Fish Fear Me

Whores Whore

The competition has been fierce already this week, but I think this has to take the lead in the category of dumbest thing of the week:

Washington lobbyist Jack Burkman on Monday said he is preparing legislation that would ban gay athletes from joining the National Football League.

Burkman in a statement said he has garnered political support for the bill, though his statement didn’t mention any specific lawmakers who are behind it.

”We are losing our decency as a nation,” Burkman said in a statement. "Imagine your son being forced to shower with a gay man. That’s a horrifying prospect for every mom in the country. What in the world has this nation come to?”

In fact, this is so ridiculously dumb that it has to be phony, and sure enough Ben Jacobs at the Daily Beast comes up with the smoking gun:

While the lobbyist wouldn’t reveal the members of Congress who supported the bill, as specific language had not even been drafted, he did say that almost all shared something in common: They were all Republicans worried about a Tea Party challenge. Burkman told The Daily Beast he thinks “95 percent of supporters” will be Republicans facing primary challenges and therefore looking for political cover. Burkman spelled out his coalition, saying that one Senator and six members of the House were definitely on board, but that those numbers could expand to six Senators and 36 congressmen. And, of those 42, “all but one will do this politically because they have been under fire from Tea Party and far right wing element” in their states.

Bullshit, and here's why.

While there's certainly some crossover between social conservatives and the Tea Party, the priority issues for the vast majority of Tea Party types are fiscal and federal government restraint, not things like gay marriage. And certainly not something so intrusive from the federal government like a ban on gays in the NFL. That's insane. You want to know what a real Tea Party person would say to such a thing?

"Where does it say the federal government has the right to order something like that?"

That's the real deal, not the phony Tea Party that Democrats and establishment Republicans fantasize about. Which brings us to the why of all this.

After progressive Democrats, the establishment Republicans are the ones who fear and loathe the Tea Party the most. Primary season is just around the corner and a number of those establishment Republicans are facing challenges from, you guessed it, Tea Party conservatives. That makes it the perfect time to smear the challengers and you just know that with something like this, Democrats and their allies in the media can't help but jump all over it and lend a hand. 

As far as I can tell it's working. But tell me, if this stupid proposal is really intended to provide cover for more moderate Republicans, where are the Tea Party candidates who have proposed something similar or are endorsing Burkman's proposal? I'll bet a six pack that neither you nor I can find one.

But why would Burkman, who seems to be a staunch conservative and Republican, do something like this?

Because he's a whore. They call it lobbyist, but what Burkman does is accumulate knowledge and power influence and then he sells himself to clients who wish to do business with the feds and/or influence federal legislation and regulations. It's probably the number one occupation in Washington D.C. I have no proof that Burkman got paid to do what he did in this particular case, but you know, whores whore, and doing it for free runs against the normal business model. Decide for yourself.

But THIS Time Will Be Different

The Obungler administration is once again exerting great effort on a peace accord between the Palestinians and the Israelis and once again it is unquestionably going to fail. The only thing to be determined is just how badly Secretary Lurch will damage Israel in the eyes of the world when the current round of talks goes off the rails. Such talks are always doomed because they all try to work around the central and intractable problem: Palestinians refuse to accept the existence of Israel as a Jewish state.

The presentation last week of a US proposed "West Bank security plan" is just another example of straining mightily, and futilely, to get around that problem. Because Israelis smartly and correctly recognize the murderous intent of the Palestinians, they insist on extraordinary security measures to protect their nation.

"Aha," says the US, "We'll let the Israeli military keep a security zone along the border of a sovereign Palestinian state."

"Not a chance," say the Palestinians, correctly recognizing that they won't really be a sovereign nation if another nation controls their border. "We'll let an international force watch the border though."(wink, wink)

"Right," say the Israelis. "Would that be the same international force that has failed to dislodge Hezbollah's rockets in southern Lebanon?"

