or because of) their lack of information on the ground according to one story, or because of knowledge that they couldn't reach the battle in time according to another.  

When asked after the attack what the hell happened, Press Secretary Jay Carney initially told us to wait for the completion of the investigation.  Having completed it, he now tells us it's 'old news' and he can't or won't speak to it.  As for the Defense Department, the State Department, and the White House; they don't know or can't tell us who is responsible for the horrible decisions made before, during, or after the attack that caused the death of four Americans on Embassy Grounds.

Cut to the IRS targeting of Conservative and and religious groups that were seeking 501c4 tax status.  We were originally told in March of 2012 by then acting IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman that the IRS was not in fact targeting these groups.  When an Inspector General report this month was about to reveal otherwise, the IRS's Lois Lerner (whose division was responsible for this targeting)  planted a question with Celia Roady so that she could do a soft-release of the reversal.  Soon to be ex-Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller now tells Congress that it did happen, that it was real wrong, and that their 'investigating' to insure that it never happens again.  (Can you hear the Benghazi script writers scribbling away?)

Apparently, we are supposed to believe that this was the effort of a couple of rogue employees in Cincinnati.  (Does Oliver North work at the IRS?)  Despite the fact that some of the documents already released on this breaking story came out of Washington and the cast of characters in this charade is becoming as long as the one in Benghazi, no one again seem to know anything about what happened, how it happened, and who sanctioned it.  In spite of the fact that an Inspector General was appointed to look into it, no one at the IRS, in the Treasury Department, or the White House knew anything either.  It seems in fact, that of all these career bureaucrats (and the nation's Chief Executive) no one anywhere knew that anything bad, illegal, or in violation of the Constitution might be going on.  They told us in fact that they had to read about it in the newspapers to discover this ongoing skulduggery. (And who says newspapers are dead?)  The fact that this began in the run up to an election and is being released only after it's over is suspicious to no one, and at the pace of White House document releases and Congressional hearings, we may manage to get partial answers about a year after everyone has lost interest.

Cut to scene three, in which the Department of Justice, without subpoena, obtained the phone records of a number of Associated Press employees.  Ostensibly this is about going after a serious national security leak (you know, like releasing the info on who killed Bin Laden), but the Keystone Kops at the DOJ decided to go after the records of reporters who might have been involved in releasing the story instead of the limited members of the government employees who had access to the information in the first place.  This was not, according to our government, an attempt to intimidate the press in any way, or to impede the rights of a free press to do its job. (Sure, I buy that.)  The fact however that AP has traditionally been a friend to this Administration and the fact that it was they who were attacked certainly sends a clear message to those in the press who might choose to oppose it however.

As for who made the decision to pursue this particularly egregious effort in this misguided way; Attorney General 'Eric the WithHolder' said "I don't know" so many times in his recent Congressional appearance that he made "Hogan's Heroes" Sergeant Schultz look like a college professor.  (Can you say plausible deniability?)  Nobody at the Congressional Hearing however seemed to know enough to ask who was in charge of the program so that they could subpoena them to testify, and nobody else in the Executive branch seems to have any knowledge (at least that they're admitting) about how and why it happened.   (The President did however, suggest that Congress pass a law to defend the Press against an abuse of power committed by his DOJ.  Really?)

I thought at first that the White House was attempting to debut a new Reality Show with its name ripped off from the 1995 Alicia Silverstone movie "Clueless" (you know how Hollywood likes bad remakes.); but I have since come to believe that this is an unexpected resurgence to power of the 'Know Nothing' Party.  (There are many who believe that both major political parties could pass for 'Know Nothings', but that's a tale for another day.)  They were after all a secret society (and you know how we like to blame those), are lost far enough in our past to have become forgotten or misunderstood in intervening years, and could merely have transferred their rabid xenophobia from Irish-Catholics to the current target du jour of Conservatives.  It may not be great theory, but at the very least has unique quality of fitting a number of the facts that we possess.  

There be no lanterns hung in the steeple of the Old North Church this day, nor will Longfellow pen an epic poem as the news is spread.  Make no mistake about it however, you heard it here first that the 'Know Nothings' are back. 

Celebrate Sequestration Day!

For those of you who haven't been paying much attention to the news for the last couple of weeks (you lucky bastards), this Friday is Sequestration Day.  Now for those of you who have additionally failed in your obligations to have read the previous posting on this subject in JBS (go ahead, I'll wait here), the Sequestration of 2013 is a series of government spending reductions suggested by the White House, passed in a bi-partisan effort by both Houses of Congress, and mandated to occur by virtue of the 'Budget Control Act of 2011'.  If Congress couldn't come to an agreement on some form of budget reform between August of 2011 when it was signed into law and March 1st of 2013 (after a 'kick the can' extension that moved it from January 1, 2013) Sequestration automatically happened.

