The Real "Big Bang Theory"



The Real “Big Bang Theory”.  Even though the mid-term elections are eight months away, the media is replete with suppositions about how the respective parties will fare.  Upon a broad review, it seems that a majority of pundits give the Republicans anywhere from a decent chance to a slam dunk to reclaim majority control of the Senate.  No one seems to dispute the likelihood that the Republicans will retain control of the House; it is simply a question of how large a majority they will enjoy.  I have yet to read anyone’s projection that the Republicans, in their wildest dreams, will achieve anything close to a veto-proof majority in the Senate.  So, where does that leave us for the last two years of the Obama administration?

I am not ready to say that this administration has experienced more scandals than past administrations; Lord knows there have been plenty on both sides of the political aisle.  However, it is hard to deny that this administration has set a new standard for dealing with scandals in an effective and efficient way.  Using various combinations of outright untruths, misleading statements, stonewalling of information and documentation, and manipulation (willful) of the mainstream media, this administration has managed to run the clock on many areas of question and simply keep them shrouded in mystery.   But it can be argued that one of, if the not the strongest, cards the administration has held to manage their scandals has been control of the Senate.  No matter how valid (not claiming they all are),  pertinent, timely, and objective their investigative hearings are, the fact that the investigations are only occurring in the House and not in the Senate is a compelling contribution to lack of public concern and disclosure.  If, in fact, the Republicans gain control of the Senate this fall, that firewall will come crumbling down.  Put Republicans at the head of the table for all Senate committees and see what happens.  Assuming McConnell retains his seat this fall (I live in Kentucky and trust me, it is very likely…no matter what you might hear or read), the remnant resentment from the implementation of the nuclear option will be fresh in his mind.  Add to that the natural chafing that occurs when one party or the other has to endure minority status and it is an understatement to say that the Republicans will be more than eager to use their newfound subpoena positions to begin to poke and probe into Benghazi, Fast and Furious, EPA’s new appetite for regulatory control,  Obamacare, and the IRS’s newfound and selective suspicions regarding 501C4’s .

Here is your real Big Bang Theory.   It is a bang that will likely turn up some evidence of wrongdoing in this administration.  It is a bang that will likely have more volume than substance.  It is a bang that will exacerbate the lame duck status of an already weakened president and likely bring any productive government process to a slow crawl.  In this one man’s opinion, Legislative oversight of the Executive is a good thing.  Both sides overplay their hands in this area and have diminished the true value or purpose of legislative investigative hearings, but I will take excessive Legislative oversight over Executive power abuse any day of the week; be it Nixon or be it Obama.

Why 3 Might Be Better Than 2.



Why 3 Might Be Better Than 2.  Anyone who has been paying attention to the political evolution of this nation’s two major parties must admit that they have migrated more to their extremes than to their moderates.  If, in fact, there is a silent majority in either the Republican or Democratic parties, they have been silent for a sufficient time to lose their ability to be heard and wield any claim to relevance.  The neo-con right and the uber-liberal left have managed to highjack their respective parties, dominate their policy positions, and suck all the air out of the room when reasonable negotiations attempt to transpire.

Why are we seeing so many U.S. Representatives retire; is it due to a resurgence of the “Everyman Congressman” premise that our nation was initially based upon?  Hardly.  Is it because the status of a minority party in the House is below that of a night crawler under a big, flat rock?  Hardly.  Is it because of the constant, ever-present demand of campaign fundraising?  Hardly; these folks thrive on the ego buzz that goes along with that type of activity.  The ones who are leaving, by and large, are leaving because they realize how futile it is to try to work in these conditions.  They have grown weary of pulling against the wind, swimming against the tide, and trying to reach common ground with an ever-more-elusive opponent.  They are sick to death of gridlock, of the overt influence of radicals in how business is conducted, and the inane arbitrariness of the U.S. government in 2014.  I would talk about Senators leaving WDC, but that simply is not happening in the same way.  They only seem to leave because they are convicted of a felony, caught with a minor child in a compromising situation, or are overtaken with higher ambitions to what is perceived to be a more prestigious  government post.  Even serving as a minority member of the U.S. Senate is no great ordeal for these folks.  Anyone who has ever been to WDC and walked through the halls and offices of the Senate buildings realize that this exclusive club of 100 is the closest thing this nation has to royalty.

