“That one can convince one’s opponents with printed reasons, I have not believed since the year 1764. It is not for that purpose that I have taken up my pen, but rather merely to annoy them, and to give strength and courage to those on our side, and to make it known to the others that they have not convinced us.”
G.C. Lichtenberg (1742 – 1799), courtesy of 'Deogolwulf'
Yes indeed, this is a rare sight, an example of Apparatchika Nausea caught and dragged reluctantly into the daylight. Normally, of course, they can only be glimpsed lurking in the darker corners of government offices. This particular specimen, Dissimulator Maximus - or, lying liar, to you or me - is Ms. Lois Lerner, late of the Internal Revenue Service who spent the last couple of years acting like the KGB as she set about using the massive powers of the IRS to attack, pressure and scare political opponents of the un-Democrat party and their sainted president.
Yesterday, in a riveting news sequence on Fox News (yes, it's true, I don't have much of a social life!) she sat, lips clamped shut, before a Congressional committee who wanted to know, in effect, why, as she had known of this totalitarian behaviour for a year or more and had been inundated with questions from worried Congressmen, had she failed to do her sworn duty and tell them? She responded in exactly the same way as sundry other other 'rats' have done through American history - she pleaded the Fifth. Except, of course, being a bureaucratic rat she wasn't too bright and instead of just clamming up and pleading the Fifth she insisted on prefacing it with a sanctimonious statement which various legal experts said later had rendered her plea null and void. I think we will be seeing more, much more, of Ms. Lerner but the next photo I want to see of her is the one where she's holding a board with numbers on it in front of her chest as she stares grim-faced into a police camera. Faced with that prospect, I wonder how loyal she will stay to the un-Democrat party?
(NB: I see a long list of Comments to which I should respond but, alas, it's Churchyard grass-cutting time and they say bad weather is on the way - so no change there then - and so I must seize the moment. Back later.)
The Oklahoma tornado has provided a brief, if tragic, pause in the slow but steady prising open of the government scandals in America. I have been, and still am, somewhat short of time and frankly I can barely keep up with the latest developments. Nor can I judge which, in the end, will prove to be the most damaging to the Democrat party because each time I choose one, something else crops up in another which takes your breath away!
My favourite is still the Internal Revenue Service imbroglio in which during the run-up to a presidential election they targeted Right-wing groups for special investigation, in other words, the sort of behaviour you would take for granted in some third world, Latin American dictatorship. The latest development is that a senior IRS executive due to be hauled up in front of a Congressional committee is likely to 'plead the Fifth' - how good will that look on prime-time TV?
The Benghazi affair may yet erupt some more if Roger L. Simon at PJ Media is correct in assuming that two new State Department whistleblowers are seeking legal advice before revealing amongst other things that the commander of the Africa-Command ordered units to move in support of the beleaguered consulate but his deputy was ordered to arrest him if the orders were not rescinded! Also, it is possible that part of what lay behind the attack was the fact that the State Department, not the CIA, had sold ground-to-air missiles to anti-Ghadaffi groups who had turned out to be linked to terrorists and part of the reason why Ambassador Stevens was there was to try and get them back. If that ain't dynamite, I don't know what is!
The number of reporters who have now discovered they were subjected to secret government surveillance is growing by the day. The latest is the Washington Fox News team including their respected reporter James Rosen.
And as a last dollop of cream on this 'mess of potage', it looks like the whistle-blower who broke the story of the disasterous 'Fast and Furious' operation was deliberately smeared by Federal authorities.
The liquid, smelly, brown stuff is slowly seeping under the locked door and the stench is unavoidable!
The other day, with my usual immaculate timing, I quoted Shakespeare's famous line from Sonnet 18:
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May
I definitely did not have this terrifying spectacle in mind:
Not least because this was just a tiny part of the result:
Sometimes, even for a loquatious fellow like me, there are no words, just a sort of mute, helpless sympathy which is made all the more frustrating because of its uselessness.
In which, during the course of the day, I will emit sundry burps and belches on anything that catches my beady eyes.
'Swivel-eyed plebs': By their unguarded, flabby-mouthed remarks shall you know them! And actually, I am rather pleased when it happens because suddenly in the fog and mists of PC-speak you catch a rare glimpse of the truth, or at least, the truth as perceived by the "swivel-eyed loons" who run this country of ours. In this latest case it was some Tory toff referring to the grass-roots suckers workers who volunteer their time and efforts to get these oily rascals up the greasy pole, however, it is an attitude of mind that stretches effortlessly to encompass all of us "plebs" who actually vote. Even as they grovel, they despise us. But you should not think that this attitude is confined to Tory toffs; the grandees of, say, the Trade Unions who swill their champagne in the best hotels and restaurants in the land think the same way about the real-life "plebs" who are daft enough to volunteer their union dues every week in order to keep the champagne flowing.
A poem: An old and dear friend gave me a rather beautiful book of war poems for my birthday last week. Very nicely produced in folio size, it contains war poems from all ages not just the usual and well-rehearsed WWI poems. Here is one that struck me as I was flicking through the book. It is reminiscent of Rupert Brooke's famous "That there's some corner of a foreign field/ That is forever England" but this was written by Thomas Hardy who lived and wrote in Dorset just a few miles south of here and the particular "corner of a foreign field" to which he refers is somewhere on the veldt in South Africa.
Drummer Hodge by Thomas Hardy
They throw in Drummer Hodge, to rest
Uncoffined – just as found:
His landmark is a kopje-crest
That breaks the veldt around;
And foreign constellations west
Each night above his mound.
Young Hodge the Drummer never knew –
Fresh from his Wessex home –
The meaning of the broad Karoo,
The Bush, the dusty loam,
And why uprose to nightly view
Strange stars amid the gloam.
Yet portion of that unknown plain
Will Hodge forever be;
His homely Northern breast and brain
Grow to some Southern tree,
And strange-eyed constellation reign
His stars eternally.
Oliver Kamm misses the point: A week ago on his Times blog Oliver Kamm (you can read it via my link or something called 'Tumblr', whatever that is!) took issue with Nigel Lawson over Lawson's urging that we leave the EU. In his usual concise and logical manner he laid out the economic advantages of us remaining in, although he admitted that we would instantly be £8bn a year better off for no longer having to pay into the EU budget. As an economist/banker by trade (before he fell into Grub Street) it is not too surprising that he sticks to economic arguments but 'the dismal science' is not the primary one in this particular and fractious matter. It's politics, innit? We, that is the royal 'we', in case you're wondering, simply do not wish to be ruled by European politicans and bureaucrats - it's as simple as that! I don't care if our standard of living drops 0.75% or whatever, or even if it goes up by the same amount, I just want the United Kingdom to run itself, make its own laws, make its own mistakes, make its own way - c' est tout! (See, bloody French get everywhere!)
Albert Finney's Big Fail: I have just had lunch in my kitchen and the 'Memsahib' was watching Murder on the Orient Express with Albert Finney playing Hercule Poirot. I nearly murdered Albert Finney! That has to have been his worst performance - ever. He shouted his lines from somewhere at the back of his throat because in his effort to look plump, which he was not at the time, he kept his chin buried in his neck in an effort to show a double chin. I have admired Finney for years, for just one example, his performance as Sir Donald Wolfit in The Dresser was superb. I suppose from time to time even the best get it wrong - the worst do so constantly as my past performances bear witness! Anyway, no-one does Poirot better than David Suchet.
The Bookaholic's Tale: I got lucky last week. I wrestled with my conscience, with which I had sworn never, not ever, to buy another book until I had reduced the pile of 'waiting-to-be-read' books - and lost! So in I went to Waterstones without even a pang of regret and ended up in front of the American History section which was surprisingly small. I am still waiting to come across a book on Lincoln which is biography and not hagiography. There was one on the shelves but reading the reviews my suspicions were aroused. However, when I replaced it I noticed The American Civil War written, I was re-assured to notice, by a Brit and a damned good historian at that - the late Sir John Keegan. It was half the size of Lincoln's biography so that helped, too! Anyway, a warning to my American e-pals, sometime in the next 10 years I will be an expert on your civil war about which, at the moment, I know next to nothing.
But my good fortune did not end there. Going to the Pay Desk I noticed a bookcase of books at knock-down sale prices. Amongst them was The Information by James Gleik. I have two of his books on my shelf, one on Richard Feynman and the other on chaos theory. Gleik is excellent at writing science for dummies without actually insulting our intelligence. The book had a tear in the cover and slight damage to the spine but was only reduced by £2. My second-hand car dealer persona took over and I asked the man at the desk if that was the best he could do given the damage. Not only did he sell it to me for a fiver, he noticed a very slight tear in the cover of the American Civil War book and knocked two quid off that, too! Well done, Waterstones!
I do realise that for most people politics takes up about 0.5% of their time and interest. I also do realise that for most Americans most of the 'news' they receive on politics is fliltered through a grovelling, lickspittle MSM who make the old-style Soviet Pravda look like a scandal sheet! Even so, ignorance is no excuse. If I, from 'over here', can pick up halfway through his first term that Obama is a dangerous, radical, Marxist socialist imbued with the teachings of Saul Alinsky then so should they, or at least, sufficient of them should have done so that he stood no chance of a second term. If that sounds like sour grapes because my forecast of a Romney victory failed to occur then I will admit, yes, I do feel very, very sour, not least because I put my faith in my belief that a sufficient number of Americans would see 'the bleedin' obvious'. They didn't!
Yesterday, the Congressional hearings into the IRS scandal has - I hope! - frightened the life out of enough of them to ensure that the half-term election next year results in a massacre for the 'un-Democrats'. Alas, my hopes are not high. Like electorates the world over they are likely to be seduced by even bigger, more glittering 'baubles, bangles and beads' which will be showered upon them by a government wishing to distract them from the creeping menace oozing through the myriad channels of power that spread like tentacles across, through and over the body-politic. The IRS is but the first example of Alinsky's theories being put into practice. Congress still has to look hard at the all the other Federal agencies whose corrupted and malignant, party-political power reaches right down to 'Main Street, USA'.
Here are two YouTube extracts from yesterday. The first is 'The Kraut' who, in his usual incisive way cuts to the heart of the matter. The other is an impassioned speech by a Congressman at yesterday's hearings into the IRS which is greeted, incredibly, by a sustained burst of impromptu applause:
First of all an apology. One of you lot, by which I mean, of course, you, dear readers, sent me a link to this story but, alas, life being somewhat hectic here at 'Chateaux Duff' these days, I simply cannot remember who it was so I cannot acknowledge you - but my thanks all the same.
So, here is the tale of the strangest battle ever fought in WWII. It involved on one side, a strong force of fanatical SS men still determined to fight on; and on the other side, a rag-bag mix of black and white American soldiery, a group of famous French political prisoners and, to add to the head-shaking incredulity of it all, a small force of ordinary Werhmacht soldiers. Yeeees, quite!
It took place in Austria in early May 1945 just after the fall of Berlin but at a time when fanatical SS troops were busy fighting to the last man! A certain Lt. John C. "Jack" Lee Jr. was despatched with a tank or two and a handful of black and white American soldiers to rescue high-ranking French political prisoners from Schloss Itter, a castle situated in the middle of a fluid area which neither side completely controlled. On his journey towards his objective he ran into a group of Werhmacht soldiers who promptly surrendered. He took them along but no sooner had they entered the castle when it was attacked by the SS. Everyone, French, German and American rapidly co-operated and a stout defence was put up, but with the pressure mounting and the ammo running low the situation was becoming desperate. Almost like a Hollywood movie, at the last minute the American cavalry, or at least, a rescue force, arrived and saved the day.
You can read the details of this remarkable battle here:
Whilst wearing surgical mask and gloves I did touch upon this subject a few weeks back and it is only with extreme reluctance that I return to it. I do so because my e-pal, Dom, sent me link which both turned my stomach and sent me into apoplectic rage. If you do not wish to suffer similar symptoms, read no more!
It concerns Dr.(?) Kermit Gosnell, a man who has run abortion 'factories' for decades and who has now been found guilty on three murder charges relating to the deliberate killing of babies minutes after they were born. In my earlier piece I remarked on the fact that none of the American MSM had bothered to use the court seats which had been reserved for them with the result that great swathes of the American public know nothing of this case - although now, thanks to the efforts of a minority of media outlets, the story is spreading. I also described the technique employed by Gosnell and his assistant butchers to despatch these babies after they had been born as they lay there on the table moving, crying and fighting for life. Gosnell or his assistants used scissors or a scalpel to snip the spinal cord at the back of the neck, in fact, they called it "snipping"!