When the Palestinians rejected the latest Kerry plan, they also reportedly gave him a letter listing "Palestinian red lines", one of which is "the refusal to recognise Israel as a Jewish state".

And there you have it. The Palestinians continue to hold dear the destruction of Israel, which leads to understandable but untenable security demands from Israel, which leads inevitably to another failed round of talks. Diplomats around the world can talk all they want, but the core problem remains Palestinian hatred of Israel and it cannot be bypassed no matter the effort. 

Education and experience should make people see truths such as that all the more clearly, but with much of our current political "elites", in this case specifically John Kerry and Barack Obama, the passage of time sees them move in the opposite direction. Because they lack honesty and integrity at a fundamental level their vision is obscured by their own bullshit and their arrogant determination to believe it no matter how much the real world gets in the way.

It's all really quite stupid, perhaps even insane. But then, there are so many other policies and actions of this administration that fit that description that one more run of the mill stupidity doesn't even stand out.

Tell Me Lies Tell Me Sweet Little Lies

To me, the greatest joy of hunting is walking down some trail, or Forest Service road that isn't really a road by anyone else's standard, and feeling the modern world fade away with each footstep. Not that I hate modernity itself, I'm no Luddite by any means, but the way the modern world works these days, especially here in America, makes me despair sometimes. The first three weeks of October were particularly soul-sucking in exposing the debased and incompetent nature of our so-called elites. Three solid days of walking in the woods at the end of October could not have come at a better time. So with a little refreshed perspective from that, a few thoughts on Obamacare.

Of all of the lies around Obamacare, the website failure is the smallest and most fixable. We were once again sold the fable that the federal bureaucracy has the competence to get something right the first time. It doesn't. It never has and it never will. Even the most admired bureaucracy in the federal government, the US military, initially fucks things up all the time. The Obamacare website will eventually be fixed to an acceptable standard by the same method the federal bureaucracies always use─the combined brute force of lots of money and manpower. 

The first really big lie that has been exposed is Obama's(and the entire Democratic Party's) claim that if you like your plan or your doctor you will be able to keep them. Not only did they know that wasn't going to be true for millions of individual plans, they spent the last three years tightening the regulatory screws that would make it a certainty for millions more. Additional coverage mandated by Obamacare have made those plans illegal and the replacement plans are naturally more expensive.

In addition, many insurers are controlling the cost to consumers by cutting down the number of in-network providers in their lower cost plans. Millions of Americans are discovering they can only keep their doctor if they switch insurers, which may not be practical if they are in a group plan, or if they upgrade their coverage. And if you think it's fun now, wait until the employer mandate fully kicks in and we see what other consequences make themselves known.

Nothing exposes Obama's unprincipled and arrogant nature more than his attempt to blame insurers for all of this. That's a lie, pure and simple. And nothing is more infuriating than his craven apologists who have commandeered for themselves the right to determine what is or is not the right minimal health care coverage for everybody else.

The biggest lie of all is not yet obvious to many Americans, though it should be. That's the idea that the government, through a maze of mandates, subsidies, cost-shifting, and dozens of panels of experts, can effectively manage the US health care system at all. We've been doing that stuff to one extent or another for decades now at the state and federal level and it's why the health care system is as screwed up as it is today. Now we're going to do all that stuff on steroids and the result will be...awesome?

No, it's going to be a disaster of perverse incentives and completely predictable unintended consequences leading to "fix," after "fix," after "fix" until it becomes obvious even to Democrats that this was the dumbest government intervention in the history of the United States. And I haven't even touched on the crushing economic effects that are just starting to be felt.

Obamacare was conceived as a lie, gestated through secret backroom deals, and birthed by Pelosi and Reid as a 2000-page monstrosity that nobody had read, let alone even partly understood. That it's going to be an unprecedented disaster should surprise no one. 

