Despite Obama's intentions, The Show (apparently) Must Go On!

Cognitive Dissonance

In the beginning, promises of ridding congress of back room deals, amendments full of pork, the practice of passing bills which congress has not had the time to thoroughly debate and creating more transparency for the public before any voting on legislation occurred was music to the ears of some on the right and most of those in the middle. And while those on the left also supported eliminating these practices, little did they suspect that their very existence as a political party was dependent upon them. For most of us reality has now set in. Cooperation in congress is down, bipartisanship is up and the performance of our political system has stalled. The show goes on and we (currently just less than 50%) still love our president.

The present immigration legislation is taking the same path as the Affordable Health Care Act (see the practices identified above). Of primary concern in this legislation, which has of course largely avoided public debate - missed is more like it since the cloture vote in the senate occurred yesterday and I will bet the vast majority of Americans have no clue - is the key provision, as part of section 3214(b) dealing with family unification.  The section gives the Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, discretion to waive the provisions as to removal, deportation and inadmissibility of illegal aliens not just for family ”hardship” (which itself is huge) but for any reason the Secretary deems in the ”public interest.” This same loose language preventing accountability for the other "promises" of the legislation was written into the Affordable Health Care Act and is reason in and of itself to just say no to this bill.

In addition, through amendments the bill has become a grab bag for some of the usual suspects including, among others, Harry Reid's extension of the Travel Promotion Act to benefit Las Vegas; Susan Collins redirection of immigration enforcement money from the southwest to the northeast; and for the state of Alaska (securing the votes of Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich) special treatment for Alaskan seafood plants.

What exactly do these amendments have to do with immigration? Nothing. They are part of our political system and the sacrifices made to "buy" votes. Part of the despicable behavior, then Senator, Obama promised to fix.

Immigration is important to America and not only had a positive impact in our past but is an asset to the present and the strength of our future. That is of course if it is properly and fairly enforced. Neither of which has occurred under previous bills (enforcement) or will occur under the proposed bill (fairness - it is subjective at best and lacks accountability at worst). The pending immigration legislation has seen debates over topics like the number of DUI's a current illegal alien can have before they are deported under the new law; should it be two or three? Yes you read that correctly - breaking the law by being an illegal alien is dismissed and the debate now is how many additional times an illegal alien can break the law before we deny their request for citizenship.

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
Theodore Roosevelt

We must not support legislation simply for the purpose of having the legislation to right a wrong. The wrong legislation will not make things right. Cross reference the Affordable Health Care Act.

Contact your representatives now before it is too late. They can do a better job of securing our border and providing a solution for the millions of illegal aliens who both support America and qualify for citizenship. But neither should we fool ourselves, some of them will need to be deported.

This Show Must NOT Go On!

Footnote: I purposely chose to use the term illegal rather than undocumented for clarity, not (just) to point out the foolishness of that politically correct locution. Undocumented implies the administrator made the mistake. Illegal implies the perpetrator made the mistake.

If it Takes a Village...

...keep her out of it! Unlike Obama, she has a record, and it's clear - move on. We have a little over 3 years to investigate legitimate presidential candidates so lets get on with it.

Americans love thrillers, mysteries and conspiracy theories. In the absence of the (map) facts and when what we're told (the pieces) doesn't fit, investigators, to the best of their ability, must determine what happened. Sherlock Holmes made the process look easy but in real life it is much harder to sort through incomplete or misinformation .

Some puzzles are truly difficult and some are never solved, many of those originate in DC; go figure.

When we try to make sense of the political dysfunction over the last year and wonder about the direction of the next 3, it only stands to reason that we look ahead and consider what we know about the likely 2016 presidential field. Forrest Gump said "life is like a box of chocolates", he's right, and when it comes to presidential candidates, I suggest we poke every one of them until we find the one we want.

“How can one be well...when one suffers morally?”
Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

In a report out today, aviation experts and NTSB investigators claim that evidence from the 1996 crash of TWA Flight 800 points to a missile as the cause, rather than static electricity as previously concluded. If true, this may link the Clinton's to yet another scandal and while it is currently nothing more than a conspiracy theory, it is plausible to say the least. It also fits nicely with the progressives working view that when it comes to terrorists, there is no there, there.

Unlikely, but we don't need this to exclude Hillary from our list. 