Today, Dom sent me a link to a Catholic blog which in turn drew heavily on an article by James Taranto in the WSJ written last month. Taranto's article is quite long but is a meticulous summary of the current situation and the past history of abortion in the USA and I urge you all to read it. He ends with this example, rich in irony, of history coming back to bite you in the arse:
One of the strongest practical arguments in favor of the Roe regime is that abortion has been around since time immemorial and outlawing it only drove it underground, leading women to endanger themselves by seeking out the services of back-alley quacks. The Philadelphia grand jurors recounted a powerful example from their own city’s history.
It was called the Mother’s Day Massacre. A young Philadelphia doctor “offered to perform abortions on 15 poor women who were bused to his clinic from Chicago on Mother’s Day 1972, in their second trimester of pregnancy.” The women didn’t know that the doctor “planned to use an experimental device called a ‘super coil’ developed by a California man named Harvey Karman.”
A colleague of Karman’s Philadelphia collaborator described the contraption as “basically plastic razors that were formed into a ball. . . . They were coated into a gel, so that they would remain closed. These would be inserted into the woman’s uterus. And after several hours of body temperature, . . . the gel would melt and these . . . things would spring open, supposedly cutting up the fetus.”
Nine of the 15 Chicago women suffered serious complications. One of them needed a hysterectomy. The following year, the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade. It would be 37 more years before the Philadelphia doctor who carried out the Mother’s Day Massacre would go out of business. His name is Kermit Gosnell.
Back-alley abortions were indisputably a problem before 1973. That’s no defense of the Roe regime, which failed to solve it.
How are you feeling? Yeeeees, quite! And before you are tempted to shrug and say, "Only in America", ask yourself how our baby killing factories are doing?!
In the post below I suggested you take note of the name Ben Rhodes. He is Obama's Liar-in-Chief and if you thought Jay Carney, the White House Press Spokesman, had that title then let me tell you that you are confusing the loudspeaker with the DVD player!
Gradually, very gradually, the American press is teasing the truth out about this (irony alert!) failed fiction writer whose skill at weaving fairy stories might not have cut it with the buying public but which were considered invaluable by Obama who appointed - or should that be 'annointed' - him as his foreign policy speech writer - amongst other things. Rhodes it was who composed Obama's fatuous speech in Cairo in which he almost fell to his knees on a prayer mat to praise Islam without bothering to distinguish betweem moderate Muslims and extremists.
As Ed Lasky tells us at The AmericanThinker, Mr.Rhodes might prefer to stay back out of sight but his tentacles reach quite far. A reporter for CBS News, Sharyl Attkisson, has shown considerable spirit, given the nature of her employee, in refusing to swallow the administration's cover story for the Benghazi attack. She has pursued the story against the increasing resistance of CBS who have taken a heavy hand against her, accusing her of "advocacy" not reporting. Guess who is the boss of CBS News - why, none other than David Rhodes, brother of Ben the White House string-puller!
This Benghazi cover-up scandal has a long way to go and given the nature of obfuscating governments everywhere, it will take a long time for everything and everyone to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the daylight. However, Ben Rhodes is definitely going to feel some Congressional heat.
It was me who first mentioned the 'I'-word by wondering if, just if, there might not be a case for impeachment against the 'Commander-in-Chief' for dereliction of duty, if nothing else. Rick Moran at PJMedia disabuses me of that hope. He reminds all of us over-excited 'impeachers' that you cannot:
[I]mpeach a president without mentioning “high crimes and misdemeanors”?
That’s the constitutional standard, and for people who purport to love our founding document, there is precious little said about a serious case to be made that the lies, the incompetence, the political calculation, the whitewashing, and even the stonewalling and denial of documents add up to a reason to overturn the election and make Joe Biden president.
[...]
You can’t impeach a president for being a naive fool or an incompetent boob. You can’t impeach a president because he chose aides, assistants, or cabinet secretaries who can’t, or won’t, do their jobs. You can’t impeach a president for looking into a camera and lying to the American people. You can’t impeach a president because he tries to hide an error that would cost him votes in an election. Nor can you impeach a president for playing politics with national security, failing to rescue Americans under attack, or going to sleep in the middle of a crisis.
Pity, but I think he might be right. Still, that's no reason not to go after Ben Rhodes. And in the process, of course, make sure 'HillBilly' is well and truly splattered in order to ruin her chances for the top job when Obama goes.
I am feeling rather faint! And I do think Breitbart News should have printed an 'Elf 'n' Safety' warning on their story reporting that the BBC - yes, the BBC! - had actually apologised for its worse than useless coverage of the Benghazi scandal:
In a piece titled, "After Benghazi revelations, heads will roll," Mardell writes, "In the interests of full disclosure I have to say I have not in the past been persuaded that allegations of a cover-up were a big deal." He adds, "It seemed to me a partisan attack based on very little."
Well, as a fully indoctrinated BBC-man, Mark Mardell would naturally fear no evil from the sainted Obama in the whitest of White Houses. Still, credit where credit is due, when ten tons of brown, smelly stuff is tipped out right in front of him, even he can take notice:
This is the first hard evidence that the state department did ask for changes to the CIA's original assessment.
Specifically, they wanted references to previous warnings deleted and this sentence removed: "We do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack."
There's little doubt in my mind that this will haunt Hillary Clinton if she decides to run for president, unless she executes some pretty fancy footwork.
State department spokesperson Victoria Nuland is directly implicated, and the fingerprints of senior White House aides Ben Rhodes and Jay Carney are there as well.
Take note of that name - Ben Rhodes. His name keeps cropping up as being one of the backroom apparatchiks doing Obama's bidding. Suddenly the media searchlight is swivelling towards him. A second-rate, 'back corridors' man who has slithered his way into a position of influence way above his abilities, I wonder how he will take the heat of scrutiny?
For the benefit of my Brit readers who may be less enthralled with the minutiae of American politics than me, I should explain that Ms. Maureen Dowd is well-known commentator for the New York Times. Needless then to add that she leans so far over to the Left that only a solid stack of Marxist tracts keeps her from falling over. Thus, it was with some trepidation that I read her take on the Benghazi attack and the hullabaloo that has steadily grown as the facts leak out. Actually, it was rather brave of me because I am incensed to a foam-flecked fury by, first, the American governments inaction as the attack took place and, second, its desperate, scrabbling action metaphorically to spray the corpses with scent and bury them quick lest any unseemly smells seep out. Bearing in mind that the considered opinion of the editors of the NYT was the age-old refrain you hear from coppers at any accident or crime scene, "Right, move along, nothing to see here" I was not expecting too much from Ms. Dowd except possibly my early death brought about by bursting gaskets! So, imagine my surprise when I read this:
The administration’s behavior before and during the attack in Benghazi, in which four Americans died, was unworthy of the greatest power on earth.
I don't quite know why she failed to add the word 'after' to the "before and during" because in the remainder of her article she hammers 'HillBilly' and her minions for their cover-up. But let me not quibble. Ms. Dowd set her political sympathies to one side and more or less told it the way it was, and that is quite remarkable
Now we know that at 8 p.m. Eastern time on the last night of [Ambassador] Stevens’s life, his deputy in Libya spoke to Secretary Clinton and informed her of the attack in Benghazi and the fact that the ambassador was now missing. An hour later, Gregory Hicks received a call from the then–Libyan prime minister, Abdurrahim el-Keib, informing him that Stevens was dead. Hicks immediately called Washington. It was 9 p.m. Eastern time, or 3 a.m. in Libya. Remember the Clinton presidential team’s most famous campaign ad? About how Hillary would be ready to take that 3 a.m. call? Four years later, the phone rings, and Secretary Clinton’s not there. She doesn’t call Hicks back that evening. Or the following day.
In the middle of a campaign in which the President had claimed that Al Quaeda (AQ) was now a defeated force, his apparat twisted this way and that to avoid admitting that it was an AQ affiliate that had murdered four American public servants in Libya. Instead, despite knowing the facts directly from survivors in Tripoli, they pointed their Federal finger at Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, an Egyptian-born Christian Copt resident in teh States who had released a video on the internet which was fearfully rude about Islam and which had caused unrest in Cairo. The Federal law machine moved into action, this time with no hesitation, and Nakoula was arrested, charged with infringing his probation rules and is now in the slammer for a year. (Silly man, had he made a film denigrating Christ he might well have won an Oscar!) But worst was to come - and at this point you really do need to have a sick-bag to hand - both Obama and Clinton stood over the corpses of their own public servants and lied to them, and then went one further by appraoching the grieving families and lying some more:
As Mr. Hicks testified, his superiors in Washington knew early that night that a well-executed terrorist attack with the possible participation of al-Qaeda elements was under way. Instead of responding, the most powerful figures in the government decided that an unseen YouTube video better served their political needs. And, in the most revealing glimpse of the administration’s depravity, the president and secretary of state peddled the lie even in their mawkish eulogies to their buddy “Chris” and three other dead Americans. They lied to the victims’ coffins and then strolled over to lie to the bereaved, Hillary telling the Woods family that “we’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video.” And she did. The government dispatched more firepower to arrest Nakoula Basseley Nakoula in Los Angeles than it did to protect its mission in Benghazi.
Still, at least we know what should be carved into 'HillBilly's headstone, her very own words:
I do not know enough American history to say definitely that this is the worst government they have ever had but I will hazard a guess that it is far and away the most dangerous. Slowly but surely the web of deceit which the Obama apparat threw over the murder of four US public servants in Benghazi is being torn apart. Steven Hayes in The Weekly Standard helped the process along with a forensic examination of how Susan Rice, the ambassador to the UN, was provided with a brief full of out-and-out lies with which she was ordered to trot round five different TV studios on a Sunday morning in order to give the American people a completely false picture of what had occurred and why. Hayes' investigation finally prompted a normally complacent Dem-supporting news agency, ABC, to dig a little deeper and they came up with the fact that the original briefing paper supplied by the CIA after the attack had been changed in twelve important respects after sundry government apparatchiks had insisted that anything that contradicted their version of events must be deleted. This hand-grenade from a normally docile member of the press was startling and when combined with the Congressional hearings in which the man on the spot in Tripoli who took over as amabassador after the murders said that when he heard Ms. Rice's version of events "My chin dropped!" because it was a travesty of what he had reported back to Washington, the collateral damage is beginning to look ugly.
The ABC report was like the first slight shiftings before an avalanche begins. More and more of the formerly supine members of the press began to dig and obviously they were reaching places of intense discomfort to the White House because yesterday, Jay Carney, the professional 'liar-in-chief' for Obama was forced to delay his standard press briefing whilst he privately briefed a select number of reporters. This, naturally, caused immense irritation from all the other reporters who were not privileged with private briefings and Carney was savaged during the subsequent press conference.
Suddenly, whilst Carney's charade was going on, yet another hand-grenade went off, this one from an entirely unexpected direction - the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), their equivalent of Her Maj's Revenue & Customs. There had been mutterings last year ahead of the presidential election that various Right-wing groups, particularly the so-called 'Tea Party', had been subjected to sudden investigation by the IRS. It is important for Brit readers to understand that an investigation by the IRS is no small thing, it involves immense amounts of work and time to answer all their detailed questions and, given their huge legal powers, it is also very frightening. Anyway, yesterday the IRS suddenly 'fessed up' and admitted that it had, prior to the election, mounted a specific campaign of what was, in effect, harrassment and bullying aimed at Republican support organisations.
Like some of the commentators on Fox News, I, too, am puzzled as to why this confession and grovelling apology was made at all, and also why it was made yesterday. The cynical might suspect that it was by way of a distraction to gain the media's attention and keep them away from the Benghazi story. If so, it is a highly dangerous stunt because the implications of the IRS behaving in a blatantly partisan manner in order to effect the outcome of a presidential election is enormous. Potentially, I would suggest, there is jail time awaiting some senior IRS officials and if they acted under political pressure they will sing like canaries! Anyway, watch this space for further developments.
In the meantime, ponder on the stench arising from the midden that is the government of the United States of America, the Land of the Free (to be fooled)!