The Moral Bankruptcy Of The Left

On this 50 year anniversary of what has to be one of the greatest speeches in American history, so-called progressive columnist Charles P. Pierce debases it by shitting on one of its most profound and beautiful lines:

As the president mounts the podium at the Lincoln Memorial today to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Dr. King's speech, we are reminded (ceaselessly) about one thing that Dr. King said in his address:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.    

There it is. That's the great loophole. It is an otherwise unremarkable sentiment given the context of the entire address, but, for the people who almost certainly would have lined up on the other side of the movement in 1963, it subsequently has been used as an opening through which all manner of historically backsliding mischief has come a'wandering in, from "reverse discrimination" to Allan Bakke, to what is going on today with the franchise in too many places, to the reaction to the killing of Trayvon Martin and the acquittal of George Zimmerman.

And so a dream that his children will be treated with basic human dignity, simple but astoundingly and eloquently presented, and today overwhelmingly embraced by all but a very small fringe of Americans, is turned into another craven racial narrative in the service of Democratic politicians.

Goddamn me for believing in King's vision and taking it to heart, I guess. Somehow I doubt that Pierce and his thoroughly corrupt views on race are going to lead us to the Promised Land.

Call me a cynic, if you will. 

Take That, Ronnie!

The day is far from over, but here's my nomination for retarded headline of the day:

Defying Reagan, Obama Returns Solar Panels To The White House

Yeah, I guess Obama told him! It doesn't get much bolder than defying a man who has been dead for nine years.

In the mythology of the so-called reality-based community, the evil Reagan tore out those solar panels because he couldn't stand the thought of fossil fuels not being burned and he wanted the whole world to choke on the fumes and...Evil! Reagan was evil, evil, evil!

The truth is much simpler, as the New York Times reported on August 24, 1986:

The Reagan Administration says it will not replace a solar water-heating system that was installed in the White House in the Carter Administration.

The panels of the system had been dismantled to fix the roof underneath. Dale A. Petroskey, a White House spokesman, said Friday, ''Putting them back up would be very unwise, based on cost.''

Not that the truth matters to people who are completely blinded by their own hate.

Because Apparently There Wasn't Enough Poison In Our Politics Already(update)

Some woman in Texas thought she would be clever on Sunday and showed up at a protest against the George Zimmerman verdict with the following sign:

Note the caption and how the NY Daily News ran with it as a straight news item. The UK's Daily Mail online played it as a straight news photo of a George Zimmerman supporter also.

It turns out that she was actually with the Trayvon Martin side at the protest and she was just being "sarcastic."

 

It may have been sarcasm as far as she's concerned, but two major news organizations put it on the record as testimony to the racism of Zimmerman supporters.

I'd like to know how that happened, because according to the story at the video link, at one point she was clearly on the side of the street with the Trayvon Martin supporters. Is that where James Nielson of AP took the picture? Did he know that wasn't really a Zimmerman supporter and did he provide that context when he submitted the photo to his editor? 

Who was the editor and was that image altered in any substantial way? Was important context cut before it was sent out over the AP wire to other news organizations?

I wonder how many thousands or even millions of people have seen or will see that picture as a Zimmerman supporter standing unmolested amongst other Zimmerman supporters and therefore see that as a true representation of the racism of all Zimmerman supporters. How many people have been or will be misled into anger and hatred and have their hearts hardened by that photo?

I wonder if Renee Vaughan, the name of the woman with the sign apparently, is proud of that.

I wonder if James Nielsen is proud of that.

I wonder if AP President Gary Pruitt and his staff of managers and editors are proud of that. 

I wonder if Philip Caulfield and the publishers and editors at the NY Daily News and the Mail Online are proud of that.

I wonder if any of them actually give a shit.

Update: As of 12:45 CDT the New York Daily News has memory-holed the photo without a correction notice, but left the following copy in the story:

One woman in the Zimmerman group held a sign that said, "We're racist & proud."