So, if we the people are to be represented by two parties, who have taken up permanent residence at opposite ends of a spectrum, how can we expect any type of compromise or accomplishment?  We can’t.  The moderates in the middle are too few, too timid, or too inconsequential to effect the equation.  The far Left shouts to drown out the far Right, who screams back at the far Left in righteous indignation.  And the band plays on.

Pure and simple logic tells us that the only moderation between two extremes is some point in the middle.  It is time for a third party in this government.  Yes, this would have far-reaching implications for our process and system of government.  Yes, it is a valid thought to wonder how 3 might agree when 2 cannot.  Will it not simply mix the pot up more?  I submit that we now have a tie.  When the Republicans are out, they wait patiently (obstruct, delay, obfuscate) for that time when they will re-assume the position of dominance.  When the Democrats have the whip hand, they know their pre-eminence is ephemeral and feel obsessed with pushing through their agenda in the greatest volume possible by any means necessary (i.e. Obamacare).  When inevitably the roles are reversed, does anyone really think that one or the other will experience an epiphany of statesmanship and government will assume some level of efficiency, effectiveness, and respectability?  Hardly.

Right now we have two points on either end of the continuum.  It not unreasonable to expect that a point will not spontaneously arise somewhere in the middle; the thirst for revenge is too powerful for the outs to ignore once they get in.   We need a third voice in the conversation.   We need a tie-breaking vote.  We need a position in the middle between the radical right and the liberal left. 

We…need…a…third…national…party.  Let’s call it the Independent party.

The Morphing of "Global Warming" Into "Climate Change"



The Morphing Of “Global Warming” Into “Climate Change”.  The capacity of the liberal media in this nation to rationalize their suppositions and the certitude of their sanctity is nothing short of breath-taking.  The latest example is the slow move from uttering Global Warming to the now chic phrase Climate Change.  Without having sufficient knowledge to make a scientific assessment of the issue, I will nonetheless draw on my compilation of reading, listening, and pondering what has been written and said about the subject over the last couple of decades:  More fortunes have been made off of this farcical scenario than off of any other scam in my lifetime.  The hype of global warming has spawned a global industry that is built on nothing less than a self-perpetuating circle of scientists, politicians, and liberal do-gooders.  Kudos to them; they sure pulled it off in a tidy fashion.

However, this recent pivot from global warming to climate change is going to test their agility and they better hope that their fat and lazy days of extreme success hasn’t taken the edge off of their competitive juices.  A few folks have called them out on their attempted jujitsu, but so far there is no widespread exposure of their preposterous shift.  Even though it was based on complex science, the overall concept of global warmists was pretty simple to grasp.  Ice caps melting, the oceans rising (I thought the One was going to stop that?), and steadily rising global temps were supposed to signal the coming Armageddon for all of mankind.  The problem is… it was a house of cards.  And in this, one of the most severe U.S. winters in recent history, those atmospheric con-artists decided to attempt a sleight-of-hand: Let’s start calling it climate change instead of global warming.   If you can get past the audacity of this move, one must admit that it is remarkably simple.  After all, who can deny climate change?  Saying the climate will change is like saying one team will win and one team will lose in a basketball game.  It is undeniable.  It is inevitable.  It is also true that it will happen whether or not mankind inhabits this planet or not.  It takes no science or research, no brilliant deduction, and certainly no academic risk to stand before the public (or the Congress of the United States) and state that climate change is settled science.  Duh; “water is wet” is settled science.

If the global warming apostles are able to pull off this vaudevillian act, then it will pretty much cement my opinion that any remnant of an objective, serious-minded, and inquiring free press in this nation is dead and gone.  This will be interesting to watch.

Doing It Right, For All The Wrong Reasons.



Doing It Right, For All The Wrong Reasons.  My wife and I were sitting in our sunroom drinking coffee the other morning, listening to media details of Obama’s latest debacle, and we both wondered out loud…”Has he done anything right?”   I studied for several minutes and finally replied… “Nothing that I can think of”.  I dwelt on that response for a day or two and realized how truly pathetic (of him or me, I am not certain) it was.    I have come up with something that I believe the One has done right, but he did it for all the wrong reasons and in a shameful fashion.