But everyone ignored it! I watched some of the Congressional committee hearings on the murder of four American officials in Benghazi last year. I'm afraid I lost my temper - yes, I know, difficult to imagine, but I did! - because Fox News is rubbish! When Sky News reports on some important happening, say, a Parliamentary committee hearing on a 'headline' case, they broadcast the whole thing without interruptions for adverts. Not so with Fox News-interruptus, if I may rename it. I suppose there is some excuse for the adverts in that they pay for the lights and heating, etc, but there is no excuse for giving valuable time to all those bimbettes with fright-white teeth who proceed to tell us all again what we just heard - whilst the live proceedings are going on without us! I used to be in love with Megan Kelly but now she has joined the rather large group of people on TV whose faces I want to punch!
Anyway, I saw just about enough to be well and truly sickened. It was politicians doing what politicians do which is bad enough on the normal day-to-day stuff but this concerned the murders of four public servants aided and abetted by gross governmental inefficiences and sullied beyond shame by a deliberate campaign of outright lying by the White House and the State Department then under 'HillBilly's' control. If the Republican membes of the committee were salivating at the chance to land hard punches on the Obama apparat they at least had virtue on their side as they sought to uncover the cover up. The Democrats, or at least the ones Fox News-interruptus allowed me to see from time to time, were utterly despicable, full of cant and humbug, weeping crocodile tears on behalf the dead men, assuring the so-called 'whistle-blowers' that there would be no retaliation against their careers, before laying into them and more or less accusing them of lying.
If I was an American I would be deeply ashamed. If I was a member of one of the victims' families, I would be in despair. As it is, I'm an Englishman, and I wouldn't trust the Obama apparat or the Democrat party as far as I could piss into a gale! Obama almost succeeds in making Putin look like a straight arrow!
Well, I only produce my Monday Funnies to cheer up all you wage-slaves as you start the week but today being a Bank Holiday, and a sunny one as well, you are all, no doubt, lazing about in your gardens watching the weeds grow! Anyway, I will leave you a Tuesday Funny later tonight because I have an early start for 'Londinium' again tomorrow, so no posts on Tuesday. Anyway, today, as I keep taking shelter indoors from this unbelievably fierce sun, I will leave you the occasional mumble.
Euro founder calls for break-up: Not so much a case of chickens coming home to roost as 14-year old dead turkeys hitting the floor to rot! Courtesy of Ambrose E-P in The Telegraph, allow me to remind you of a long-lost name - Oscar Lafontaine - remember him? He was yet another in a long line of swivel-eyed Germans with a fanatical idea - a common currency for a United States of Europe:
Mr Lafontaine was labelled "Europe's Most Dangerous Man" by The Sun after he called for a "united Europe" and the "end of the nation state" in 1998. The euro was launched on January 1 1999, with bank notes following three years later. He later left the Social Democrats to found the Left Party.
Ah, but that was yesterday, or to be precise, back in 1999. Today, that nasty old real-politik has stuck its oar in and poor old Oscar has had to face reality:
Mr Lafontaine said he backed EMU but no longer believes it is sustainable. "Hopes that the creation of the euro would force rational economic behaviour on all sides were in vain," he said, adding that the policy of forcing Spain, Portugal, and Greece to carry out internal devaluations was a "catastrophe".
He foresees a resurgence of extreme anti-German sentiment across southern Europe including France. Whodathunkit? Well, lots of people, actually, but no-one listened.
Mary Bousted, edukatanist, earns an 'F' for Fail: According to this particularly dim light in the 'edukatanist' firmament, pupils should be allowed to skip the "slow", "boring" openings to the plays because they leave them "gritting their teeth" with boredom. I can only assume that Ms. Boustead teaches 'Media Studies' or 'Japanese Paper Folding' or some such vital subject because it is obvious that she hasn't a clue concerning Shakespeare and his plays. Happily, Ms. Bousted's terminal stupidity has permitted her to, er, rise well above mere class-rooms and reach the exalted heights of being general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers. Yeeeees, quite!
Could Adam Smith be proven wrong? A truly fascinating article in Der Spiegel sent to me by the ever alert, 'SoD' - well done, my boy! In it, two economists and directors at the MIT Center for Digital Business dare to forecast the complete overturning of one of the central beliefs of free market capitalism, that is, that no matter if new technology (trains, for example) puts workers in outdated industries (farriers, stablemen, coachmen, etc) out of work, the increase in productivity will provide alternative jobs. According to these two swots this may no longer be the case because the rate of increase in computer controlled automata is such that human work is decreasing. For example, pause and consider for a moment the possible impact of driverless autos which have just been given licences to be tested. The implications, if true, are awesome! A fascinating article, worth reading.
Maybe, just maybe, Obama is nearing a 'Gotcha' moment: I must admit that one of the crucial events which convinced me that Obama would lose the election was the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi followed by the most obvious and disgusting programme of lies and obfuscation put out by his regime. He made Nixon look like a vicar! I thought at the time that American patriotism would be so enraged that they would slaughter Obama at the polls in much the way the American victims were slaughtered in Benghazi. But it didn't happen. Just like the outrage of 'Operation Fast & Furious' in which a Federal government sting took place and went hopelessly wrong leading to the death of an American border guard, a systematic barrage of foot-dragging and out-and-out lying went on and no-one, least of all the Attorney-General, paid a price for it. The deliberate docility of the Obama-lovin' lickspittles in the media was an enormous help, of course. But, as Michael Walsh points out at PJMedia, this time the people feeling betrayed by Obama's inaction at the time and his lying ever since are hard-bitten intelligence and Special Ops types who are thirsty for revenge on behalf of their friends. New Congressional hearings are due and the brown stuff is likely to hit the fan. Obama will be well and truly splattered but so also will 'Hillbilly'. Allow me to mention one word, perhaps more in hope than expectation, but even so - impeachment!
Critics - don'cha lurve 'em? Well, actually I do, at least, some of them. Take for example, Lloyd Evans in The Spectator, I love him because he has just saved me 'loadsa' money! I was trying to work out an underhand way of getting past that implacable backstop, normally referred to here as 'The Memsahib', in order for me to pay over the odds to get a ticket for the ROYAL National Theatre (I like to rub their proper title under their rotten republican noses) production of Othello. I don't have Evans' erudition but I just know that I would share a great many of his views - and his view of this production was exceedingly dim. So, money saved, time better spent and terminal grumpiness avoided - thanks Mr. Evans. And that's the end of this Monday Rumble.
It would be unfair to suggest that 52% (or whatever the figure was for those who voted for Obama last year) were technically brain dead because, alas, like voters everywhere they simply (and I do mean 'simple'!) voted in their own self-interest. Obama, following Saul Alinsky's creed, promised them bread and circuses and they duly swallowed the lies whole. However, one thing is now clear beyond debate, Obama, himself, is as thick as six short Gurkhas!(*) Interestingly, I have just read two articles saying roughly the same thing but rather more politely than me.
Barack Obama, already naturally inclined to believe his own loftiness, graciously accepted the kingly crown and proceeded to ride his reelection success to a crushing victory over the GOP at the fiscal cliff, leaving a humiliated John Boehner & Co. with nothing but naked tax hikes.
Thus emboldened, Obama turned his inaugural and State of the Union addresses into a left-wing dream factory, from his declaration of war on global warming (on a planet where temperatures are the same as 16 years ago and in a country whose CO2 emissions are at a 20-year low) to the invention of new entitlements — e.g., universal preschool for 5-year-olds— for a country already drowning in debt.
To realize his dreams, Obama sought to fracture and neutralize the congressional GOP as a prelude to reclaiming the House in 2014. This would enable him to fully enact his agenda in the final two years of his presidency, usually a time of lame-duck paralysis. Hail the Obama juggernaut.
Well, that story — excuse me, narrative — lasted exactly six months. The Big Mo is gone.
John Boehner and the GOP called his bluff on the 'poker game' over sequester which entails automatic cuts to government spending and, surprise, surprise, the only breakdown in services came as a result of Federal officials obeying orders from the White House to make the ensuing cuts as painful as possible to the public so that blame could be laid at the feet of the Republicans. Alas, for the less than clever dicks in the White House, this nefarious plot was quickly uncovered and anyway, inconvenienced members of the public, like their counterparts everywhere, instantly blamed the government for every breakdown in services:
Things began with the near-comical cancellation of White House tours and ended with not-so-comical airline delays. Obama thought furious passengers would blame the GOP. But isn’t the executive branch in charge of these agencies? Who thinks that a government spending $3.6 trillion a year can’t cut 2 percent without furloughing air-traffic controllers?
Looking not just incompetent at managing budgets but cynical for deliberately injuring the public welfare, the administration relented. Congress quickly passed a bill giving Obama reallocation authority to restore air traffic control. Having previously threatened to veto any such bill, Obama caved. He signed.
Meanwhile, his crusade on gun control has turned into a fiasco with membership of the National Rifle Association growing apace and his efforts to have legislation passed have been foiled not just by Republicans but Democrats, with an eye to their home base, as well.
Grover G. Norquist in The American Spectator is even more dismissive of Obama's fumblings. He reminds us that in his first two years in office, the President had control of both Houses and was thus able to pass more or less any law he liked. He wasted that opportunity by concentrating on an eye-wateringly large splurge of government 'stimulus' spending, and in ramming through 'Obamacare'. (Incidentally, the bills for that gigantic folly are only now just beginning to become apparent to a dismayed public but, hey, never give suckers an even break!)
Then in 2010, his Democratic majority in the House was tossed out. Two years of power as complete as exists in American national politics ended and were followed by two years in which others held the power to say no. The Republican House wrestled away $2.5 trillion in spending reductions as the price for increasing the government’s “debt ceiling.” Obama could pass no new legislation. His first term lasted two years.
By winning a second mandate, Obama was again in possession of real power but, as Norquist tells it, within less than two months he blew it - and even worse, he failed even to realise quite what a political disaster he had brought about. There were around $500 billion p.a. in what were called the 'Bush' tax cuts which had run for years but which required annual endorsement by the Congress or they would automatically fail. Were this to happen Americans would be hit by an enormous tax hike which would total around $5 trillion over 10 years. This was Obama's sword of Damocles - but he dropped it! I will let Norquist explain the tricky details:
Obama spent the months of November and December reveling in his power to get his pound of flesh from the rich. He thought, as he sat across from Republican negotiators, that he was empowered by his election victory, his personal popularity as measured in polls. He misunderstood. His power flowed from the fact that he held the fate of a $500 billion annual tax hike in his hands. Like an upriver landowner with a dam and sluicegate, Obama alone would decide how much income would flow and to whom and for how long.
He chose to take $600 billion in tax increases over the next 10 years. That was 15 percent of the tax cuts that were lapsing. His increases targeted the top 1 percent. On January 1, taxes automatically increased $500 billion. On January 2 the Congress voted to cut taxes $280 billion that year and $3.7 trillion over the decade.
In his lofty generosity he agreed to take only 15% of the possible tax hike when the 'Bush' tax cuts lapsed and he targeted the top 1% of earners. But, what he failed to realise is that by agreeing to that arrangement the 85% of 'Bush' tax cuts that remained were now fixed forever and from now on any desire or demand by Obama and the Dems for tax rises can only be achieved by new legislation. In other words, there is no golden pot of tax income to be had every year when, as in the past, the 'Bush ' tax cuts came up for re-affirmation. Here is Norquist's explanation of why Obama fumbled the golden ball:
WHY, THEN, DID HE give away power? There are three schools of thought. First, Obama believed his own press clippings. He really thought he was in possession of a mandate, that the world would bend to his will, because he won the election. But elections are good for four years; popularity endures until it doesn’t. He mistook the source of his power in the fiscal cliff negotiations and didn’t understand that making the lapsing tax cuts permanent removed his unanswerable threat and ended his power.
Second, after Republicans agreed last year to delay the debt ceiling vote and the imposition of the sequester, Obama believed they were retreating. The courtier press reinforced this by joining in the premature celebration. What was really happening was more akin to the Carthaginian troops falling back in the battle of Cannae…luring the Romans into believing they were collapsing. Republicans wisely took the debt ceiling vote and the sequester—an automatic spending cut of $1.2 trillion over the decade—away from and outside the blast radius of the fiscal cliff negotiations where Obama held the power.