The Clinton's have a long history of scandals behind them culminating with Hillary's involvement in the Benghazi puzzle; no map and missing pieces. Following her departure, the State Department during her tenure has been exposed as an utter sewer of corruption, cronyism, and fatal incompetence. After thoroughly investigating Whitewater, Travelgate and Benghazi can we really find reason to give her another opportunity to play America? On her quest for power, masquerading as public service, Hillary has put self-absorption and personal victory above all else. Do you think it a coincidence that her resignation came as the media finally shed light on Benghazi? And another coincidence that we find out about the General Petraeus affair on her way out? The State Department knew about it long before then. Make no mistake, things happen for a reason. Do not forget Hillary's comment when pressed on what ignited the Benghazi attack which resulted in the death of 4 Americans: "What difference at this point does it make?" The Clinton's have successfully side stepped accountability time and again by creating distance between them and the issue, and worse, making themselves out as victims.

You may remember that Monica's dress eventually forced Bill's admission of guilt after a pathetic debate on the definition of the word 'is'. But in the end Americans found more humor than criminality in his lack of moral compass. The focus of this behavior was on just one woman but history has revealed that Bill Clinton's discretion's would have made JFK blush. And Hillary stood by her man. Sad. 

As we approach the election of 2016, I propose we drop the party loyalty and identify an honest public servant, one who willingly admits and corrects their mistakes, not doing so only when under the threat of impeachment. The job approval rating of congress makes two things clear, that we need a leader with integrity and we have had enough of career politicians. The democratic process will adjust for the right to left swings in policy but only our diligence conducting background checks will bring real change to the oval office. This time, lets not get caught up in the hype.

With that said, the sooner Hillary is dropped from the list, the better; America does not need another dishonest, self absorbed, career politician.

Deja vu?

Despite the looming fiscal cliff, the Obama's enjoyed their vacation in Hawaii; yes, the president had to cut his time short, which increased the expense to taxpayers, but he still got his golfing in. Oh well, that one only cost $4 million. Chump change.

I know that vacation was just 6 months ago but I'd say he looks like he needs another one. He might want to choose a different traveling companion than Putin; they don't seem happy to be together. As it turns it turns out, Barack, Michelle and the kids already have a trip planned to South Africa. This time though, the estimated cost is $60 - $100 million.

Did the president land on his head when the country went over the fiscal cliff? Does he really believe that his desires are exempt from the "cash crisis" (budget sequestration) in America? Or is this just another example of his entitlement behavior: "it's good to be king"? And where is the voice of reason from his wife? Surely someone in their family has a conscience, or, is aware of how this looks when contrasted against the sacrifices the rest of our country is making?

No, I don't think they gave it a second thought. In fact, this has become a pattern for the president. When the going gets tough, he gets going. Literally.

Remarkably Absent President

It seems that each time we have a major conflict or crisis, the president disappears from public. Obama's pattern is to send the minions out with talking points and avoid the press until things cool down. His statements following the revelations of any one of the multitude of recent scandals have been few and far between, with those few statements proving to have little or no value.

Take for example his May 15th statement regarding the IRS profiling: "I’ll do everything in my power to make sure nothing like this happens again by holding the responsible parties accountable...". At the presidents direction, Attorney General Eric Holder pledged that the FBI would immediately launch a probe into this high-profile scandal. And yet, during FBI Director Robert Mueller's testimony on June 14th, he stated that he does not know who’s leading the investigation, doesn’t know how many investigators are assigned to it, and whether they’ve bothered to start off by, "y’know", talking to the victims of the profiling. 30 days after making it a top priority and not only do we not have any answers but it appears the process has yet to begin. Was the president just blowing smoke or was he serious, but in what appears to be another pattern, disengaged from the process?

On the other hand, should even the appearance of racism be present, Obama can't keep his mouth shut. Remember his comment, when a white man arrested a black man, that the police had "acted stupidly"? His urgency to declare racism before knowing the facts led to the White House's first beer summit. Which, of course, was nothing more than a photo op; he never apologized or admitted that he had jumped to the wrong conclusion. Note to President Obama: People respect humility and are turned off by equivocation.

So while his availability to the 'desperately seeking answers' public is scaled back, his fundraising efforts and family vacations seem to stay right on schedule. Regardless of the impact to America's financial stability. It's good to be king!

Is this what we expected from a candidate running on Hope and Change?

It's about trust, stupid.

It goes without saying that there is a balance between individual freedom and national security, not to mention that leadership requires some level of secrecy when dealing with international affairs. Americans are divided on the recent revelation of data collection by our government and that is not surprising. Generally, it appears that most of us are willing to give the leaders in our government the freedom to exercise covert operations so long as we feel that those operations are in our best interest and that we can trust the leaders statements regarding their actions. But others feel the government should keep no secrets from its citizens are willing to go to great lengths to assure their individual privacy.

Just for the record, and irrelevant to my point, I believe Edward Snowden is a criminal for leaking national security secrets and a traitor for revealing any of that information to our adversaries.

It might have been easier for Obama to defend the merits of the data collection program had our trust in government and their motivations not been repeatedly called into question over one scandal after another.