I was raised as a conservative Republican with pretty hawkish tendencies.  I am now a moderate/conservative Independent with much less hawkish tendencies.  At some point in my fifties, I grew tired of America’s youth  spilling its blood on foreign soils for people who hated us for what we are, what we stand for, and who hold no appreciation whatsoever for the ultimate sacrifice paid by far  too many of our best and finest.  While it was pretty plain to me that Iraq’s invasion of its neighbor could not be tolerated by Bush #1, I came around much slower to supporting the deposition of Saddam; not because of any WMDs or Bush Doctrine, but because of his genocide atrocities committed on the Turkish people.  While a student in school, I had often wondered how the world could stand by so long and allow the Holocaust to occur.   I could not fault our President Bush for intervening to prevent this tragedy from playing out once again.  Foreign policy is one area where intelligent and experienced journalists often proceed with caution.  This makes it even more imperative for those of us who really don’t have a clue to withhold our tongues and our judgments.  That having been said, we must speak to what we know (or at least what we think we know), lest we give our leaders free reign to conduct foreign policy without heed to public opinion.  Following this creed, I will now give Obama credit for doing something right; for getting us out of Iraq and moving quickly to getting us out of Afghanistan. 

Now...he is accomplishing this with an absence of honor, a heavy dose of deceit, and in his typical self-aggrandizing fashion.  He wants to play the tough guy while being a closet weasel.  He supports a troop surge when he privately disagrees with it and has no faith in it.  He seeks to make himself look like a master of diplomacy while decrying the supposed idiocy of his predecessors.  Even when it comes to an issue where the stakes are the very lives of our soldiers, he cannot bring himself to be honest and straightforward about his ideas, hiding instead behind political facades intended to improve his standing in the almighty polls that he holds so highly.

The blood and treasure spent in both countries is an investment that should be properly noted and appreciated.  But those efforts did not yield a tangible gain that could be held in a material sense.  They yielded instead an opportunity for good, honest people in foreign lands who were oppressed by ruthless leaders to have a chance at a better life.   Once that opportunity was secured, the mantle passed from our brave soldiers to those people fighting for freedom and dignity; the outcome was never guaranteed and anyone who thought so was foolish.  This does not excuse the failure of this administration to successfully negotiate a meaningful SOFA; failure to do so is a palpable disrespect to those who fought in both theatres.  What it does mean is that when the cruelty of mankind against mankind reaches a certain level of evil, good people and good countries are obligated to step up.  But that obligation cannot be open-ended and, at some point, peoples must earn their own freedom and dignity with their own sacrifice.  There are many ways to help these people seeking better lives other than doing their fighting for them.  We can pick sides with supplies and diplomacy, with economic leverage, and with the strong voice that always rests with our great nation.  My God…what has happened to that voice?

Too many American soldiers have died for other people’s wars, for unprincipled leaders who hold their self interest above those of the people they lead, and for political causes that have no bearing on our nation and its people.  I do not believe in isolationism.  I do believe in a world-wide terrorist threat that requires us to have a rapid-response military force in various strategic locations around the world.  Our leaders must learn, and we as citizens must accept, that there are times when we must watch and times when we must intervene.  That line has become much too blurred over the course of my lifetime.   We must once again elect people who we can trust to see this line clearly and then have the courage and wisdom to take action accordingly.

When Did Congressional Democrats Tire Of Governing?



When Did Congressional Democrats Tire Of Governing?  Once again, the Obama administration has decreed that the actual legislation passed by Congress and signed by the president has no binding authority or standing; with a stroke of the pen (where’s the phone?), Obama chooses to change the law of the land in a manner that is more politically palatable and in line with his agenda.   Like many others, I thought when the ACA was passed in the dead of night without a single Republican vote, that it was bad legislation.  I did not agree with the governmental mandate that one must obtain health insurance.  I did not agree with the government dictating terms to free market entities like insurance companies.  I did not support the subsidy aspects of the law.  But even with all of these reservations, and with Ms. Pelosi’s cogent announcement that “we must pass it  to find out what is in it”, I accepted that the program had been promulgated into law through our governmental process and that Congress would work its will on necessary changes as time played out.  Boy, were we ever wrong.