Third, Obama assumed that he had the whip hand on the looming sequester fight just as he did in the fiscal cliff talks. Here the establishment press created some of his confusion, because they paraded Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham across the TV networks to announce that they spoke for all Republicans in preferring anything—anything—to reductions in the increases in the Pentagon budget. Obama assumed the GOP would raise taxes, or at least delay or kill the sequester, to protect its precious Pentagon spending. But the “defense spending is sacrosanct” caucus in the Republican Party now has approximately 20 members, and 17 of them are newspaper columnists without a vote in the House or Senate. The small-government worldview is in control now. Obama misunderstood the changing correlation of forces.
Norquist summarises the self-inflicted wound that Obama has perpetrated against himself:
So now we are in sequestration. Now the spending cuts are automatic. The Republicans have the upper hand. Obama cannot raise taxes or reduce the sequester without a majority vote in the House and Senate. And it is unlikely that Speaker John Boehner or Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will give away control as easily as Obama did.
According to reports, Obama was never much good as a 'community organiser' so it figures, as they say 'over there', that he's hopeless, helpless and hapless at running a country.
(*) I occasionally make use of the old army expression "as thick as six short Gurkhas" and it suddenly occurred to me that people might misunderstand and assume that I was indicating that Gurkhas were stupid. Nothing could be further from what I actually mean which is that your average Gurkha, being of stocky build, gives the impression of being wider than he is tall, hence six of them in a row is very 'thick' indeed. I wish to make that very clear because under no circs would I ever wish to upset a Gurkha!
Well, well, well, here's a turn up for the book - and, yes, I'm in tired old cliché mode tonight, or at least, I'm tired after a day grass-cutting in the Churchyard and planting my bedding plants in my miniscule garden. But, I have just stumbled across the best bit of news I have had in ages - I have found my old e-pal (well, perhaps 'pal' is tad familiar), Oliver Kamm. He was one of the first bloggers I ever came across 'back in the day' and I took to him instantly, not that I agreed with everything he wrote but I learned rapidly, as I surveyed the remnants of his opponents littering 'Blogdom', to be exceedingly cautious before taking him on. Back then he was just another 'something in the City' but before long he was taken on by my mate 'Rupe' and today he is a leader writer for The Times. Alas, 'Rupe' ignored my advice and took The Times behind a pay wall and Oliver stopped his blog, and thus was one of the most fiery and intelligent voices in 'Blogdom' silenced - unless you wanted to make 'Rupe' even richer!
However, today I came across a piece at The Coffee House by Peter Oborne, perhaps the equal of Oliver in journalistic pugilism, counter-punching vigorously against two posts written by Oliver concerning a recent book by Oborne and a co-writer, David Morrison, called A Dangerous Delusion: Why the West is Wrong about Nuclear Iran. In it, Oborne and Morrison propose that Iran has absolutely no nuclear weapons and no intention of getting them. In Oliver's first attack ( I cannot call it otherwise), he had not yet read the book itself but he took exception to Mr. Morrison whom he accused of being a Srebrinica-denier. As I hinted above, you need to be very sure of your facts before you take on Oliver:
Srebrenica denial is, as I’ve argued here, the same class of “argument” as Holocaust denial. Except the lie is even more blatant. We know how many victims perished because the bodies have been found. Scientists have recovered the remains of more than 7,000 victims and used DNA analysis to identify 6,838 of them. I’ve noted here the heroic work of the International Commission on Missing Persons, which can thereby reliably estimate the number of victims as between 8,000 and 8,100.
This analysis was based on an article for the Labour & Trade Union Review in August 2005. I have read it carefully and do not find that it supports Mr Kamm’s interpretation, or anything like it. Indeed Dr Morrison explicitly stated in his article ‘that Bosnian Muslims got massacred in large numbers is not in doubt’ (a statement to which Mr Kamm did not draw his readers’ attention).
Well, 'you pays your money and you takes yer pick'. Of course, far and away the most interesting point is whether Oborne and Morrison are correct in their assertion that Iran does not now and will not in the future possess nuclear arms. I suspect that neither party knows for sure, any more than I do. Oborne's claim that Khomeini has stated that nuclear weapons are against Islamic creed may have been said but how far would you trust him if you were an Israeli? And mention of Israel brings me to the key player in this frighteningly dangerous poker game. It doesn't matter if the CIA is convinced that Iran has weaponry because the USA will do nothing so long as Obama is in the White House. However, I reckon Israeli intelligence knows exactly the state of the game and the day they are certain the weapons are there will be the day before the Big Attack and then we will all know for sure!
Incidentally, if any of you techie-swots know how to log in to this Times.tumblr. thingie without paying I would be very grateful and 'Rupe' would be irritated!
Sorry - sorry - SORRY! OK? I'm really sorry! On Thursday, with all the computer expertise for which I am famed the length and breadth of, er, this room, I carefully composed a brief but elegantly worded post informing you of my absence. Just to prove it, here it is:
London calling!
Well, it's calling me, at any rate, on personal business and theatre business on Friday and Saturday. I will get home in the wee small hours of Sunday morning so you can expect a Sunday Rumble - but not too early!
Having written it I then saved it as a 'draft' ready to publish on Thursday night before my departure early Friday morning. And yes, you are quite right, there it stayed in my 'Draft' box unpublished until now, and whilst I think 200x lines is a bit on the steep side of course they will be completed and handed in on Monday morning! There is nothing more irritating than regularly visiting a gossipy blog which suddenly stops dead without warning and you are forced to keep clicking back on it to see if it has started up again. Those of you hoping that this one was indeed dead and buried must delay your celebrations - I have returned! My usual Sunday rumbles will commence a little later.
Sam Walters, The Orange Tree Theatre: Part of the theatre business that occupied me yesterday was a visit to The Orange Tree Theatre in Richmond to listen to a talk by Sam Walters, its founder and manager. At one stage he described himself as 'a jobbing director' which was absolutely accurate but under-stated the breadth and width and depth of his theatrical experience, and his total and absorbing love for it all. He was entertaining, shrewd, enthusiastic, slightly disorganised but through it all you could positively feel the drive behind the man which led him to start with a theatre in a room above a pub and which has now moved to a room next to a pub and which provides a small theatre in the round. Being so close to the metropolis, and given his lifetime of friendships in theatre, he frequently attracts top class actors to his tiny performing space. Plus, I suspect, his obviously tremendous charm plays its part in getting the 'luvvies' to work there. Well worth a visit for any of you metro theatre lovers.
'Enemies of the Earth': Regular readers will know that under my strict accuracy policy that has long been my re-arrangement of the name 'Friends of the Earth'. It appears I am not alone. 'Bishop Hill' attended a seminar given by some cove called Pascal Bruckner - yeeees, quite! - and he jotted down the main points that came across:
The idea of catastrophe has replaced the idea of progress
Racial minorities, women and slaves have been replaced as principal victims by Mother Earth
Fear has become something to be desired.
We are being transformed into children, ready to obey the orders of an enlightened elite.
Friends of the earth have become the enemies of mankind
Environmentalism is universal but "end of the worldism" is purely western.
Environmentalism is about keeping the world for the bobos (bohemian bourgeois)
Sound fella, that Bruckner despite, or perhaps because of, his formidable name!
"Bye Bye Miss American Empire": Continuing my secessionist agitprop, there is a review in The American Spectator of an interesting book which looks in detail at the myriad groups of what they call 'seceshers'.
Some seceshers, like those in West Kansas and New York City seek to form their own states. Others, (Alaska, Hawaii, Texas, Vermont and the old confederacy) long for complete independence.
Apparently their chances are minimal to zero!
It’s a cliché to say that lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for, but that doesn’t make it any less true. And, as Kauffman reminds us, “I know: Breaking away is impossible. Quixotic. Hopeless. So was dancing on the Berlin Wall.”
These are Kauffman’s kind of people, the kind who hesitate to say the Pledge of Allegiance, not because of the phrase “Under God,” but because of the word “indivisible,” which clangs on the ear like a cell door. Self-government dreamers, small-is-better believers, localist underdogs and home grown patriots. How can you not love them?
Someone is to blame! But I don't expect they ever will be, except, perhaps, by the historians eventually. I refer to the somewhat dismal record of the British army in recent times. There is a truly dispiriting article in Commentary Magazine remarking on what looks like a total cock-up in Camp Bastion, the British base in Afghanistan, in which an unguarded perimeter was attacked and two US marines killed and six Harrier jump-jets destroyed. The writer, Max Boot, reminds his readers of the shambles in Basra after Iraq II when the Brits, full of supposed expertise in urban counter-insurgency gained from the Malaya campaign onwards, more or less handed the entire city over to the gunmen and eventually the American s had to go in and clear up after us! Too, too, embarrassing - but no-one in command has been blamed!
The immigration proposal pending in Congress would transform the nation’s political landscape for a generation or more — pumping as many as 11 million new Hispanic voters into the electorate a decade from now in ways that, if current trends hold, would produce an electoral bonanza for Democrats and cripple Republican prospects in many states they now win easily.
Beneath the philosophical debates about amnesty and border security, there are brass-tacks partisan calculations driving the thinking of lawmakers in both parties over comprehensive immigration reform, which in its current form offers a pathway to citizenship — and full voting rights — for a group of undocumented residents that roughly equals the population of Ohio, the nation’s seventh-largest state. [My emphasis]
If these people had been on the voting rolls in 2012 and voted along the same lines as other Hispanic voters did last fall, President Barack Obama’s relatively narrow victory last fall would have been considerably wider, a POLITICO analysis showed.
One wonders how that map will look after all those immigrants are absorbed? The Republicans appear to be rattled - and divided. Some seem to be bowing to the inevitable and by appearing to welcome the influx of new potential voters they hope eventually to gain their votes. Others, remaining strictly opposed, find themselves between a rock and a hard place!
Since lobbing my handgrenade in the previous post, and reading the commentary, I have decided to return to the subject of the possible break-up of the USA. But let me begin by making some things very clear. My knowledge of America has grown enormously since the invention of this 'internet-thingie'. Up to ten years ago my main source of information was printed copies of The American Spectator which arrived once a month, the rest of the media being quite beyond my reach. But now I can not only read and watch the main media, I can also, if so minded, follow the regional news. Needless to say, all this detail has produced considerable, er, 'shock 'n' awe' in me which would not be the case to ordinary Americans who have lived their lives there and who take matters more for granted. In other words, there is a tendency for a 'newcomer' like me to behave like a Bateman cartoon character and repeat endlessly, "I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!"
For example, I really am shocked at the path followed by Obama and the Democrat party. It is only necessary to contrast and compare the ideological fervour driving the party today with the easy-going pragmatism of Bill Clinton t0 see the huge difference in the political zeitgeist. Today the spirit of Saul Alinsky rules in almost every area of American public life including, or perhaps I should say, especially, in the media which no longer even pretends to some sort of detachment. (As I write that, however, I am reminded that back in the '40s and '50s the media were equally virulent against any politician deemed to be soft on communism, so what goes around, comes around!) Even so, the first requirement for any civil unrest is sustained political pressure in one direction and the Obama administration is certainly providing that, and should he be replaced by another Marxist ideologue that could result in sixteen years of relentless growth in Federal power reaching into every part of American life.
The second requirement, and as I have written here before, it is one that is eagerly sought by the Alinsky-ites within the Democrat party, is a catastrophic emergency. As political cynics have said through the ages, no emergency should ever be wasted! Again, as I have written here before, and others far more knowledgeable have repeated endlessly, the USA is heading towards a financial crisis of epic proportions. At the end of the Obama regime the country will owe $20 trillion. The dollar will have ceased to be the world's reserve currency and so it will be left to sink or swim on its own - it will sink! That will cause economic convulsions around the world so if Americans think they will be able to export their goods cheaply they are mistaken because no-one will be buying anything! In fact, Americans will feel austerity as they have never felt it in 75 years. It will be worse, far worse, than the 1930s because ordinary people then did not have that much, but today most Americans are wealthy beyond the dreams of their grand-parents and when you lose what you have always considerd to be yours by right, the shock is immense.
