Guest Post: Bunner's 2 cents

The following doesn't vary much from the way I feel about our slide into national insolvency. So rather than write a post myself, here y'go, y'all:

Money started out as a convenient form of exchange. It's become an adversarial construct, a tin deity and the scoreboard for our existence. We can pretend it's still working for us, but it's become a lever that - as the length and stiffness of that lever expands for the haves - is used to pry us from what little hard wealth we have. 14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt notes is a stupid thing to trade anything for.

You can harrumph and wave your made in China flag and wait for Michelle Bachmann to lead you to the promised land of loonies and pray to Bill O'Reilly and keep crushing those aluminum cans but the pooch has been hosed and we're holding the bag for these junk notes.

We need a concise game plan that includes a lot of hard and fast changes to how we allow businesses to function, who gets to do what and to whom and for how long or the hard and fast change will come via a molotov cocktail when there's no more malarkey to sell and the curtain is pulled back from the man in the booth. This - shit - isn't - working - anymore. Pretending it is has put us in this sack.

This is cut point for America, y'all. With or without me or you and recess is over. So if anybody has some useful ideas that don't include guillotines or mathematically gymnastic bar graphs that add up to "shut up and don't pester the wealthy", I'm all ears. Cause I don't want to see riots in the streets, either. But this shit is way past band aids and if we don't waylay the getaway car, we're gonna be left with ashes and whatever we can grow in that corner lot where those small shops used to be. I got nothing against wealth. How you got it and what you do with it matters, not the wealth itself. I got a huge problem with pirates and thugs. Don't you? .02 USD.

- by that Internet entity known as "Bunner."

Incentives, who needs 'em?

As the self-destructive spiral masterminded by our elected representatives continues, now the Pentagon, in a masterful display of military intelligence, wants to move the military pension system to a defined-contribution plan.

Like certain other professions, such as teaching, one of the major incentives has always been a good, secure defined-benefit pension system. Now it is proposed to sweep the military pension system into the great dustbin of history to save $250 billion over 20 years. And in 20 years, what will our military look like in consequence? I suspect that the only thing that is holding up enlistment rates at this point is the recession that our leadership doesn't even like to mention.....and it may be that only if our economic malaise continues will sufficient numbers of high-quality recruits enter our Armed Forces.

And- are we to wait 20 years to see what the impact of all those savings have been on our national defense? I'd rather not.

Signs of the times....

The House of Representatives applauding themselves for their tardy actions in dealing with the growing economic mare's nest, a situation that they themselves are as responsible as any for helping to worsen. I would wish that they reap the full consequences of their corruption, stupidity and incompetence, except for the fact that those consequences will be visited on the rest of us with at least as much force.

If I were more generous....

I might believe that the events of the past week have nothing to do with a PR campaign to establish the current administration's "tough on terrorism" bona fides. I might. Since I'm in a credulous mood today, even with the primaries roughly 9 months away, surely it's only a coincidence.

It's not information

We are told, and by no less an -authority- than CNN, about "lessons learned" from the Japanese earthquake / tsunami. The aftershocks continue, the cleanup has only just begun and relief efforts started, it's obvious that thousands more dead will be discovered, and we're already being lectured to by the media about "lessons."

It's only clear that it's impossible to learn anything about an event of this magnitude at this stage. This time next year, maybe. Some things that are clear:

1. As with hurricane Katrina in 2005, a natural event of sufficient magnitude is not controllable by mankind, not now, and not in any foreseeable future, and may only be marginally ameliorated by preventive measures.

2. A hard look needs to be taken at where people live, in countries that pretend to have the security of their citizens in mind. Sweeping legislation should perhaps be instituted to prevent future settlement in flood plains, along earthquake faults, on the slopes of volcanoes, and areas of coast likely to be affected by hurricanes or tsunamis. And maybe the building of ramshackle trailer parks in tornado alley.

There is little perspective possible, given our present means of "informing" ourselves, and at a time when we most need it.

