Unprincipled Media and It’s Futile Pursuit of Perspective.  I worked a career as a federal civil servant in the Department of Agriculture.   A great deal of my work involved farm crop disasters and their national impact.  Many times, the width and depth of a particular disaster would not reach a high enough level to trigger any type of federal relief legislation; but if you were one of the few affected by the disaster, it was indeed a catastrophe.  All news is relative and should be kept in perspective.  These principles have been lost by our media and many of the non-thinking followers that follow it in a zombie-like fashion.  Please consider two quick examples from recent days. 

The Boston marathon tragedy was a terrible ordeal for those affected by it and it could very well end up sending shock waves through our nation’s anti-terrorism efforts.  However, by any measureable standard, the west Texas fertilizer plant explosion affected many more people, resulted in much more damage (both human and physical), and may yet have some of the same national security concerns as the Boston affair.  Why then did we see 24/7 coverage on the Boston bombing and a night of two of brief leads on the Texas incident?  At a minimum, a big part of the explanation lies in the fact that Boston is the center of this nation’s liberal establishment which is intertwined with the liberal media and liberal entertainment (i.e. the recent WDC correspondents/celebrities dinner) and Texas is in the heart of the conservative movement of this country.  “Urban versus rural” is not new and we should not be surprised when a greater population delivers a larger viewing audience.  But as Tom Brokaw has so aptly illustrated in the last few days, the media presence in this country (ALL of them, right and left) are shameless  to the point of not even realizing an appearance of conflict of interest and are only driven by their own relentless pursuit of chic self image.

As a second note, I recently watched a few moments of MSNBC covering the gun control issue during which their correspondent asked a gun owner why they would want to own an assault-type weapon when it “looked so dangerous”.  Does a rifle in the hands of a middle-income American male at a recreational gun range or in the hunting woods appear any more dangerous than an airliner in the hands of a hijacker?  How about a psycho driving a Ford Mustang on a busy sidewalk in nighttime LA?  How about a drunk driver in an eighteen wheeler driving I65 from Indianapolis to Nashville?  How about an unlicensed surgeon illegally practicing medicine in Oregon?  Will we ever learn that once we get past a handful of automatic weapons that have no applicable purpose other than military and law enforcement, a gun is simply a tool of the idiot who wields it?  Put that same idiot in an airliner, in an alley with a long knife, or behind the wheel on a crowded street with a few belts down and you have the same threat.   

My plea to the media is this:  Cover the news in a fashion that exudes professionalism and integrity, keeping the real impact in perspective.  Cover the threats based mainly on the individual delivering the damage, not the instruments used to deliver that damage.  Demonstrate to the thinking people of this country that you respect their ability to interpret the facts for themselves rather than attempting to dictate exactly what is important and why it is important.

Executive Actions = End Run.  For that tiny handful of folks who read this blog, you realize I have been heavily critical of the manner in which Congress has deviated from rules of order.  Now if I can get this upset with Congressional inaction, one might ask, how can I criticize the Administration for taking executive actions to address the needs perceived by the President but not addressed by Congress?  Easy; my complaint is the same in both cases.  Executive actions exist, in my humble opinion, to address issues not addressed by Congress or in other cases, to address issues in an expedient fashion required by extraordinary circumstances.  Joe Biden today told a group of gun control advocates that given the Senate defeat this week of the gun control bill, the President would soon be taking executive actions to address the situation.  Now this, my friends, is what I call an abuse of executive action.

Whether the President is George Bush or Barrack Obama, taking executive actions that attempt to accomplish policy that has been rejected by Congress is not a proper application of power.  Had Congress failed to move a gun bill to a vote…that would perhaps be grounds for executive action.  Had Congress passed legislation that left certain critical areas of policy unaddressed… that would perhaps have been grounds for executive action.   But when executive actions are taken to impose (that’s right, it is imposition because it is not subject to Congress and…by the time the Judiciary reviews it, the damage is often done) policies that have been rejected by Congress, it is a perversion of the democratic process and an abuse of power.     Presidents should not supplant themselves in the place of Congress when it comes to making law. While it has clearly become out of fashion to adhere to any type of traditional order when legislating in this country, it is yet another sad commentary that the instrument of executive orders has become nothing more than a political flare that the President sends up when his boat begins to take on water.  The flare soars into the air, burns brilliantly for a few moments, and then falls helplessly into the water.  In the case of flares, they sink harmlessly to the bottom and are soon forgotten.  Unfortunately with executive orders, they tend to stay around for longer shelf life and create all manner of havoc.  If you can’t get the legislation passed that you want, do the heavy lifting and either convince others to buy into your ideas, change the substance of your argument, or compromise in such a way to get the required votes for passage.   Pitching hissy fits in the rose garden is a bit lame, don’t you think?