After the cataclysm of WWI, Wilson took advantage of the times and pressed through with his socialist agenda. In the depression of the 1930s, Roosevelt followed his lead. In the coming disaster in this century an ideologically committed president will try to ram through even more extreme socialism. And that, in my opinion, is when the brown, smelly stuff will hit the fan! Already today, there are vast differences between the mid-west of the union and the two seaboards. Will the citizens of the prosperous, tax-light mid-West, imbued as they are with old-fashioned ideas of American virtue, take kindly to the idea of the United Socialist States of America? I don't think so, but the question is, will they do anything about it? And if they do, which way will the military move - particularly the reservists who have local loyalties? (Incidentally, now you see why elements of the Democrat party are so keen to disarm the populace, it has nothing to do with poor little 'kiddie-winkies' being shot dead by nutters but everything to do with the coming battle they see as likely!)
To stand any chance of success, the Republican party needs to think ahead in the same way that the Alinsky-ites do. It is essential that they have ready a political plan for secession which they can put into operation before any 'cowboy' hotheads start shooting. Like all wars these days, it is the message that counts and ill-defined acts of violence will put people off particularly when virtually the entire media is against you.
So, only two questions remain. Do I think secession is likely? No, but it is, just, a possibility. Will it succeed? Nah!
This thought has been niggling away at me for some time but, alas, I am short of time this morning so I can only pull out the pin and lob the grenade in amongst you all. I am provoked to this action by an article in The American Spectator by Marta H. Mossburg in which she warns us to watch and beware Gov. O'Malley of Maryland. I do not know for certain if he is possessed of swivelling eyeballs but from what Ms. Mossburg says he ought to! He it is who has introduced a 'rain tax' to the goof balls good electors of Maryland and seeing as how they put him in the job they deserve no less. Apparantly, satellites will map Maryland and any property having an excess of hard-standing will be taxed in order to reduce the runoff of rain water into the Chesapeake Bay. This is but one of several 'Greenie-socialist-la-la-land' ideas that Gov. O'Malley has in what passes for his mind, I suppose it is the whimsical 'Oirish' in him.
However, my main point is that O'Malley is not alone in his crazed desire to tax everything including rain. Over the other side, the 'Kommissariat of Kalifornia' continues its mad tax and spend binge as city after city goes broke throughout the State and businesses flee to Texas which, under a liberal tax regime is prospering like never before. But of course, given the federal nature of the United(?) States, Texas is forced to send money to Washington, now in the grip of Democrat socialists, who then send it out to places like Maryland and 'Kalifornia'. Now, if Obama is succeeded by another out-and-out socialist, and O'Malley is already planning his campaign, and the prospect of another eight years looms then the pressure will mount. So my question is, how long will they put up with it in middle America before that dread word 'secession' raises its ugly head? I'm not saying it will happen, I'm not even saying it is probable that it will happen but it has to be a possibility. After all, you all know how far behind the times I am, so if I've thought of it then sure as hell someone else has too!
"Oh, what a beautiful mornin'"! And, as it happens, it is indeed a beautiful morning here, all the more so given what seems like in retrospect six months of cloud, rain, snow and a non-stop freezing wind from even further 'ooop north' than the usual 'ooop north'. Even so, I am provoked to the opening quote not by the sunshine but by a filmed version of Oklahoma produced by the Royal National Theatre back in 1999 and which was shown on Sky Arts last night. I was curious to see it because it starred (a much younger) Hugh Jackman who later played Jean Valjean in the film of Les Misérables. I remarked at the time that whilst I had heard of him I had never seen him before. Well now I have seen him twice with a fourteen year gap in his career and I now realise what the rest of the world already knew, that he is tremendously talented. Unfortunately, Oklahoma suffers a little, as so many of those earlier musicals do, from thudding dialogue whose only advantage is that it gives one time to get up and make a cup of tea before the next brilliant, moving and/or witty song begins. In retrospect, what an act of genius it was when the producers of Les Mis decided to forego spoken dialogue and just let the songs tell the story. Even so, Oklahoma from the RNT was a superb piece of theatre and the director, Trever Nunn, is quite simply the very best.
Sometimes it gets personal: This morning, quite properly, the news bulletins are full of details concerning the Chinese earthquake with 200+/- killed and God knows how many injured and thousands bereaved and mourning. And yes, for a moment one is moved to pity and sympathy before moving on to the next story of the day. To be thus is to be human. But sometimes, somehow, a tragedy sticks beneath the skin and it will not be moved. For me, it is the tragedy of the man and his family - wife, two sons and a daughter - who went to the Boston marathon. The father was taking part in the run and his family were close to the finishing line to cheer him in. And then - personal apocalypse! The bomb went off, one son killed outright, a daughter maimed by the loss of a leg and a wife in hospital with brain damage. It beggars understanding. At one moment you are this, a happy family tied together with mutual love and affection; and the next moment you are that, a wreckage of hopes and expectations blown apart. "As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods, they kill us for their sport."
Sow and ye shall reap: Or something like that; but it was Heffer, I think, in The Daily Mail yesterday who reminded us with sardonic brutality that Boston was the main centre of financial and 'moral' support for the IRA whose atrocities 'over here' far, far exceeded the marathon bomb. Folly, to which we are all prone, does not deserve the non-linear retribution exacted lat Sunday but it is a salutary lesson all the same. Think before you drop a dollar in the collecting tin!
And talking of terrorist bombers there's always the president's old friends:
Whilst supping with the Devil (and his wife) it is usually good practice, or so I am told, to use a very long spoon. The President seems unaware of this as he enjoys a dinner with the convicted terrorist, Bill Ayers, and his equally despicable wife, Bernadine Dorhn. Both, of course, now major players in the Chicago mafia Democrat party which, as Emmett Tyrell of The American Spectator reminds us, is never totally averse to bombing atrocities. According to Obama they are "just good friends"! Yeees, quite!
Fitch the Fab! At last, and long overdue, the credit rating agencies are turning the screw. On Friday Fitch downgraded the UK to AA+ which is not much in itself but anyone with half a brain would take it as a serious warning of more, much more, to come unless Osborne stops borrowing m0ney! He can only do that by cutting government spending, not little bits here and there but wholesale slashing and burning whilst at the same time cutting taxation to those likely to produce wealth in the future. And, no, I'm not holding my breath!
Another great oxymoron - 'settled science': Well, they told us that global warming was 'settled science' and temperatures have barely budged for 15 years. Then again, we have been told that the origin of life took place down in the depths of the ocean where heated air from the earth's core erupted through fissures and set off a chemical re-action and, hey presto, suddenly what was inanimate was animate. So, the swots told us, 'settled science', move along, nothing to see here. But, you just gotta love those swots because no sooner is science settled when some rascal comes along and unsettles it. According to The Mail, a couple of computer nerds have used something called Moore's Law which explains the rate at which computers have increased their complexity and efficiency since they were invented. Using the same equations on life forms but working backwards they estimate that life actually began about 10 billion years ago and as the earth is a mere stripling of 4.5 billion years then it is obvious, innit?, that life began somewhere else in the universe and caught the equivalent of a No.29 bus to this old globe of ours. 'Settled science' - heh!
Regular readers will already know that any mention of early American history almost always produces a swift snarl from my e-pal, 'Dearieme' ('DM'), aimed at the unfortunate head of the late President Thomas Jefferson. Now what this distinguished former president has ever done, or been the cause of something being done, to 'DM' I do not know. Alas, in my ignorance of early American history I know next to nothing about Jefferson except that he was part of a group of men imbued with good British, not European, philosophy which acted as a basis for their Constitution. Yes, I know there are some minor quibbles concerning his opposition to slavery which went, so to speak, hand-in-skirt with an affair with one of his black slaves but, hey, we're all chaps here - er, well, with the exception of Andra - and sometimes a chap has to do what a chap has to do, and all that sort of thing. According to Wiki, whilst Jefferson kept slaves he treated them exceedingly well and certainly no worse than white tenant farmers. Anyway, always trying to be helpful I would like to try and draw 'DM's concentration away from Jefferson and onto another and much greater hypocrite, the truly ghastly President Wilson. In this I am aided by Prof. Paul A. Rahe writing in The National Review.
Wilson, of course, is held in veneration by today's Democrat party stalwarts, not least, President Obama. Wilson is generally reckoned to have laid the foundation for a socialist state and using it as a base for attacking and subverting the Constitution, a practice later re-enforced by Roosevelt, tried and failed by Carter, but today, renewed with vigor by Obama. Of course, today's Democrat party draws huge support from minority groups, especially blacks, and the virulent use of 'racism' slurs against their opponenets hs proved to be very effective.
Thus there is considerable irony to be relished when one is reminded by Prof. Rahe that April 11th was the one hundreth anniversary of the bill which was rammed through Congress by Wilson and which specified the segregation of whites and blacks in the American civil service:
Wilson, our first professorial president, was a case in point. He was the very model of a modern Progressive, and he was recognized as such. He prided himself on having pioneered the new science of rational administration, and he shared the conviction, dominant among his brethren, that African-Americans were racially inferior to whites. With the dictates of Social Darwinism and the eugenics movement in mind, in 1907, he campaigned in Indiana for the compulsory sterilization of criminals and the mentally retarded; and in 1911, while governor of New Jersey, he proudly signed into law just such a bill.
Prior to the segregation of the civil service in 1913, appointments had been made solely on merit as indicated by the candidate’s performance on the civil-service examination. Thereafter, racial discrimination became the norm. Photographs came to be required at the time of application, and African-Americans knew they would not be hired. The existing work force was segregated. Many African-Americans were dismissed. In the postal service, others were transferred to the dead-letter office, where they had no contact with the general public. Those who continued to work in municipal post offices labored behind screens — out of sight and out of mind. When the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the National Independent Political League objected to the new policy, Wilson — a Presbyterian elder who was nothing if not high-minded — vigorously defended it, arguing that segregation was in the interest of African-Americans. For 35 years, segregation in the civil service would be public policy. It was only after Adolf Hitler gave eugenics and “scientific racism” a bad name that segregation came to seem objectionable.
The only thing that stands between the liberty of the American people and their sometimes swivel-eyed leaders is the Constitution. Obama's efforts to circumscribe it are in a direct line from his predecessor Pres. Wilson.
And so we bid farewell to 'the Iron Lady' in an entirely proper and suitable manner. The military element was entirely right because she took the military to her heart and after the Falklands they returned her feelings. It was also entirely right that there should be some protests along the way because they reminded us all of her battles on the 'home front' which absolutely had to be fought and won. The ragged rabble of protesters stands as a sad memorial to their utter and complete defeat. I am strongly averse to worshiping politicians but every once in a while one comes along and earns the right to be respected, if not loved. Thus it was with her.
My last comment on this sad occasion is to note the small, mean-minded and truly 'stoopid' behaviour of the White House menagerie. No-one expected Obama to turn up but to refuse to send even a token member of the current administration just about sums up their lack of political acumen. The President's first action on entering the White House was to send back a former gift of a bust of Winston Churchill. Now, in a gesture of solidarity with his socialist worldview he declines to attend the funeral of Mrs. Thatcher. In this "brave new world" we are entering in which more and more political shifts are occurring I am surely not the only one who is rethinking my hitherto automatic pro-Americanism. That sort of totally unnecessary poke in the eye from a sharp presidential stick only confirms my doubts and nudges me to consider British options for the future.
Mind you, the business I am alluding to probably deserves to be closed down but even so it is one that generates around 10,000 jobs and some people estimate that it enjoys a turnover between $1 to 11 billion! However, in California the state and local governments only have one skill and that is using all and every means to close businesses down usually by spending zillions more than they collect in taxes and, when that realisation hits them, raising taxes even higher. The exodus, especially into low-tax Texas, is enormous and behind the fleeing enterprises city after city is going broke.
The business I am speaking of makes so much money (and probably diverts huge amounts of it off-shore, so to speak) that taxation levels are not the reason for its threatened departure, no, no, it's all to do with condoms! You see, over the last few decades the porn industry, to which I am referring, has grown and grown in Los Angeles County, particularly the San Fernando Valley, but now 'elf 'n' safety' spoil-sports have stuck their oar in and passed a local law mandating that the, er, gentlemen performers wear condoms in order to mitigate the risk of AIDS infections. Well, as we all know, gentlemen, do we not?, sex with a condom is like eating chocolate with the wrapper still on and I guess watching a porn film where the gentleman pauses in order to comply with 'elf 'n' safety' would be much the same.