It is then, this lack of credibility which is straining President Obama's administration as they attempt to defend their use of the data collection program for the purpose of protecting Americans. On the heals of intentional deception by senior administration officials, including the president himself when questioned on the relentless scandals, Americans are right to question their objectives.

“If you once forfeit the confidence of your fellow citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem. It is true that you may fool all of the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all of the time; but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. -Speech at Clinton, Illinois, September 8, 1854.”
Abraham Lincoln 

So what is Americas objective in Syria now that Obama has moved forward with his promise to supply the rebels with arms since his red line was crossed (a month or so ago)? Don't get me wrong, the 150 people who were killed from the use of chemical weapons proves that Assad is willing to do anything to preserve his hold on power. However, with the two year anniversary of this rebellion fast approaching and an estimated 90,000+ killed in the conflict, I have to question the timing of this intervention. Is it possible the timing is political; to divert attention from the continuing scandals plaguing the White House? Certainly it is not based on previous "red line" statements, the administration walked those back over a month ago once the use of chemical weapons was proven.

Are we to believe that our entry into this conflict is based on humanitarian reasons considering our inaction for two years while over 89,000 people were slaughtered? Or for some unstated, specific, geo-political purpose? And have we prepared for the alliance of the anti-American cast being assembled in Syria?  While Obama's actions and policies led the Syrian rebels from behind (followed), Al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and other enemies have taken up positions which will pit them directly against our efforts. The fact that we do not know who all of the rebels are, assures that any support we provide, money, food or weapons, will wind up in the hands of our enemies. Throw Israel into the equation - it is right in the middle - and America is facing a much more difficult and complicated situation than existed when the uprising began.

Through ongoing communication with Moscow, Iran has a plan. What is our plan? Do we assist in the downfall of Assad and then abandon the Syrian people as they attempt to rebuild their nation under the intimidation of Muslim extremists? Have you checked on Egypt lately? Libya?

American support for the Syrian people is long overdue. Before it is provided, and we have had two years to put a plan together, we must have clearly defined objectives articulated to congress and the people who give them their power, us. To enter a war without appropriate and clear objectives and under suspicion of doing so for the purpose of 'changing the American conversation' puts our leaders in the same category as Snowden.

It is about trust!

Post Representative Democracy

Does anyone else wonder about the state of our country and what direction, exactly, we are headed? It is not unusual for countries and governments to evolve or change. It is however unusual for a country to transform into an improved and sustainable version of what it was while keeping the existing form of government and existing laws; sustainable being the key word. America's constitution is, in fact, an anomaly in history; a country whose government has followed the same set of rules for over 235 years is an exception.

The demise of past civilizations has been brought about by events like war, climate, economics and social unrest. Today, Turks rioted in the streets as their Prime Minister attempted to squash the widespread protests over the countries move from a secular nation to one highly influenced, if not directed, by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Our civil war, by historical standards, was (aside from the timetable) predictable. What was not, was that after the war, our government and constitution would remain intact.

So what will be our tipping point?

Could it be precipitated by social unrest as scandal fatigue finally erodes public confidence in our government to a point of no return? The latest is a cover-up by the State Department of sex and prostitution activities by that agencies staff and contractors. How will Hillary explain this one? Surely, even her most ardent followers must ask themselves where they draw the line. An assignment for you: have some fun and look up the name Patrick Kennedy (clue's: Under Secretary for Management, State Department, Benghazi, sex scandal). First Benghazi and now this. What else might he have touched? When a government spirals out of control, the citizenry soon follows.

Might it be war, brought on by our passive approach of dealing with the "Bad Guys"? Clearly, and despite the presidents insistence that the war on terror is over and Al-Qaeda is on the run, they are not done with us. No country has survived, completely, every war in which it engaged.

Or will Economics be the proverbial straw that broke the camels back? The very scary conclusion of this report is the permanence of the additional government expenditures, especially with the Affordable Health Care Act expenses looming large, not to mention increasing daily, as Nancy Pelosi (I love this video - it is the height of government arrogance and stupidity) accurately informed us, "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it". US Debt Clock, 16.8 trillion and still moving fast.

And unless a previously undetected meteor sets its sights upon us or Yellowstone decides to blow, climate, at least, seems to be the least likely near term candidate. Since selling his television station to the Emir of Fossil Fuels, aka Al Jazeera, aka the Qatari government, Al Gore seems to have picked up a new cause. So it appears that with regards to the climate, there is no there there!