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it."

- Kay to Jay, MIB

Poetry Corner, 2011

The flight of the curiales from Wisconsin and Indiana to the welcoming arms of Illinois is such transparent, temporizing, time-wasting nonsense that a large hole should be dug for all the legislators - ALL- from both states, plus the governors. Then they should all -ALL- do the decent thing. If they can persuade the same officials in Illinois to join them, I'm sure the hole can be enlarged to fit.

To do what has to be done, these cowards, of every political persuasion, are terrified of appearing the bad guy and risking their pathetic careers. So the Donks flee the state, ostensibly to block legislation, while attempting to make the Trunks look bad and do a Pontius Pilate for their constituencies. The Trunks threaten draconian executive action to terminate thousands of state employees, while attempting to make the Donks look bad and do a Pontius Pilate for their constituencies.

As I have the habit of doing, I'll let others speak for me:

"There are three principles in this Constitution, and they are very precious. They are compromise, compromise, and compromise."

-James Madison, Father of the U.S. Constitution

On a more global level, we resort to the poets:

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."

- William Butler Yeats, The Second Coming

"And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night."

- Matthew Arnold, Dover Beach

"There are four types of homicide: felonious, accidental, justifiable, and praiseworthy."

- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary

First Nanny

Now, the new, improved First Lady has suddenly emerged as full-blown First Nanny in "Partnering with" -never say "scolding"- the restaurant industry to cut down on the portions it serves. This is typical of the top-down unrealistic idealism that pervades certain circles of our society, and the audiences it garners, who believe that celebrity somehow equals authority. There' s not the slightest reason to believe that Michelle Obama is any better informed on this issue than the next person, and yet she receives instant credibility from the media.

In fact, there are many very good reasons why this proposal is going to fail. Restaurants serve large portions of food in this country because food is a relatively cheap part of overhead, and the portions justify the amount the restaurants must charge. Many people who don't want large portions simply get a doggie box and take what they don't eat as leftovers, which helps with their perceived value of the meal. And people who are still hungry will probably just eat more, regardless of the portions being served.

And, last, the timing of such an initiative is extremely poor. The country is in a recession, which has cut into restaurant revenues, and the proposal is to do something that may cut into them even more. Push this enough, and it could precipitate the ultimate disaster.....people might actually learn to cook for themselves.

Taking the Pulse of the Patient

As far as the inability of the COOTWH* to govern, this Newsweek article by Mickey Kaus makes some excellent points. An appeal to common sense, and that leadership must actually involve some.......leading.

*Current Occupant Of The White House

Rallies, then & now

"Do you believe, as do the many, that certain young men are corrupted by sophists, and that there are certain sophists who in a private capacity corrupt to an extent worth mentioning? Isn't it rather the very men who say this who are the biggest sophists, who educate most perfectly and who turn out young and old, men and women, just the way they want them to be?"

"But when do they do that?" he asked.

"When," I said, "many gathered together sit down in assemblies, courts, theaters, army camps, or any other common meeting of a multitude, and, with a great deal of uproar, blame some of the things said or done, and praise others, both in excess, shouting and clapping, and, besides, the rocks and the very place surrounding them echo and redouble the uproar of blame and praise. Now in such circumstances, as the saying goes, what do you suppose is the state of the young man's heart? Or what kind of private education will hold out for him and not be swept away by such blame and praise and go, borne by the flood, wherever it tends so that he'll say the same things are noble and base as they do, practice what they practice, and be such as they are?"

(Republic, 491e - 492b), translated by Allan Bloom

Is American information dead?

President Obama held a "town hall meeting" yesterday. While not inquiring as to how many people find the name ludicrous, I would be interested to know the percentage of people who believe that any -any- such things are not as staged and scripted as a movie. Does anyone believe that some 30 year old law graduate seriously and earnestly asked the President "Is the American dream dead?"

