...the smoothest transition in the history of transitions.
Htom and I had this exchange in the comments on the President Obama @ work post.
htom: "I think we're going to see a lot of "unintended consequences" from this administration. Real ones, not just claims of those. As life-time benefit limits fall, and payouts for vets rise, this will force more and more vets into the VA system for all of their health care, causing "empty beds" in the private sector, the closing of more private facilities, and more overloads and expansion in the VA system. Perhaps that's the plan. Looking at the list of unforced errors they've piled up in the last two months, there may not even be a plan, which is going to make everything worse. "
The Armorer: "Looking at the list of unforced errors they've piled up in the last two months, there may not even be a plan, which is going to make everything worse. That would be my take on it.
They're flailing.
Just another data point for the thesis that Senators who've never held an executive position of any consequence usually suck at... administration. I freely admit, I prefer thus far, my Presidents to come from the ranks of the Governors and similar people. Which includes Clinton. For the record, I think a Hillary Clinton administration would probably have been a flailex too, seeing as how it would likely contain a lot of the same people [as the current administration]. I'm not sure McCain would have been hugely better, but his talent pool might have been better."
Unrelated piece of trivia - flail is only an ell away from fail.
Heh. Look at the *shock*surprise*anger* at the AIG bonuses. What, no one *read* the law they passed and the President signed? The one that *protected* the bonuses? And now they're all surprised and angry about it? So, you're either baldfaced liars... or incompetents. Or, worse, both.
Then there's the dust-up over the VA proposal to bill health insurance policies.
Then there's the stuff yesterday over the FFDO Program, which Dusty wrote about today.
Then there's the run-amok civil servants who caused "Surplusgate..." Which could either be overzealous public servants trying to do what they think the new boss would want, or a rogue civil servant doing what they want, or, a civil servant reading a regulation for the first time and reads it differently from the way it's been read before (anyone who watches the ATFE will understand that one) or an actual call from someone in a new policy position making policy, and finding out that what seems simple (tweaking a policy to fit a new viewpoint) isn't so simple.
In my 30 years or so of gadding about the Federal Government in and out of it, all of those scenarios are possible and plausible.
To recap: Two days ago The Shootist broke the story about an admin change in property disposal rules that would require that expended ammunition cartridges be demilled to an unserviceable standard, vice just sold as-is, and cancelled existing contracts for same.
Really? That pricked up a lot of ears because it basically meant several popular calibers of ammo were about to get really expensive. The war and rising materials cost for lead, antimony, copper, tin, etc in addition to additional regulatory burdens on the components of explosives (which also affect propellant powders) have caused a steady rise in ammunition prices as well as shortages due to manufacturing capacity being taken up by war work - so anything that serves to further reduce component supply gets the attention of a lot of shooters pretty fast.
Add to that the new Administration, with it's open call for renewing the ban on Cosmetically-Ugly-Guns-With-Ergonomic-Features. Plus, those of us who pay attention to gun issues predicted last summer that the anti-gunners, having lost the Heller case, would go after ammunition short-term while retooling for another shot at getting to the guns, and you had a perfect storm about that news.
I had a post about it yesterday that got eaten by the gremlins. I'm just as glad it did, now. Because the pitchfork brigades worked their Toquevillian magic - Cannoneer #4 tweeted me last night about this bit from the message boards at AR15.com
Rest assured, this wouldn't have happened this fast if we hadn't learned how to build up a head of steam using the Internet.
"Surplusgate" is probably just civil servants being civil servants. But when you throw it all together with the other stuff, this administration seems to be pretty lightweight, and blows with the winds. Which is not what we need right now, ya know what I mean? One hopes they'll hit their stride - well, actually on a lot of stuff I hope they don't *have* a stride - but, I guess right now I'll assume they're having these problems because they're spending all that time with their CPAs making sure that this year, at least, they pay their taxes.