Back on point now. Has President Obama figured out what happened in Benghazi yet? Will anyone connect the dotted lines linking David Petraeus' s affair and resignation with Hillary Clinton's version of the events at Benghazi? Has Eric Holder's investigation of himself turned up anything on the invasion of privacy issue? If the IRS profiling has been fixed as Elijah Cummings now states, why is Lois Lerner still on PAID administrative leave?

Where is our representation? Our country was founded as a representative democracy and that appears to be disappearing faster than water off a ducks back! Until something changes, our government is accountable to us, it is required to provide us with the truth, even when it hurts and regardless of the potential consequences. The absence of answers, of the truth, the only reason for dodging questions and spinning the conversation, is that those answers, that truth, will reveal guilt. And what should be most infuriating to all Americans, is understanding the singular, selfish reason behind these maneuvering cover-ups. To maintain their public image in order to remain in power.

This is not Representative Democracy. In fact - would these obvious attempts to keep one party in power succeed, and considering their current: constraints on political groups, identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat societal problems, repressive tactics on opponents and a prohibition of anti-regime activity, and ever shifting executive power - it would be closer to an Authoritarian Socialist government.

To be fair, the intrusions on our privacy started long before the current administration, it is a bi-partisan effort. The cover-up of embarrassing activities is also shared by all parties.

I have to wonder, if our elected officials inability to work together, except when it comes to lying and cheating the American public, will be our tipping point?

"The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.”  
― Karl Marx

Have we come this far?

Keep the Turks, and all the oppressed around the world, in your prayers. And while you're at it, ask that Americans do not join those ranks.

The psychology of a believer.

What does it mean to believe? To have an unwavering faith in a set of guiding principals or a leaders vision of specific objectives? The story in the Bible of Abraham preparing to sacrifice his child is an extreme example of belief. As far as I am concerned, and my guess is that every parent would agree, the thought of sacrificing a child is unfathomable and would be the greatest test of belief. No question for me, I'd fail.

Faithful followers of all religions understand that they have a connection with God which drives their actions. And in some cases, justifies them.

Similarly, followers of other non-religious groups experience the same phenomenon. A belief so strong, that their behavior or activities are spurred by their personal belief in the leaders, or the groups, set of beliefs.

If you have never reviewed the study by Phillip Meyer, which he conducted to test his 'German's-are-different' hypothesis, it is well worth a few minutes of your time. If you have, then you already understand how the obedience demonstrated by the minions and leaders in the current administration is orchestrated. Or any past administration for that matter.

But lets deal with the current one. Is it possible that the relentless demonization by President Obama of his opponents has created an environment in his administration where the defeat of those opponents is to be accomplished at any cost? Is the Smoking Gun in plain sight?

Why would a DOJ official think it ok to sell guns to drug dealers?
Why would the Secretary of State take full responsibility for four murdered Americans without explaining the events leading up to the attack? While claiming it wasn't terrorism when it obviously was? And then resigning?
Why would the Department of Labor classify a terrorist attack on a military base which resulted in the deaths of 13 Americans as workplace violence?
How does the Attorney General make a choice to secretly spy on our (previously) free press?
Why is the NSA collecting domestic phone records from over 100 million Americans? Yes - collecting, this is ongoing!
What would make an IRS official think it ok to profile specific political groups?
Why would the United States sign on to a UN law which might impact our own laws?
What would compel an FBI official to, prematurely and effectively, end the interrogation of a suspected terrorist by reading them their rights when they were not required by law to do so?
And why would the Health and Human Services Secretary risk questions of ethics by taking the extraordinary step of soliciting "donations" to help pay for the Affordable Care Act from the very medical groups the bill requires her to regulate?

And so, in the case of Sarah Murnaghan, who was ineligible to receive a lung transplant due to her age and an outdated law, the true face of The Affordable Health Care Act was revealed today (remember the 'death panel' claims?) when Kathleen Sebelius chose to punt rather than exercise her authority stating "I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies". It is now crystal clear that government authorities, NOT OUR DOCTORS, will determine what care is in our best interest. Fortunately for young Sarah, a federal judge ordered Sebelius to suspend existing organ allocation rules to give her a better chance at a life-saving lung transplant.

Like Nurse Ratched, Sebelius clearly believes in the Health Care Act, the governments ability to make decisions in our best interest and the leadership which provides her with direction.

Success is best achieved with a strong supporting cast. Smart leaders surround themselves with a team that supports the same set of beliefs and all the better when they are capable of achieving the leaders objectives with little oversight.

Make no mistake - when a subordinate steps out of an administrations well known and clearly articulated line of beliefs, they are immediately reprogrammed or reassigned.

When administration officials continually outrage a great part if not the majority of its citizens with the decisions they are making (step out of line) and one of the consequences issued by their leader is a promotion, there should be no doubt about whose beliefs those officials are supporting.