Anyway, the porn film bosses reckon it's a turn off and they are looking for new locations. I wonder if they have considered South Somerset? Of course, the weather isn't quite the same as the San Fernando Valley, varying as it does from sub-arctic to arctic with non-stop rain but even so there are some advantages. Modesty forbids and all that but as an experienced thespian I am prepared to make myself available and I can offer them inside locations for the filming. I even have the title for my first film: The Man Who Put The 'Long' in Long Johns!
So, only 7.7% growth in China and the markets come over all faint. Our two posh boys would give their right arms - well, Dave would give Georgie's and Georgie would give Dave's, they're politicians after all - for a growth rate half that size, in fact, a quarter would have them 'high fiving' - er, presumably with their left hands! I realise I am repeating myself but the new Chinese government has an enormously tricky route to steer as it attempts to rebalance their economy without hurting their people who are notoriously fractious, especially so in this age of instant communications. The Chinese population no longer has hopes - today it has expectations!
At last the price of oil is beginning to reflect reality. It is one of those commodities perpetually warped by some seriously big market manipulators who, amongst other things, will keep giant tankers on the high seas for as long as it takes for the price to be right, that's 'right' from their point of view, of course. However, there is one irreducible factor which cannot be ignored and that is oil and gas fracking. As I mentioned a few days ago, America is already out-producing Saudi Arabia and their requirement for imported oil is dropping rapidly. If Chinese growth is easing off, too, that is going to leave the middle east oil producers sitting on oil no-one wants. Hitherto they have kept their populations happy with handouts from oil revenues but if that is curtailed sundry kings and princes could find themselves as popular as a pork sausage in a mosque!
As for 'this septic Isle', I still fail to see any signs of real austerity. There may not be the runaway growth of yesteryear but we all know where that led so it's not much of a loss. However, the big millstone hanging round the neck of this government is their own internal energy policy. Perhaps the only good thing to arise from the 'global freezing' we have just endured is that voters all over the land will be staggereed at the size of their heating bills. Their anger might just be enough to strengthen the hands of the few realists in the government to dump all the ridiculous carbon measures and windmills into the North Sea and get on with fracking and building nuclear power stations.
Measles and MMR:Peter Hitchens in The Mail repeated a few days ago what I thought back when the controversy over the MMR versus single, separate immunisation jabs was raging in the headlines and, no doubt, in the hearts and minds of parents. Given the colossal waste of money going on in our not-so-beloved Nationalised Health Service, surely the government of the day could have allowed people a choice between the two proposals whilst the scientific validity of the doubters was tested. Today, of course, there is a massive panic on as regional health authorities use emergency procedures to vaccinate thousands of youngsters whose parents opted out all those years ago. Massive panic, of course, means massive expense, so they didn't save any money.
Beyond irony:According to The Mail, the wife of the Speaker of the House of Commons, the fragrant, dainty, saint-like Sally Bercow who took part in a Celebrity Big Brother Show but was, in a surprisingly tasteful decision by the mostly moronic viewers booted off at the first opportunity, has let it be known that she will not be attending Lady Thatcher's funeral. Her reason is that Lady Thatcher "was very divisive… She also ushered in a very greedy and selfish society". In the meantime, this delightful specimen of all that is best about English 'gels' is busy looking for some Labour party suckers supporters to provide her with a Parliamentary seat to fight at the next election. Can anyone doubt that she will make an excellent parliamentarian and prime minister, certainly capable of out-classing "that woman" . . . sorry . . . didn't quite catch that . . .
Taking UKIP seriously: Well, that's what young Master Fraser Nelson is doing over at The Coffee House. Last week he dropped in to a UKIP rally meeting in Worcester expecting to find three men and a dog and maybe an elderly lady looking for the Women's Institute. Instead, he found the main meeting room packed and when a second room with a broadcast loudspeaker was arranged that too quickly filled to over-flowing. Of course, Nigel Farrage was speaking and there is no doubt that he is one of the most gifted political speakers of this age and a lot of people would be happy just to hear him reading his laundry list. Still, Nelson was more than somewhat surprised at the turnout and in his interesting article he analyses the popularity of the UKIP and the effect it is likely to have. The forthcoming local elections should give a clue.
Alinskyed, by Jove! An interesting article at The American Thinker by Thomas Lifson which follows on from my post yesterday concerning the corrupt behaviour of the Left-wing American media in refusing to report on the mass baby murders executed by an abortionist in Pennsylvania. Apparently some Right-wing journos have studied in detail the writings of Saul Alinsky, Obama's political Godfather, and have applied his methods back onto his advocates. Thus, dictum #4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules" and dictum #13: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it" is being used against individual journalists and their organisations who have resolutely ignored this case. Such fun!
More music - sorry! I risk becoming a bit of a bore on the subject of music - sorry! But, even so, how in hell's name can I have missed Tchaikovsky's symphonies? Obviously, like most kids I loved Tchaiko's 1812 Overture decades ago when I first heard it, and I have liked and admired it since despite the pitying smiles from friends with, er, more sophisticated tastes - or so they would have me believe. And everyone knows and loves the gorgeous ballet music he composed and which reduce us all to romantic goo after a few bars. But, dammit, I have been demanding to know in the last few weeks why did no-one tell me about the symphonies, especially the 5th and 6th? They are just superb beyond description and, I am ashamed to confess, I have had all six of 'em on my shelf for years - unplayed! Now, I ask you, am I a totally daft, mad, old coot or what ? - don't answer that question!
Actually, if you are American then the chances are you will not have read or seen anything of this topic because the American media have almost to a man - and woman - done their very best to stick their heads in the sand and their fingers in their ears whilst shouting loudly "nah-nah-nah-nah-nah-nah!" I am talking of a murder trial and, it goes without saying, that if the accused were gun-owners shooting college kids or white racists shooting blacks then American newspapers and TV screens would be filled with it all for days, weeks and months. But this case which involves the specific murder of eight people but could involve hundreds is totally ignored and to prove it, here is a picture of the courtroom concerned with all the seats reserved for the MSM (non-)reporters which have remained resolutely empty!
You see, this case concerns Dr. Kermit Gosnell who has, prior to his arrest, gone off to work each morning in order to kill babies because, you see, he's an abortionist. One can imagine his wife greeting him each evening with something like,'How was your day today, dear?' and him replying, 'Oh, you know, Honey, same ol' cut 'n' stab, cut 'n' stab' or some such. Of course, he is not the only one up on charges connected to his practice of aborting late period babies, so are his former staff - and his wife, actually - and they are ratting him out big time! And so we are getting all the gory details which, of course, will come as a huge shock to the pro-abortion lobby (if their stooges in the press ever get around to reporting it) because they never allow their delicate minds to actually dwell on the details of what is required to kill a late term baby.
At this point, if you are of a delicate nature, read no further!
In Gosnell's clinic police found severed baby feet of various sizes kept in see-through containers and bodies of babies in a freezer and in the basement. The upper spinal cords of some of the babies had been severed. This is a montage of photos from the grand jury report.
The top-left photo is of particular interest because it shows the end result of the favoured means of despatching a baby after birth by severing the spinal cord between the brain and the body. According to the report of court testemony by LifeNews:
A second Delaware woman who worked at Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s abortion clinic testified today that it was “standard procedure” to snip the necks of any babies that were delivered by patients before the abortion procedure due to labor-inducing drugs.
And Lynda Williams, 44, of Wilmington, said Gosnell taught her how to flip the body of the baby over and snip its neck with a pair of scissors and recalled one time when she followed these orders and saw the child move.
“It jumped, the arm,” she said, showing the jury by raising her arm.
And you really couldn't make this up, the irony is simply too rich, just guess what her defence was?
“I only do what I’m told to do … what I was told to do was snip their neck.”
In other words, I was just obeying orders - now where have I heard that before? Needless to say, the authorities charged with supervising abortion factories (I use the word with deliberation) never set foot in the charnel-house in seventeen years despite receiving numerous complaints! If and when Gosnell and his cohorts are sentenced perhaps the police could take a look at the bureaucrats - yeah, yeah, I know, fat chance!
Jill Stanek points a derisory finger at the ever-sensitive President of the United States who wept, yes, wept, I tell you, at the deaths of all those young students at Sandy Hook but, she wonders, as a pro-abortion politician how many tears would he have shed if they had all been 'snipped' immediately after their births?!
Er, that's after he's finished shagging her! (Honestly, with all these stories from top American universities recently would you want your kids to go to any of them?) This particular professorial perv teaches, or taught, political science (natch!) at Columbia University. In his spare time he shagged his daughter who, according to the report on ClashDaily.Com, was between the ages of 17 and 19 at the time - she is now 24 years of age. A Google search led me to the original story in The Daily Mail last October - how did I miss it?
Anyway, so far, so tediously commonplace - well, fairly commonplace. But the twist comes with the professor's defence as articulated by his scumbag lawyer. According to this worthy(?), the case should never have been brought because it was sex between consenting adults and no business of anyone but the participants. After all:
Matthew Galluzzo, defending Epstein, has said that even though his daughter had emerged as a victim in the case, she could 'best be described as an accomplice'. (My emphasis)
So perhaps what dear old pops is saying through his hired mouthpiece is that in a very real way it wasn't his fault and that the real perp was his daughter for being there in the first place as well as being so, well, so damn sexy! Mr. Galluzzo, doing his darnedest to justify his fee, also drew attention to the law in Switzerland where all consensual sex including incest undertaken in privacy is permitted. The Mail informs us that the Swiss 'rolls' are not the only 'liberals' in this matter:
Consensual incest is also legal in China, France, Israel, the Ivory Coast, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain and Turkey, according to a 2007 report from the Max Planck Institute in Germany.
To be honest, I'm not too sure about Norfolk where they all do appear to look very much like each other!
I want you to read this slowly and carefully and then think on't!
U.S. Passes Saudis In Oil Output
Eh? What? Say that again! The Yanks are actually producing more oil than Saudi? Crikey! It means, according to a report in Investers.Com, that:
Imports of foreign oil will fall from 60% in 2008 to likely 30% in 2013. (My emphasis)
Not quite sure I understand the detailed logic of that last sentence, I mean, 60% and 30% of what exactly? Even so, it is easy to imagine the $ zillions that America will save and, of course, the $ zillions they will earn by exporting it. So, you ask, where is this bonanza coming from? The answer is mainly private money operating on privately-owned, or State-owned, land; the States concerned, of course, being mainly Republican! Like everything in life there are always problems and the biggest problem facing this resurgence in the production of shale oil and gas comes in the form of the US government and its 'Green Gestapo', the EPA:
The Administration's policies have hardly welcomed the oil boom although the president selectively claims credit.
Recall that then-candidate Barack Obama, during the 2008 campaign, pledged "to end the tyranny of oil in our generation as our parents ended the tyranny of Hitler." His administration, indeed, has done plenty to stymie upstream oil production although, to date, without the lethal regulatory weapons used on coal.
The uncertain fate of the Keystone XL pipeline, the first heavy-handed EPA regulation for hydraulic fracturing, endangered species in oil producing regions, and indefinitely delayed permits offshore and onshore on federal lands, are a few of the obstacles. They all pale in comparison, however, to the EPA's arrogation of the authority to regulate carbon dioxide.
Ask the coal industry how that goes. Whether EPA initiates the action or not, a federal court with the Sierra Club's bidding could force EPA to impose the same infeasible carbon limits on refineries as EPA's has imposed on coal.
Needless to say, Obama's own favourites, the alternate energy industries who are encouraged with huge handouts from the government have all proven to be 'crocks', in the British and American meaning of the word. From here, it seems that the only man to make money out of them is Al Gore! So it will be interesting to watch the Obama 'Central Committee' wrestle with the problem of whether or not to kill this golden calf whose product could pay for all sorts of Federal goodies, but whose farts pollute the atmosphere!
Meanwhile, over here, we have £ zillions waiting to be exploited in shale gas but, alas, we have two 'Dim Daves' in charge. There is Ed Davey, a swivel-eyed Greenie who thinks windmills are going to keep us warm as the globe freezes, and Dave Cameron whose knowledge of oil is confined to telling his chauffeur to ensure the car is kept topped up!