This is all quite preposterous, but the most difficult thing for me to believe is that a graduate of Princeton and some equally prestigious sounding law school (Indiana, I believe) would be enough of a dupe to participate in such a charade. Since I can't believe someone of his putative intelligence would do such a thing, I can only assume that he was performing from a memorized script.

Watching these things is more a waste of time than staring at the wall; the latter is more likely to produce thought.

A Fable for our Time

I can't really call this fantasy, because it isn't. Except for the last part (which apparently DID happen).

An obscure fanatic from a small town makes wild assertions and threatens to burn books.

His rhetoric is taken up by the news media and given national and international coverage.

He is given lavish attention by important government officials and agencies, thereby raising him from obscurity to notoriety overnight.

Attention is so acute that incipient hysteria and paranoia spill over and result in the chief executive of a nation of millions of people making a personal appeal to this individual.

A member of a major news organization wonders whether or not the media handling of the whole affair "-might have been reckless."

D'ya think?

Bibliography: See Adolf Hitler, rise of National Socialism, Beer Cellar Putsch, Hitler treason trial, etc., etc. You may end with the burning of the Reichstag if you wish....

At my limit

I'll tell you one thing blogs are good for- solipsistic rants, that's what! (Cue laugh track)

I received a telephone call last night from a young lady conducting a survey. The following is my best attempt to reconstruct the sense, if not the word-for-word, of this amazing experience.

She: "We're looking for people's opinions of Illinois politicians in the upcoming elections."

Me: "Go ahead."

She: "First, I'll read a list of names, and you tell me whether you feel positive, somewhat positive (insert remainder of array of choices to ....'negative')."

Me: "These are all politicians?"

She: "Yes."

Me: "Put me down for all negative."

She: "I can't do that; I have to ask each one separately."

Me: "OK"

She reads list of names, I respond

She: "Do you intend to vote in November?"

Me: "Absolutely."

She reads lists of candidates, I tell who I'd vote for.

She: "Now, I want to read two statements about Boody Jar Moblinga (name of well-known Illinois political hack changed to protect the guilty, referred to hereinafter as 'BJM'), and you tell me which one you agree with the most."

Me: "Read away."

She: "First, do you agree that BJM is wonderful, can walk across Lake Michigan on her bare feet, shines at night with her own golden aura, and deserves to be escorted to Springfield by a thousand trumpeting cherubim and a full twelve dozen winged mantics?"

"OR"

"Do you agree that BJM is a domestic terrorist who seeks to overthrow the Constitution of the United States, that the very grass and flowers die wherever she walks, that birds fall dead from trees wherever her shadow is cast, and that she is numbered among the legions of Satan?"

[The previous questions may have been somewhat different, but for purposes of this illustration, you may regard them as valid]

Me: "I can't believe you've attempted to insult my intelligence with those questions. This interview is over."

(I hang up)

This episode requires no explication or analysis; it has served to convince me that we are living in a political comic strip...a very dark, dark comic strip.

Put another way.....

"One should never forbid what one lacks the power to prevent. "

-Napoleon Bonaparte

.....or, never pass a law that cannot be enforced or for which the political will is lacking. We fall deeper and deeper into this chasm.

Surviving Brilliance

I was regaled this morning by someone on a cable news channel informing me of the brilliance of the present nominee for SCOTUS . Anyone who's a candidate for any government position above Toilet Brush Inventory Supervisor seems to automatically merit the title of "brilliant" these days. Not sure we'll survive too many more of those....

Well, that's reassuring

In his introductory remarks to his SCOTUS nomination today , the COOTWH stated that she represents what we need, less of the dry dead old law on paper, and more concern for people in their everyday lives. I thought I already had somebody like that......my Representative.

I cannot for a moment believe that a law professor / factotum, sans judicial experience, is even going to be able to be concerned about the everyday lives of people, let alone conceive that that is her job. The Constitution gives broad legislative powers to Congress, and the 435 districts into which the House of Representatives is divided is crafted and specifically intended to see to my "needs."