Jason? Is that enough to get you to show up? 8^ )
Htom and I had this exchange in the comments on the President Obama @ work post.
htom: "I think we're going to see a lot of "unintended consequences" from this administration. Real ones, not just claims of those. As life-time benefit limits fall, and payouts for vets rise, this will force more and more vets into the VA system for all of their health care, causing "empty beds" in the private sector, the closing of more private facilities, and more overloads and expansion in the VA system. Perhaps that's the plan. Looking at the list of unforced errors they've piled up in the last two months, there may not even be a plan, which is going to make everything worse. "
The Armorer: "Looking at the list of unforced errors they've piled up in the last two months, there may not even be a plan, which is going to make everything worse. That would be my take on it.
They're flailing.
Just another data point for the thesis that Senators who've never held an executive position of any consequence usually suck at... administration. I freely admit, I prefer thus far, my Presidents to come from the ranks of the Governors and similar people. Which includes Clinton. For the record, I think a Hillary Clinton administration would probably have been a flailex too, seeing as how it would likely contain a lot of the same people [as the current administration]. I'm not sure McCain would have been hugely better, but his talent pool might have been better."
Unrelated piece of trivia - flail is only an ell away from fail.
Heh. Look at the *shock*surprise*anger* at the AIG bonuses. What, no one *read* the law they passed and the President signed? The one that *protected* the bonuses? And now they're all surprised and angry about it? So, you're either baldfaced liars... or incompetents. Or, worse, both.
Then there's the dust-up over the VA proposal to bill health insurance policies.
Then there's the stuff yesterday over the FFDO Program, which Dusty wrote about today.
Then there's the run-amok civil servants who caused "Surplusgate..." Which could either be overzealous public servants trying to do what they think the new boss would want, or a rogue civil servant doing what they want, or, a civil servant reading a regulation for the first time and reads it differently from the way it's been read before (anyone who watches the ATFE will understand that one) or an actual call from someone in a new policy position making policy, and finding out that what seems simple (tweaking a policy to fit a new viewpoint) isn't so simple.
In my 30 years or so of gadding about the Federal Government in and out of it, all of those scenarios are possible and plausible.
To recap: Two days ago The Shootist broke the story about an admin change in property disposal rules that would require that expended ammunition cartridges be demilled to an unserviceable standard, vice just sold as-is, and cancelled existing contracts for same.
Really? That pricked up a lot of ears because it basically meant several popular calibers of ammo were about to get really expensive. The war and rising materials cost for lead, antimony, copper, tin, etc in addition to additional regulatory burdens on the components of explosives (which also affect propellant powders) have caused a steady rise in ammunition prices as well as shortages due to manufacturing capacity being taken up by war work - so anything that serves to further reduce component supply gets the attention of a lot of shooters pretty fast.
Add to that the new Administration, with it's open call for renewing the ban on Cosmetically-Ugly-Guns-With-Ergonomic-Features. Plus, those of us who pay attention to gun issues predicted last summer that the anti-gunners, having lost the Heller case, would go after ammunition short-term while retooling for another shot at getting to the guns, and you had a perfect storm about that news.
I had a post about it yesterday that got eaten by the gremlins. I'm just as glad it did, now. Because the pitchfork brigades worked their Toquevillian magic - Cannoneer #4 tweeted me last night about this bit from the message boards at AR15.com
Dear MSSA Friends,
I just received a phone call from the office of U.S. Senator Tester of Montana to inform me that at 5:15 (EST) today a letter cosigned by Senator Tester (D-MT) and Senator Baucus (D-MT) was faxed to the Department of Defense asking DoD to reverse its new policy requiring destruction of fired military cartridge brass. At 5:30, I am told, Tester's office received a fax back from DoD saying that the brass destruction policy IS reversed.
Others report to me that they are already seeing evidence of this on the Websites of entities that liquidate surplus DoD commodities.
Our thanks go out to Senator Tester and Senator Baucus, and their staff, for getting on this problem promptly and making the reversal happen
Staff for Tester and Baucus promise they will get me the documentation for this reversal tomorrow morning. I'll forward that when I get it.
Best wishes,
Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com
Rest assured, this wouldn't have happened this fast if we hadn't learned how to build up a head of steam using the Internet.