Gloomy 'Yerdy-Burdle-Durdles': I watched the first episode of the Swedish police story on BBC4 last night and went to bed even more depressed than usual. What is it, or, why is it, I wondered, that these Scandinavian 'Yerdy-Burdle-Durdles' always look so depressed and miserable? I mean, the story line was all about shooting high finance crooks so you would think there could be a touch of humour to be derived from it, but no, all the detectives in this special investigation squad continued to look as though someone had nicked the best bits from their smörgåsbord! Actually, I think I may have the answer to this Scandinavian mystery. Last week even I, your favourite 'Sunny Jim', began to feel distinctly gloomy and it was some time before I realised that it was probably this bloody-bloody arctic weather we have suffered not for days, not for weeks but for months! I am fed up with having to take about ten minutes to get dressed like an eskimo just to trudge through an icy wind to buy a paper. Of course, the estimated size of my forthcoming heating bill might have added to my misery. Oh, and the Scandi thriller failed to thrill. I'll give it one more chance next Saturday but if it doesn't cheer up then it's adjö!
Nippon No 1 . . .but No 1 what, exactly? Alas, dear reader, with the sort of efficiency which you have grown to expect from D&N I have mis-filed a report I saw during the week that provided a strategic over-view of the Pacific region. Recently I have become somewhat over-fixated on China and that has led me to ignore Japan. Big mistake because 'the times they are a-changin'' in Tokyo. A new government has introduced money printing as an economic tool which has led, naturally, to a devaluation of the Japanese yen which indicates a belligerent attitude towards what is beginning to look like a world-wide currency war. According to (my memory of!) this report there are also signs of an increase in Japanese military belligerency which is unremarkable given China's swaggering posture in regards to the South China Sea and the lunatic antics of 'Fat Boy' Kim in North Korea. Apparently many small nations on the Pacific rim actually want Japan to give up its non-aggression policy which has been in place since the end of WWII because they are looking for a counter-weight to Chinese hegemony. Watch this space . . .
Sir Edward Elgar . . . 'pompous and circumstantial' Edwardian toff and musician?
Nah! A deeply ambivalent man with a host of insecurities which, naturally, surfaced during his life and in his music which you may, just, detect if you listen to it carefully enough. Unfortunately, to fully detect the contradictions and the struggles within the man you need to be able to understand the language - music! I have mentioned before my deep regret at not having learned the two most important languages after English - music and mathematics! This personal deficiency of mine was embarrassingly emphasised by an excellent programme on BBC4 last week investigating Elgar's life in which various emminent musicians were filmed listening to his musical 'language' and obviously hearing things I could not detect. However, as a Catholic son of lower-middle-class parents born at the heights of the British Empire and in a society in which class was everything he had much to struggle with. In addition, he was a vain man - see the myriad of carefully composed photographs - and an intensely romantic one as well. Oddly, although his 'pomp and circumstance' music is taken as a musical portrait of the Victorian Empire and all it stood for there is throughout a vein of deep melancholy. A man worth studying but, dammit, I wish I could speak the lingo!
The lights are going out all over . . . er, my house, actually! And if I find the man responsible for fiitting all those smart, trendy lights that fit flush to the ceilings and which contain titchy little bulbs with two tiny metal prongs which have to be slotted into two equally minute channels which you cannot see, I will personally stick his fingers in a mincing-machine! In order to get at the dead bulb it is necessary to first remove the chromium 'thingie' which holds the fitting flush to the ceiling. In removing it, of course, you bring down half the ceiling - well, I do at any rate. Removing the old and inserting the new-fangled micro-bulbs is a test of intense concentration which must be sustained whilst standing on a wobbly step-ladder as the blood slowly but implacably falls down your arms leaving your hands and fingers looking like they will a day after you are dead! I am trying to convince the 'Memsahib' of the advantages of torches but so far . . . well, you can imagine!
I can't bring myself to write it: A few days ago I started to write a post entitled "I'm beginning to give up on America". I couldn't finish it, indeed, I had difficulty knowing where to start. And that was quite apart from the genuine pain and anguish in even attempting to marshall my thoughts. I simply cannot envisage a world in which the USA, with all its vices and virtues, was not around as final arbiter. I suppose British Edwardians living in the '20s and '30s felt much the same as they sensed the rapidly approaching demise of the Empire. I will not live long enough to see the full effects of the decline and fall of America - thank God. However, I will try and grapple with the subject later in a proper post.
Mark Steyn hones in like a guided missile: Happily, for you, I cannot improve on Mark Steyn's laser-guided wit which is impeccable even if the target was as soft and large as Maureen Dowd:
He who controls the language shapes the debate: In the same week the Associated Press announced that it would no longer describe illegal immigrants as “illegal immigrants,” the star columnist of the New York Times fretted that the Supreme Court seemed to have misplaced the style book on another fashionable minority. “I am worried,” wrote Maureen Dowd, “about how the justices can properly debate same-sex marriage when some don’t even seem to realize that most Americans use the word ‘gay’ now instead of ‘homosexual.’” She quoted her friend Max Mutchnick, creator of Will & Grace:
“Scalia uses the word ‘homosexual’ the way George Wallace used the word ‘Negro.’ There’s a tone to it. It’s humiliating and hurtful. I don’t think I’m being overly sensitive, merely vigilant.”
For younger readers, George Wallace was a powerful segregationist Democrat. Whoa, don’t be overly sensitive. There’s no “tone” to my use of the word “Democrat”; I don’t mean to be humiliating and hurtful: It’s just what, in pre-sensitive times, we used to call a “fact.”
OUCH! A direct hit!
You choose: Who would you rather be in a position of influence, an honest but dim teenager with a mouth, or to be precise, a tweeting finger, bigger than her miniscule brain; or Mr. Keith 'Vazeline' Vaz MP, a man who took payments as an MP but failed to declare them, a man who concealed payments from the Hinduja brothers via his wife's company, a man who made false accusations against a police officer and was suspended from the Commons, a man whose office expenses ranked 45th out of 647 MPs and whose second-home expenses ranked 83 out 647. Needless to say, he lives in Stanmore, a mere 45-minute journey into Westminster.
Read The Mail for the details of this young lovely who, in so many ways, stands for the contemporary 'youf' of this septic Isle and as an example of our wonderful nationalised edukashun serviss. The fact that she was placed in a position to be made a fool of is, of course, the result of the sort of soppy-daft, pc-non-think so beloved of our 'glorious leaders'.
This creepy-crawly politician is only stuck to the sole of my shoe because the mostly Asian voters of Leicester East are so dim they actually believe he is going to protect their interests rather than his own. What's "sucker" in Punjabi?
My rumbles for the day are now at an end - you will be glad to know!
Bank Holiday Mondays always feel like Sundays so I am continuing the Sunday Rumble format in which I will, from time to time during the day, ejaculate - look, I do the jokes round here! - sundry thoughts as and when they stumble into my mind. That means they will not be the usual beautifully crafted, highly intelligent, literate posts you expect on a normal day - and I won't tell you lot again!
The car washer test: There seems to be a great deal of fuss being made about Ian Duncan-Smith's so-called welfare 'reforms'. He has admitted publicly that they will not save a penny which, given that most politicians are lying liars by definition, gives me some small hope. However, what Duncan-Smith does claim is that his 'reforms' will manage the money more sensibly. I will offer you all, free of charge 'cos I'm generous like that, a simple test as to the efficacy of these 'reforms'. I make regular use of one of those car valeting services you see everywhere around these days, and yes, it is because I'm a lazy git who doesn't like getting his hands wet! I very much admire the boys and girls who work there, and do so with incredible energy in all weathers. I always make a point of asking where they come from. The answers cover just about every country in Eastern Europe. The only country never, not ever, mentioned is England! And how many Brit 'youfs' and 'youfettes' are in receipt of unemployment benefit, I wonder? When I see Brits working at these places I shall know that the 'reforms' have worked.
I told you, didn't I? A few days ago I provided you all with an audio link to a very shrewd American businessman who, apart from wanting to sell you his services, also spelled out exactly and precisely why the USA is well on its way to the knacker's yard. The Americans will owe around $20 trillion by the time Obama ends his reign and they will be utterly dependent on being able to borrow at the cheap rates they enjoy today because their dollar is still the reserve currency for much of the world's trade. Alas, that is already ending as more and more countries agree to drop the dollar and use their own currencies. I remind you of this because today the excellent Zero Hedge site is reporting that China and Australia have just agreed to ditch the dollar as the currency for their trade. This is all part of a Sino-Russian plan, already well on its way to completion, to form a trade bloc based on energy supplies with the sole aim of excluding the USA and, come to that, any of its usual glove puppets, ie, us! "The times they are a -changin'."
Footie fans: the truly brain dead: From the comfort of my own armchair with a constant supply of hot tea (courtesy of the 'Memsahib' whose hip is coming along nicely, thank you for asking, she no longer has to drag herself along on the floor which slowed up delivery recently) I have just watched Chelsea beat Man United on a freezing cold day. I suppose, just, that there is some justification to leave the comfort and warmth of your home, to travel sometimes hundreds of miles at vast expense and to pay ticket prices that will keep sundry "muddy-mettled rascals" in the millionaire styles to which they have grown accustomed, but surely having arrived there must be better things to do than just stand there chanting imbecilic slogans over and over and over again. Or is it their way of trying to prove to themselves that were they to submit to a brain scan the needle would move - just!
So farewell then, David Miliband, and good riddance! So 'Big' Dave slinks off to America to run a charity for a million quid a year because his sneaky little bro' nicked what he considered to be his political entitlement. Fair enough, I suppose, but today he also resigned as a director of the 'footie' club in his constituency because they have just appointed an Italian lout as manager who once expressed his liking for fascism. Well, David was shocked, I tell you, shocked and instantly made his feelings clear by resigning - whilst probably thanking the Lord he would never have to visit Sunderland again. Of course, had the Italian oaf expressed his support for communism, David would not have turned one of his well-groomed hairs despite the fact that communism has murdered roughly twenty or is it thirty times more millions of people than that dilletante Hitler. Perhaps the fact that his dear old dad had been a lifetime supporter of Stalin, a proper mass-murderer, had something to do with it.
Even The Economist puts global warming in the deep freeze: Thanks to Roger Simon at PJ Media I learn that the mighty Economist mag has dumped global warming:
OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO₂ put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”
And someone must have opened the windows at their London offices because now they are quoting some Russian eye-ball swiveller predicting the freezing end of the world:
Russian scientist Dr Habibullo Abdussamatov, of the St Petersburg Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory, painted the Doomsday scenario saying the recent inclement weather [in Europe] simply proved we were heading towards a frozen planet. Dr Abdussamatov believes Earth was on an “unavoidable advance towards a deep temperature drop”. The last big freeze, known as the Little Ice Age, was between 1650 and 1850.
I may be crap at predicting American elections but I did warn all of you to 'go long' on Long Johns!
My trusty observers at NightWatch tell me that 'Fat Boy' Kim has placed all of his missile, rocket and artillery formations on the highest level of readiness which is a 'war imminent basis' and means they are capable of firing within minutes of receiving the command:
In the four Army Corps that are based north of the Demilitarized Zone, the North has deployed in caves and hardened positions about 10,000 howitzers, guns and multiple round rocket launchers with wartime loads of ammunition. The gun density per kilometer is higher than at the major battles on the Soviet Front in World War II and is, in fact, derived from Soviet artillery doctrine.
No-one seems to believe that he really wants war but explanations for his apparently lunatic behaviour vary. The shrewdest, I think, was a man on Sky News who suggested that his main aim was to attract the attention of President Aloof - ooops, sorry - President Obama and force him into one-to-one negotiations over a new settlement for the Korean peninsular. This, of course, will give Kim's reputation a tremendous boost and as any settlement will probably include large dollops of American aid for which North Korea is desperate, that will add even more 'lustre to his cluster'!
For once, Obama will be right to remain aloof. This is primarily a South Korean, Japanese and Chinese problem. Kim is like a batty old man living in a community who spends all day and night shouting obscenities at the neighbours and threatening to kill them all. It is up to the neighbours to decide amongst themselves what to do about him - they, after all, have most to lose.
In the meantime, of course, in such a state of high tension the possibility of some soldier somewhere along the border making a mistake and starting a war is a very great possibility.