Yet another example of rhetoric that is either simply BAD, or which has intentions which are far more than questionable, given that we are presently visited with far, far too much legislation by judicial fiat.

A little bit louder and a little bit worse...

I was treated to another of those glimpses of the COOTWH* yesterday, which, as usual these days, comes about while I'm working out at the gym. While I listen to music on the iPod, I watch one, or several of the large TVs, and in this case was able to see the dialog on the streamer below. Later, I was treated to the audio on the radio while driving home.

Without dialogue, the scene was something right out of Ronald Reagan, except that Mr. Obama was just in shirt & tie. He and the interlocutor (in a polo shirt) were walking down a path among some trees, very folksy, nice and casual. The attempt at simulating a casual conversation between two people was reinforced by the almost apologetic tone of the reporter and the low-key responses of Obama. Very nice until I recalled much of what bemused us when we were first treated to this type of interview when Ronnie came into office, and before it became obvious that the whole thing was completely staged and scripted.

The content was predictable in its absence. Mr. Obama: "We should be able to disagree without being disagreeable." Ignoring the hypocritical and mendacious things that are continually said any time Obama's opinions and policies are questioned, this was ostensibly a serious assertion, made over the debate surrounding the Health Care Bill. The only problem is that the statement ignores human nature. We have had disagreeable things said of presidents since John Adams (this would be 1796), such tone an inevitable consequence of the contentiousness built in to human nature. Surely Mr. Obama cannot be so naive as to believe he will be exempt. Conclusion: he is being deliberately disingenuous.

Another random statement (in paraphrase): "All the evidence indicates Iran is interested in developing nuclear weapons." This enables Mr. Obama to employ a double whammy in "avoidance grammar." He is now in a position to employ "I was misled" and "blame the evidence," as his predecessor did with Iraq, and to doubly deny that he said Iran was developing nuclear weapons, since he used the word "interested." As well for me to say "I'm interested in whether or not there are leprechauns in the bottom of my garden." I have thereby avoided asserting that there might actually be leprechauns out there, and having people question my grasp of reality.

Every time I see or hear anything about government or politics, it merely reinforces my determination to avoid it until the next time I'm accidentally exposed to it. Sort of like the flu.

*Current Occupant Of The White House

Notes on Tragedy

Contrary to the common use of the term in our degraded times, where every stubbed toe is a "tragedy," the essence of tragedy lies in its inevitability. It may be that the inherent tragedy in representative government is that the representatives must lie repeatedly to their constituencies, making promises they cannot keep in order to be elected and re-elected.

The real damage is that the false promises comprise a secular Slough of Despond, in which any common regard for society is lost.......

"He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world's believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions."

- Thomas Jefferson

An Honest Politician?

Setting aside my great reluctance to post the name of a politician, hats off to Senator Evan Bayh for jumping ship. I don't even know which party he's affiliated with, but he knows the system is broken.

Can politicians who just quit (Bayh had never been defeated in an election, and was considered the choice for re-election) force reform? In my opinion, no, because it's the career-obsessed that remain who will have to vote it in. Stalemate.

Define "Prescient"

Well, this is one definition, written in 1978. Nineteen seventy-eight:

Lipidleggin' by Paul F. Wilson

And here's another, probably better known:

Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut

This is where we're going, but it's hard to say exactly why. Since we have a representative government, I am forced to assume that in some fashion we've actually chosen to live out this nightmare, but that doesn't mean I understand it.

This Country is Going Nuts

This is a compulsory blog, and I'll cut right to the chase: The United States of America is developing some sort of mass psychosis, which was moved into high gear by the events of 9/11, and manifests itself every time there is some -perceived- security incident.

It is very, very clear in the events surrounding the recent "airliner en route to Hawaii turns back" story.

Either there is something in this story that has not been reported, or we are going batshit as a nation.

"Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."

- Friederich Nietzsche