Austin resident Renee Vaughan echoed the sign’s ugly sentiments by yelling, "We're racist. We're proud. We're better because we're white," at the Martin group as they passed, according to the Chronicle.

At this point it is hard to escape the conclusion that Philip Caulfield and all his editors are a bunch of giant assholes who are out to deliberately deceive their readers.

Why Gun Control Is Failing

It's been two weeks now since various gun control measures went down in flames in the US Senate, prompting President Obama to don his petulance pants and lecture us from the Rose Garden. In that time I've read quite a few pieces by Democrats seeking to explain, in one way or another, how gun control could fail in the wake of the Newtown mass shooting. Some blame the NRA, of course. Some blame Republicans, of course. Some even blame Obama, but not for the reasons I'm going to cite. Pretty much all are long on self-pity and short on self-examination, so here are my criticisms of the pro-gun control side, because they are every bit to blame, if not more, than the NRA and Republicans.(This is a long one, so I'll put most of it below the fold)

Obama's poor leadership

When Obama outsourced the issue to Joe Biden, the probability for meaningful action took an immediate and negative hit. At that moment Obama signalled that it was really going to be business as usual, in other words it was going to be "inside the beltway politics." In the short term that was probably smart politics for Obama personally, but it was also another missed opportunity for him to match the greatness of his office.

He could have taken the role of an honest broker between the two sides and step by step publicly guided the conversation toward what was possible. That would have meant swallowing his own personal preferences for the moment and acting as President of all of these United States to bring both sides together. I suppose many in both party establishments would consider that idea naive, but my gut tells me the less ideological on both sides and independents would have eaten it up. Besides, isn't that the Hope and Change president we've been promised twice now?(I know, I know, that was always phony, but I couldn't resist) 

Biden's Poor Leadership

Many projects fail before they even begin because the problem and/or the scope of the solution are not properly defined from the start. I've seen it countless times over the years to the point where I can smell a looming clusterf*ck from a mile away. As I noted here and here, the problems of overall gun violence and mass killing are related but also distinct, and they have related but also distinct solution sets.

A tightly focused effort on Biden's part might have had a chance, but instead we got what was basically a free for all of gun control wish list items, regardless of how effective they would be in preventing the next mass shooting or daily gun violence on the streets.

To be fair to Biden, the Washington Post back in January noted how Obama had tied his hands somewhat from the start. Still, he wasn't just Obama's puppet on this issue. He fully embraced Obama's strategy of foregone conclusions, emotion over reason, and divisiveness through demonization. That worked in the last general election with the media covering their backs, but as shown in the results two weeks ago, it's a disastrous way to try to govern.

Truth, Lies, And Reality

Last week brought not only the Republican convention, but a barrage of charges and counter-charges of lying and deceit. Even the fact-checkers managed to get fact-checked and found wanting by people who were, of course, themselves fact-checked. Our political discourse has become one of those pictures with a reflection of the picture which has another reflection and on and on and on. Will the last fact-checker please turn off the lights.

This week is certain to see the anger and the vitriol rise to a fever pitch as more charges and counter-charges come from the Democrat's turn. In fact, while it's possible that the fever will get so hot that it will burn itself out, I think it most likely will burn through the election and well beyond, continuing to poison our politics unless something changes, and I don't see anything or anyone coming along that can make that change happen.

In a way it doesn't matter in the short-term, at least as far as I'm concerned. Unless they catch Romney in bed with the proverbial "dead girl or live boy" he's going to get my vote. There's no sense in getting caught up in the "You're a liar!"/"No, you're a liar!" game. It's too hard on my blood pressure and if I'm going to stroke out over something, I don't want it to be politics.

We do seem to be having a growing problem with truth in this country though, and therefore our shared reality, which seems to be increasingly fractured. After reading several related and interesting posts this weekend, I want to do a few more posts on it, so I'm going to create a new category: Truth, Lies, and Reality. The first post is regarding a video clip I saw on Saturday and some statements by Washington Post columnist Colby King.