"Surplusgate" is probably just civil servants being civil servants. But when you throw it all together with the other stuff, this administration seems to be pretty lightweight, and blows with the winds. Which is not what we need right now, ya know what I mean? One hopes they'll hit their stride - well, actually on a lot of stuff I hope they don't *have* a stride - but, I guess right now I'll assume they're having these problems because they're spending all that time with their CPAs making sure that this year, at least, they pay their taxes.
Jason? Is that enough to get you to show up? 8^ )
As Instapundit says, "The country’s in the very best of hands."
The bailout protection of contracts (and therefore contractual bonuses) that were in places before this year was necessary. It would be a horrible slippery slope to have the govt. abrogating business contracts in general.
What I really find distasteful is that the same a$$hats in Congress who abuse their transportation privileges get to yell at execs flying in corporate jets, and that these same overpaid and over-benefited jerks are now squalling about corporate bonuses. It spells of sheer envy to me.
As the sign at a Tea Party said recently:
You can't fix stupid.
But you can fire them and vote them out.
And now we're going to have the Comic-in-Chief tonight? What is this, a Marx Brothers comedy?
They can't take the heat. The eResistance must remain vigiliant, and ever ready to swarm like angry fire ants bringing hellfire and scunnion upon the unindicted co-conspirators who fancy themselves our rulers.
Including incompetence at being liars.
Buuuut, the MSM has been doing a good job at painting over that particular defect...
We see our economic system disintegrating, and confidence in our political system eroding ... largely due to their efforts and their propaganda in the news media.
Who stands to gain the most from these "cirises", and who publicly announces that they're going to take full advantage of them to advance their agenda?
And we think it's all a big coincidence? LOL
The use of circuses to deflect attention away from crises. See, Rome, fall of.
"And, frankly, suicide would appear to be the only way to get these recidivists out of office,"
Satire from Doug Ross.
In cases like these, I always remember Napolean's maxim: "Never ascribe to malice that which may be ascribed to stupidity.'
I'm beginning to suspect the flailing is due to Barry's Chicago machine background; he's used to the "I won, so I get to pass out the goodies, what's for lunch?" approach. Once you control the machine, all you do is pass out orders. Now that he's got hold of the Federal government, he is -for the first time- encountering voters and representatives who push back when their interests are slighted. And, no, I don't mean just special interest groups; just concerned citizens of all stripes.
This seems -in both instances- to derive from a sense of impotence and vulnerability.
Sigh.
I had hoped we were gonna be better'n that.
Please note that our esteemed host agrees with me on this. If that doesn't persuade you, then may I point out that a healthy proportion of the "class of 2006" Democrats come from relatively conservative/independent districts. When you consider the antics of people like Bob Taft, Denny Hastert, Ted Stevens, and Trent Lott, it's no surprise the GOP lost ground. The first corollary is that those same representatives will be more responsive to "fly-over" concerns than will the folks representing (say) Berkely or Boston.
I shall also cite liberals I know, or people who voted for liberals. One of my friends (in her late 20s) is a self-described Green and "yellow-dog" Democrat. She is a gay woman who is also a devout Roman Catholic. One of her more notable statements to me a couple years ago -when Dubya was expending his "political capital" trying to reform Social Security- was that Bush was trying to destroy (her word) Social Security. On the other hand, while opposing the war in Iraq as a distraction, she supports the war in Afghanistan. I like to needle her about things, including the way the MSM is soooo in the tank for Barry. That part she got, since she was a PUMA; but the irony escaped her once the general election started.
Actually, she's been less political the past couple years, after she had her daughter. Yes, she's gay, but she had a child. And, yes, she wants to get married, and raise a family. Yet most conservatives slur people like her as trying to "destroy the institution of marriage," and other cultural crimes.
And that's the whole point. There's a huge variety of people out there who either become alienated from the conservative movement, or refuse to seriously deal with said movement, exactly because conservatives view them as mindless enemy drones in the same way fdcol63 did with this passage:
Sure, my friend won't agree with the whole cloth of conservative thought. On the other hand, she will (most likely) completely discount even the consideration of listening to her opponents when they insist on demonizing their opposite numbers in that way.