The Degree of Arrogance is Incredible.  In my time, I have had the wonderful opportunity to visit the House and Senate buildings on Capitol Hill and promote various issues to the Senators and Representatives.  After several trips in and around Capitol Hill, I remain in awe of the people and the process that governs our country; it is a truly magnificent model.  However, one comment I have always made to friends upon my return from WDC was that the Senate office buildings are the closest thing we have to royalty in this country.  I stand by that comment today.  It appears the members are being influenced by their surroundings.

The hubris and arrogance that comes from long-tenured Senators is absolutely off the charts.  Not to say that there is any shortage of narcissism in the House; but standing for election every two years does have a somewhat humbling effect on politicians and by necessity, they tend to “till” the home fields a bit more than their counterparts across the square.

I don’t know when it happened, but this ever-accelerating movement towards a “Gang of (pick your number here)” generating legislation as opposed to the regular order of business is really ruining our government.  Since when do repeated terms as a U.S. Senator make you a fount of all knowledge and wise enough to circumvent the rules that have ruled our legislative operations for decades?  Can these people really….really….believe that they know more than the other (100 less the “Gang Number”) Senators in the body?  Does the collective wisdom of the chosen few outweigh the collective wisdom of the elected many?  Is it any wonder that the quality of completed legislation is pathetic; rift with unintended consequences, errors, and plain stupidity?  Can any sane person question the wisdom in orderly committee hearings and the historically deliberate process of passing laws in this country?

As a child, I was always told that the House would brew the tea of legislation in a boil and the Senate would simmer that brew in the saucer.  I suppose the rule now is that any particular Gang of (??? can take over in the kitchen and dictate the drink of the day.  It is a sad day indeed when our most-seasoned members of Congress have fallen to convenient legislative short-cuts that forsake the heavy lifting of thinking, listening, researching, discussing, debating, and taking the temperature of the electorate for the far more chic mode of “Gang” legislation.

Perhaps They Are Afraid of What They Might Hear?  Even after all of the foolishness that we have seen out of this government (all three branches!) over the last decade or so, there are still occasions where I am amazed at the brazen cluelessness or shamelessness that Congress exhibits.  Specifically addressing the Schumer/Rubio drama on immigration reform, I pose the very simple question: Why in hell would they NOT want to hold hearings on this potential life-changing legislation?

If we have learned nothing over the past several years, it should be that sometimes no legislation is the best legislation and, at a minimum, careful thought and deliberation should take place before ever signing legislation into law.  The poster child for this principle is Obamacare; which famously had to be passed before we could discover what was in it.  Well, it has passed and we are discovering (much to our chagrin).  To a lesser degree, we are seeing the same drama play out in the arena of gun control; specifically, people with no earthly idea of what they are talking about entertaining the thoughts of passing monumental legislation that will hugely impact our society.  Isn’t  it time for legislation to be passed by the orderly process of the House or Senate and not by the political product of a “Gang of Eight…or Ten….or Six….or Twelve….”

Much as I addressed the two choices facing the Republican Party in my last post, this situation presenst Rubio with a very revealing decision.  As had been speculated on by minds far greater than mine, Rubio may have reached the point where appearing to want immigration reform legislation and failing in the process is superior to actually passing immigration that is not completely satisfactory.  Whatever the decision Mr. Rubio makes and how this influences his stock as a future presidential candidate is not my point.  My point is that our Congress has clearily, unequivocally, and in the most transparent fashion imaginable, demonstrated their inability to write legislation with any kind of forethought or anticipation of how it will collaterally impact our country.  The whole purpose of hearings is to address this particular area.  For heaven’s sake, HOLD THE HEARINGS!  Have the debate, line up the Dem witnesses and line up the Repub witnesses, go through the circus atmosphere of bloviating from elected officials with elevated opinions of their self-importance.  But the overarching point is this: TALK about what you are doing and how it might IMPACT the people of this nation. 

How long have we waited for serious immigration reform?  Is it not wise to take a few more weeks, listen to the people who actually deal with immigration issues on a daily basis, and try to get this thing right BEFORE passing it into law?  WHY ARE WE EVEN HAVING THIS DISCUSSION!