In typical recent government fashion, the law was passed to trade spending now for savings later; in this case getting a debt ceiling increase of $400 billion back then (with an option for $500 more that was used) for $1.2 trillion in spending reductions over ten years.  If an agreement on those reductions wasn't reached, a form of them would kick in automatically instead; and since Congress seldom has the courage to cut money from any program, these cuts would be made based on the difference between the annual portion of the $1.2 trillion and whatever across the board cuts Congress could come up with.  (Hell, the Senate hasn't even had the testicular fortitude to pass a budget in four years and the President has been late in delivering budgets four out of the last five years. )  They would affect almost everything except entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.  

Hidden in the fine print of all such government language however, is that any such action would be  based on the 'Base Line Budget' process that Congress uses where the national checkbook is concerned.  Now for those who don't understand this concept of accounting, practices that would be considered illegal if practiced by anyone other than the government; it means that every budget program funded by the government is assumed to get bigger each year.  This means that programs will normally see the equivalent of cost of living increases of between 4% and 6%, assuming that their prior year's budget is spent.  In this year's case, because the date of Sequestration was moved back to March 1st, the $120 billion of projected reductions that was originally required would now in fact consist ofof a mere $84 billion ... approximately 2.4% of the projected $3.8 trillion 2013 federal budget.  (I say projected, because without both Houses passing a budget that's signed into law for the last four years, actual budget numbers get rather fuzzy.)  What that in turn means is that the amount of spending that Sequestration will reduce is smaller than the budget increases already built-in under the 'Baseline Budget' principle.  In other words, in spite of the process of Sequestration, the government will still spend more this year than it did last year.

All of the Doom and Gloom coming out of the national bully pulpit that we've been hearing about the last week or so about how these cuts will undoubtedly bring about a fiscal Armeggedon in this country are really nothing more than someone from our government telling us that these agencies must 'suffer' with only slightly more than their funding for 2012.  Their threats of dire consequences are in fact only being made in order to scare us into paying even more taxes than Congress agreed to just a month ago.  So what are we going to do about it?

Well I don't know about you, but I'm going to celebrate Sequestration!  Sequestration may be the only government 'reductions' in spending that we are likely to see this year from the bi-partisan efforts the White House and Congressional behavior that has become far more like that of a crack addict than of a responsible national government.  It appears that we can no longer count on either major political party to do the right thing, but only instead to produce lies and excuses about their own failures.  This is not because they don't know what the right thing is, but because the haven't the backbone to offend any of those special interest groups feeding at the public trough.  After all, with today's endless election cycle, if they aren't looking for campaign contributions for a re-election bid, they're looking for at least the vote of benefiting members of a parasitic constituency.  

Just this once, it appears that they may have done the right thing (probably by mistake) and they don't know how to dig out of the hole that they've created.  While the Sequestration cuts are barely a token, they still represent more than either party has done to change the horrible path that this nation is on in the last couple of decades.
 
In fact, I recommend that we all go out and celebrate; and that we do so as publicly as possible!  Those currently out there on the stump have consistently lied to us not only about the budget, but about the dreaded process of Sequestration that they themselves visited upon us; and for no better reason than to keep us frightened and as they see it, easier to control.  Countering their fear mongering with enthusiasm for what they've tried to make a see as disaster might put them back on their heels.  Celebrating what they think we should be terrified of could make us seem less predictable in their minds.  Acting in a way that passes their understanding might shake recent assumptions by those in Washington that their skills in steering the herd that they believe us to be are anything but complete.  If nothing else, we may get a chance to enjoy their temporary discomfiture and give them pause before trying to create their next faux panic in yet another attempt to manipulate us in the next budget debate.

Yes, I know that it's possible that there might actually be negative consequences to Sequestration; though I suspect that if there are, they will be at our leaders' purposeful doing.  Even if some hard lessons come out of these manipulations however, we should take it as our just deserts for allowing the bi-partisan fiscal impropriety that's been committed.  Times are tough out there financially, and and it's far past time that everyone (including our fearless leaders in Washington) recognized that it's time to learn to do with less in order to survive.  

So while it might be a couple of days early in doing so, I would like to wish each and every one of you:

Happy Sequestration Day!

The Jester

Listening to Glenn Beck yesterday, I was informed that one of the new White House inner circle was found to be nothing more than a blogger.  A BLOGGER?  Are kidding me?  What are these knuckle-headed knuckle-draggers in Washington doing adding a blogger in a position of authority to their midst.  What, after all, could a blogger possibly offer to the inside-the-beltway experts of politics (except maybe some clear thinking and fresh air), let alone to a White House that has begun to take on airs of its own (like those of a monarch that all Administrations inevitably do during a second term)?  