People like her would be a lot more inclined to meet conservatives half-way, if they would return the favor. Forget, for a minute, the DC idiots like Pelosi, Reid, and company. Dig deeper and listen to people like Evan Bayh have to say, or even John's local Represtentative. Listen to our new Ohio Governor, Ted Strickland; a fairly reliable gun-rights supporter. Sure, he's no Barry Goldwater, but he's no Harry Reid, either.
My point is that there is a wide variety of Democrats out there, and that you can make common cause with many of them.
At least, you can if you don't insist on seeing all of them as Amerikka-hating Marxists...
Casey, I didn't mean to imply that I believed that ALL Democrats in America fall into this category. But I definitely DO believe that the majority of today's leadership of the Democratic Party are Marxist-Socialists at their core, and I do believe that a lot of them want a much different America than we are and have been, and are advancing their agenda to do just that .... which will, if successful, destroy the America that we have been and which will ultimately end the system of nation-states so that a supra-national global government will be established out of the chaos that will ensue.
I unabashedly align myself on the political right, but I firmly believe that the left is necessary to keep the political pendulum fixed around the center. This bipolar system between the 2 major parties is what has kept America from experiencing the extremes and civil unrest that so may other countries in the world have experienced, and I think it's a testament to the wisdom of the Founders and their very thoughtful deliberations in the creation of the US Constitution. I am always amazed at the depth of their intellect in the Federalist Papers and the anti-Federalist responses, and I marvel at the fact that we still confront the same issues today. These issues are, indeed, at the root of the differences between the parties ..... Republicans vs Democrats.
As one of those 'right wing' Democrats, thank you, Casey, for your staunch defense. I come from a place and time when 'pro-labor, pro-military, blue collar Democrat' was your basic standard Democrat. I hate the depths to which my party has fallen. While I'm pro-choice and pro civil marriages for gays, I'm also a strong 2nd amendment supporter and a fiscal conservative. I don't really feel like i HAVE a political party any more; I am increasingly alienated from both.
Oddly enough, the Founding Fathers either didn't anticipate distinct parties, or viewed them as offspring of selfish special interests. To use modern terms, they would have seen our modern system as two sets of super-lobbyist groups fighting for influence and favor. Go back and re-examine the comments of leaders such as Washington about the "baneful effect of parties."
Still, I agree that a binary party system is very useful. Churchill, in his History of the English Speaking Peoples spent a fair amount of time discussing just how useful a party (out of power) could prove in opposition while consistently espousing an alternate line of action. I'll take a moment to point out here that Churchill's History should be required reading in every Civics course in this country. ;) The British system of binary parties had not yet (at the time of the American Revolution) evolved to the point where this utility was self-evident, so it is not surprising that our leaders missed the significance. One may even say that said revolution introduced a great reform in British politics.
As for party names, a small snark; the original name for the then-contemporary Democratic Party was (gasp!) the Republican Party. That is to say, the party of Jefferson and Jackson. They later split at the end of the Era of Good Feelings into the National Republicans (most of whom eventually migrated to the Whigs, then new Lincoln/Republicans), and the Democratic Republicans, who morphed into the modern Democratic Party.
The modern progressive wing of the Democratic Party took shape in the midwest, under leaders such as Bryant, then (Easterner) Wilson. Please note that even Teddy evolved into a distinct near-socialist/populist in his later years. His "Square Deal" evolved into cousin FDR's "New Deal," which resulted in Truman's "Fair Deal."
But I'm wandering far afield of the original thread... ;)
Karla, I'm glad to find a kindred spirit, although I'm an independent myself! There are a lot of "pro-small-business," "pro-military," "pro-responsibility" Republicans (see, no mention of abortion, gays, or Mexicans! {/snerk}) out there, coming at you to the same place, but from a different direction. They, too, feel that they don't have a political party any more. Dubya's "Compassionate Conservativism" turned out to be "Big Budget Conservatism, or (as I call it) "LBJ lite." Feh.
I think that all three of us have a respectably large degree of common ground. One of the main issues I see is that, sometimes (sorry fdcol!) what we -as groups- say in public tends to get twisted or exaggerated to the extent that areas of otherwise common ground tends to be ignored.
...And at this point I really do feel obligated to highlight John's quip about the "Ron White Fusilers." You really can't fix stupid.
But... You can outvote them...