Through executive fiat, the One has repeatedly and unilaterally changed the fundamental health care law of this country; a segment of our community that represents anywhere from 15 to 17 percent of our entire economy.  Who knew that the huge pile of paper that was the ACA was simply more than an accession of authority to the president to become the health care dictator for America?  My question is: When did the Democrats in Congress become tired of governing, or doing the jobs they were elected to do, and decide to simply turn that job over to Obama?  I suppose one could argue that it began that fateful night when the ACA was passed in the House and the bigger question is: How long will they stand by and abdicate their responsibility and authority in this fashion?

Of all the mysteries, contradictions, outright idiocies, and poor rationale contained in the ACA episode, the most puzzling to me is how can any serious, democratically-principled Democrat stand by and watch this president repeatedly abuse his power, treat Congress (which happens to include a LOT of Democrats) with such disdain, and simply subvert the fashion in which our government was envisioned to function?  Many, including the president in his recent SOTU address, have asked the legitimate question to Republicans: If you are against the ACA, what exactly are you for?  There are three fundamental reasons why you will not hear an answer to this question any time soon.  First, the Republicans will deservedly have their pound of flesh in return for the extraordinary legislative measures used to pass the bill.  Secondly, the Republicans control only one house of Congress and cannot push any bill through the Reid majority in the Senate.  And third and finally, until some Democrat… some serious, recognized, respected Democrat stands up and calls out this president on his outrageous abuse of executive power… nothing will change between now and the mid-term elections.  After that…who knows how the tea leaves will read.   But I will guarantee, there are Democrats on the hill today who are absolutely simmering inside over how they have been marginalized and demoted to administration water boys and girls.

Imagine...



Imagine…On this anniversary of the greatest band in history (the Beatles), it is perhaps appropriate to use one of John’s songs as a basis for a blog.  Just imagine that there’s no Obamacare; just imagine.   I have alluded many times to the lost opportunities of the Obama administrations.  It cannot be overstated that these opportunities were without a doubt historic in scope and proportion.  In my time, there will very likely never be another President who comes into office with more good will or promise. 

What if the One had chosen to focus all of that good will in other directions and on other issues?  What if he had not succumbed to the temptation of seizing power and riding it for all it was worth?  What if he had recognized the fact that no matter how high his certitude of righteousness, it makes no sense to force policy that is not supported by a majority of the citizenry and requires extraordinary legislative means?  How different would this country look today had that initial decision been made differently early on in the Obama presidency?  I submit to you that it is absolutely shocking to consider the possibilities.

Take the ACA out of the equation and what is left?  There are no legislative accomplishments of note; no foreign policy victories; no domestic policy benchmarks.  But had Obama chosen to exercise his significant political capital early on in the area of  tax reform, we could today possibly be looking at a shrinking national debt, a manageable deficit heading in the right direction, and an economy that is healthy and creating jobs for those who want one.  Instead of wasting precious legislative energy on immigration reform, it could be a fact instead of a notion and we could be well on the way towards a new and improved immigration environment in this country.  How many of the executive and administrative abuses of power that this administration has perpetrated were a direct result of the original ACA conflict with Republicans?   If that conflict had never arisen, would the partisan divide we see in WDC be quite as deep and poisonous as it is today?  In the absence of the Obamacare acrimony, would Obama’s foreign policy misadventures bear quite the scrutiny and criticism that they currently bear?   My suspicion is that we would be seeing a much better country in many ways if Obamacare had never happened.  All of the government warts would not be excised, but many open wounds would be eliminated altogether or be well on the way to healing. 

One of life’s most difficult truths is that we sleep in the bed we make.  Obama took the easy way out and gave into hubris and arrogance.  He believed his own bullshit.  He started out with troubled waters indeed; but rather than seeking to calm them, he poured venom and bile into them.  We now see him running around this country in a pathetic fashion for a president with three years left in office.  Waving his “pen and phone” and shouting out belligerence, he is the lamest of ducks.  His defiance of Congress is seeping down through his administration.  Holder, Sebelius and others rule their little fiefdoms through executive fiat; they are rogue ideologues without restraint.  Obama has given them free reign and is fiddling while democratic principles burn.  Their apparent disregard for any type of explanation or accountability flows from them into their agency heads and the legions of partisan appointees in every federal branch of government.  It is a cancer that has three years left to spread, it will do a good deal of irreparable damage to our government, and it will take generations to rectify.  It is a tragic turn of events.  It is lost promise.  It is the seizure of conflict from the promises of diplomacy.  Imagine…there’s no Obamacare……