Don't get me wrong here. Glenn and his cohorts may be right that this new addition to the Administration may be an over-the-top partisan ideologue. (Which has probably never happened before, right?)   He may also be little more than a amateur political hack (which actually seems SOP for White House appointments from both parties).  He may even be, as accused, sitting around his house in his underwear writing sniping comments about the political opposition (which wouldn't be a bad gig if it were you could actually make a living at it).  

On the other hand, at least he wouldn't be a someone who had never had a job that didn't involve feeding at the political trough, someone who might not have spent half of their life running for office and the other half desperately trying to keep it, or someone who was so inbred in the corruption of DC culture that using the inside information provided to members of the national legislature to accrue a personal fortune seemed a reasonable thing to do.  Neither would he be a failed news reader, corporate mouthpiece, or failed ESPN sportscaster turned political pundit.  (Yes, I mean you Keith Olbermann.)  Contrary to popular belief, there are a number of intelligent, savvy, and creative people that are writing blogs; and the rest of us are making a heroic effort to drag ourselves out of the shallow end of the gene pool in order to be worthy of their efforts. 

Now of course, in the midst of my pseudo-rant, I couldn't help but be notice that the nom de plume currently under attack was one that fit me like the cheap suit I sometimes wear.  Bloggers are after all, are still a rather curious group coming of age in this era of new media.  How you feel about them as a group is likely to have as much to do with whether you agree with what they say, how well they say it, and how much competition they've become for more traditional sources of media than what they're actually writing.

As a blogger, I've been known to do a fair job of pointing out the obvious naked condition of the emperor in my own tawdry efforts.  Certainly among the more elite of the milieu there must be far wiser and better examples in both local and national venues.  Some, I know for a fact have journalistic credentials, others have personal or professional experience that lends greater insight to their efforts, and some have terrific contacts and sources of information.  Most of them quite frankly, are far more capable of expressing themselves coherently than your average Congressman or Senator (regardless of whether its at the state or national level).  

This is not to say that you'll find me claiming in line for a top-flight job as a Presidential adviser (at least in this administration), though one might come to believe that the White House could use someone out of this New Media with a sense of humor that was willing to tell truth to power.  It might even seem like somebody close to the Commander-in-Chief could use a bit more expertise in stringing words together (without the constant use of  a teleprompter), as well the ability to give the man at the top the appearance of a less atrophied sense of humor.  

Interestingly, as all of this rather subject 'inside baseball' information played itself out during the last week, one of one of my favorite Danny Kaye movies "The Court Jester" was shown.  It's the title song written by Sammy Cahn and Sylvia Fine, "The Mal-Adjusted Jester" seemed to fit such the situation perfectly:

Your majesty, I have a confession
My secret I must now betray
I was not a born fool
It took work to get this way

When I was a lad I was gloomy and sad
And I was from the day I was born
When other lads giggled and gurgled and wiggled
I proudly was loudly forlorn
My friends and my family looked at me clammily
Thought there was something amiss
When others found various antics hilarious
All I could manage was this –hoo hoo
Or this – hoo waahhh

My father he shouted he needs to be clouted
His teeth on a wreath I’ll hand him
My mother she cried as she rushed to my side
You’re a brute and you don’t understand him
So they send for a witch with a terrible twitch
To ask how my future impressed her
She took one look at me and cried hehehehehe, he?
What else could he be but a jester?
 
A jester a jester, a funny idea a jester
No butcher no baker no candlestick maker
And me with the look of a fine undertaker
Impressed her as a jester?

Now where could I learn any comical turn
That was not in a book on the shelf
No teacher to take me and mold me and make me
A merryman fool or an elf
But I’m proud to recall that in no time at all
With no other recourses but my own resources
With firm application and determination
I made a fool of myself!

I started to travel to try to unravel
My mind and to find a new chance
When I got to Spain it was suddenly plain
That the field that appealed was the dance
The Spanish were clannish but I wouldn’t vanish
I learned every step they had planned
The first step of all isn’t hard to recall
Cause the first step of all is to stand
And stand
And stand, and stand, and stand, and stand... 
After all of my practice the terrible fact is
I made a fool of myself

I sadly decided that dancing as I did
To sing was a thing that was sure
I found me a teacher a crotchety creature
Who used to sing coloratura
She twisted my chin pushed my diaphragm in
With a poker she vocalized me
When she said it was best that I threw out my chest
You may gather that rather surprised me

I was on solid ground till I suddenly found
That in Venice I was to appear
The gala locale was a choppy canal
And me, a high sea gondolier
I nervously perched as the gondola lurched
Before the King’s palazzo
As I started my song my voice it was strong
But my stomach I fear was not so

Oh solo mio, ooohhhhhhhh
Oh solo ooohhhhhhhh Help!

When I fell overboard how his majesty roared
And before a siesta he made me his jester
And I found out soon that to be a buffoon
Was a serious thing as a rule
For a jester’s chief employment
Is to kill himself for your enjoyment
And a jester unemployed is nobody’s fool.