I rarely urge my readers to do anything but in this case I am jumping up and down and waving my arms by way of encouragement - particularly if you are one of my American readers. What I want you to do, is settle down in a comfy chair with a cup of good coffee - and a very large Scotch - and spend an hour listening to a man with a tale to tell. He is American and also a businessman so, as you will have guessed, there is a sales pitch but happily that is kept to the very end and may be avoided if so desired. However, it is the first 50 minutes or so that is riveting and in which he describes exactly and precisely why the USA is rapidly approaching a major catastrophe that will dwarf the recent bank collapses.
It is, or should be, of major concern to us 'over here' because, as the old saying has it, 'if they sniff we catch a cold'. However, it seems almost inevitable that this time they are going down not with a sniff but with double pneumonia! The warning comes in the form of an audio presentation so all you have to do is listen - and gulp at your Scotch. The central premise is simple. The American government is printing dollars at eye-watering levels never before seen in their history. They are doing this in the confident knowledge that because the dollar is the world's reserve currency used by nations everywhere to conduct their business, there will be no ill effects from this money-printing exercise because the dollar will be in constant demand. Any minute now they, the American government, are about to find out that the dollar has ceased to be a reserve currency for the simple reason that nobody trusts it any more. When that happens you can say goodbye, America and hello, Zimbabwe!
The effects of a total crash in the value of the dollar on a heavily-armed American society facing an even more heavily-armed government do not bear thinking about. The gentleman giving the presentation has not convinced me of anything new because I have long festered on my suspicion that American national debt is unsustainable - and today, and for the foreseeable future, that debt can and will only get bigger. I hasten to add that this is not entirely the fault of the Obama administration, they are simply the last in a long line of 'spendaholic' governments. By the time Obama leaves office, most experts reckon the debt will have reached $20 trillion. There are many people in his administration who will be delighted at that state of affairs and look forward with revolutionary fervour to a breakdown in civic society when the bloated chickens come home to roost.
Already China is discreetly easing itself out of dollar holdings. They are doing it slowly because they hold too much to want to cause a panic. However what they, and many other nations are doing, is to set up currency agreements which will allow the participants to do their business in currencies other than the dollar. This alone will be enough to gradually devalue the dollar as you can see from this 10 year chart, courtesy of www.tradingeconomics:
Just look where it was ten years ago and where it is today. Think of it in reverse, like the water rising slowly and inexorably up inside the SS Titanic! It is in the nature of these things that it is only at the last minute that suddenly the water rushes in and the ship turns turtle in minutes. As for my own poor 'septic Isle' I would like to think that the great minds at work in our Treasury under the guidance of our very own wise and shrewd Chancellor of the Exchequer(!) are already surreptitiously getting out of the dollar, of which they own about 135 billion, and setting our nation up ready for the coming financial apocalypse - but I don't because they ain't!
A Grand Prix grumble: Having just watched the Malaysian Grand Prix I am now going into full 'grumpy-old-man-it-was-all-much-better-back-in-my-day' mode. You may be surprised that a man such as myself who has never, not even in my youth, taken the slightest interest in motor cars, should actually be somewhat taken with Grand Prix motor racing. But once, back in a previous life - I have several of those indicating a less than straightforward career path! - I attended several Grand Prix in my capacity as the boss of a Transit van towing a trailer on which sat a BRM racing car once driven by Jackie Stewart. Yardley, the fragrances company, had decided to move into the men's market with aftershaves and all that other ghastly, smelly stuff blokes splash on all over, and our job was to visit nearby cities in Europe and dish out leaflets and free samples before going to the track on Sunday. Of course, there have been huge changes in Formula One racing since those days -the ancient name of BRM will give you a clue as to how long ago it was - but one change stands far and away above all others - these days no-one is killed! Obviously this is 'A Good Thing' but the fact is that in some indefinable way it has taken an essential element out of the sport - a bit like drinking a dry martini without any gin. I tried to remember all the names of the drivers who died during the few years when I was a dedicated fan of the sport but I simply can't recall them all, well over a dozen, anyway. I'm glad they don't die any more but today it has become all too controlled and managed with pit-line bosses telling drivers how to drive. I'd like to have seen them trying to tell Graham Hill that!
I'm shocked Shocked is shocked! Even by my convoluted standards that heading is a corker of elliptical complexity, particularly if, like me, you have never heard of Ms. Michelle Shocked. This lady is, or was, the doyen of Left-wing idols 'over there' whose career was helped enormously by photos of her being arrested at various, er, 'right on' demos beloved of the American Left. But alas, Ms. Shocked opened her mouth and instead of squawking one of her tedious songs (no, I've never heard her sing but I just know these things, trust me!) she provided her audience with her opinion of gay marriage ending her mini-rant, according to The American Spectator, thus:
The folk-rock singer then joked, “If someone would be so gracious as to please tweet out ‘Michelle Shocked just said from stage: God hates faggots.’”
Cue the instant cancellation of the remainder of her tour. I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!
U.S. crude oil production in the fourth quarter will exceed imports for the first time since 1995, as booming fields in North Dakota and Texas put the nation on track to surpass a quarter-century output record.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration, the research arm of the Energy Department, said domestic crude production will be 2 million barrels a day higher than imports at the end of 2014, as oil from outside the U.S. is forecast to drop late in that year.
“This projected change is primarily because of rising domestic crude oil production, particularly from shale and other tight rock formations in North Dakota and Texas,” the agency said in a “Today in Energy” note posted on its website.
Two thoughts occur: First, will Obama in his blunderingly stupid, anti-oil way contrive to turn the spigots off; and second, when will 'Dim Dave' drop his green trousers, bend over and take his punishment for spending zillions on utterly useless windmills instead of driving ahead with shale oil exploitation in the UK? Jest askin'!
Kerry is a Klot: Sorry, can't avoid corny alliteration, I mean 'clot', of course, and a potentially dangerous one at that. According to Jonathan S. Tobin at Commentary, Obama seems to have aquired some slight understanding of 'the bleedin' obvious' when it comes to the absolutely non-existent chance of an Israeli/Palestinian peace deal anytime in what looks like the next millenium! However, John Kerry, the new Secretary of State, is hell bent on writing his name in the history books for something other than telling 'porkies' about his service in Vietnam. The man sounds deluded and, given the nature of his 'jarb', downright dangerous, too!
I am grateful to my regular commenter, JK, for sending me a link to an article in the NYTimes written by Prof. Zheng Wang, an expert on foreign policy matters, particularly those of China. In it, he suggests that part of the problem with China's foreign policy is that it does not exist! Thinking about it and bearing in mind the last century or two in which, on good days, China was only a small and divided player in strictly regional affairs, adn on bad days, was a wrecked and raped plaything of much greater players on the international scene. Thus, it is hardly surprising that its sudden rise to global domination leaves it somewhat bewildered as it looks about it from on high and wonders what in hell to do!
Prof. Zheng indorms us that none of the members of the very top standing committees who rule China have any experience in foreign policy. In any case, he reminds us, their main, indeed, their imperative, concern is how to maintain 'Communist' Party control of a rapidly acquisitive population, that is, a population that seeks not only prosperity but also political power of a sort that is in direct opposition to the existing one party state. Naturally, the government will, from time to time, use foreign issues in the time honoured way as a means to whip up nationalist fervour, but mostly this is confined to 'neighbourhood' issues like control of the South China Seas.
When it comes to grand strategic plans for China's place in a global context there appears to be a vacuum! This is dangerous in that we have already suffered with the USA blundering from one folly to another and no clear idea on direction or purpose. The thought of a totally inexperienced China doing the same does not bear contemplation. Rather sensibly, they appear to be aware of their shortcomings and - for the moment! - they are not exerting themselves in any one particular direction. However, as a wise man once said, "Stick around, you ain't seen nuthin' yet!"
I wrote about naughty Thomas Nagel back in January. He has had the temerity to write a book pointing out 'the bleedin' obvious' that Darwinism cannot explain consciousness. Now he has popped up again inArts & Letters Dailywhich pointed me to an essay in The New Republic by Leon Wieseltier. He describes the 'shock 'n' awe outrage' in Darwinian circles at Mr. Nagel's slim little book Mind and Cosmos:
[I]n which he has the impudence to suggest that “the materialist neo-Darwinian conception of nature is almost certainly false,” and to offer thoughtful reasons to believe that the non-material dimensions of life—consciousness, reason, moral value, subjective experience—cannot be reduced to, or explained as having evolved tidily from, its material dimensions [...]
The one almost certain reaction from 'Darwinistas' (just like the 'Warmers') facing a critique of their beliefs is a screech of rage:
Steven Pinker took to Twitter and haughtily ruled that it was “the shoddy reasoning of a once-great thinker.” Fuck him, he explained.
Thus, in my eyes, Mr. Pinker sinks to the level of 'Bishop' Dawkins! Nagel had warned earlier that any criticism of the 'Church of Darwinism' was likely to cause the formation of a mob and indeed that is what has occurred on publication of his recent book - if, that is, you can call a bunch of 'tweeters' a mob:
A mob is indeed forming, a mob of materialists, of free-thinking inquisitors. “In the present climate of a dominant scientific naturalism, heavily dependent on speculative Darwinian explanations of practically everything, and armed to the teeth against religion,” Nagel calmly writes, “... I would like to extend the boundaries of what is not regarded as unthinkable, in light of how little we really understand about the world.” This cannot be allowed! And so the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Secular Faith sprang into action. “If there were a philosophical Vatican,” Simon Blackburn declared in the New Statesman, “the book would be a good candidate for going on to the Index.” I hope that one day he regrets that sentence. It is not what Bruno, Galileo, Bacon, Descartes, Voltaire, Hume, Locke, Kant, and the other victims of the anti-philosophical Vatican had in mind.
No doubt Mr. Simon Blackburn would call himself a 'liberal' - yeeeees, quite! But let us turn from one load of old rubbish, the 'Darwinistas', to another, and here I mean real rubbish as studied for some ten years by my other 'Nagel/Nagle', Prof. Robin Nagle. She is a professor at New York University and has spent her time studying the 'Noo Yawk' garbage industry. I don't wish to be ungallant but whilst she might be the clinical associate professor of anthropology and urban studies, and from her photo looks to be a very attractive and elegant lady, my advice would be remain up wind of her as far as you can! Lawrence Biemiller at 'The Chron of High Ed'refers to her as 'Dr. Garbage':
So several dozen sanitation workers waiting for roll call take notice when, a little before 6 a.m., she strides cheerfully into the sodium-vapor glare of the Manhattan 2 garage, a hulking yellow-brick relic of mid-20th-century New York that juts into the Hudson from the West Village. A sidelined collection truck—what most people would just call a garbage truck—sits outside the door, while salt spreaders are parked cheek by jowl inside (sanitation workers are responsible for clearing snow as well as collecting trash). Over by the office, guys are standing around in boisterous groups, sipping coffee, telling stories, ribbing one another, and waiting to get their assignments for the day.
Several recognize Ms. Nagle. In some cases, that's because she has worked alongside them—about 10 years ago, she decided that the best way to do field research on the department was to get hired as an ordinary sanitation worker and see DSNY from inside its lunchrooms and transfer facilities, to say nothing of seeing it from behind the gaping maws of its trucks. Other guys know her because she rode with them while collecting information for Picking Up, her new book about the department and its people, or for one of her related projects, like a series of oral histories she assigned as a class project at NYU two years ago.
Admittedly, garbage collection and disposal is a somewhat esoteric subject but on the other hand, were I paying taxes in 'Noo Yawk' I would be very interested to learn that their dustmen (as we call them 'over here') can retire on half pay and full benefits after a mere 22 years service! I am sure there were all sorts of other highly interesting facts in Mr. Bielmiller's essay but that one stuck in my mind, rather as it will, I suspect, stick in the craws of many 'Noo Yawkers'!
An article by John Steele Gordon at the Commentary site caught my attention. He draws attention to what he calls "the strike of capital". He reminds us that during the great depression, one of the major factors prolonging it was the refusal by holders of capital to invest because of a fear that the muddling politicians would make matters worse not better. He suggests that a similar strike is taking place today:
As the New York Times noted in an editorial yesterday, American corporations are sitting on vast piles of cash. Apple Corporation alone has about $140 billion in the bank. Altogether publicly-listed corporations in the United States are holding about $4.75 trillion in cash, not far short of one-third of annual GDP. In 1995, they held only about $1.2 trillion in cash, and cash has about doubled as a percentage of corporate assets since that time, to 12 percent.
Given the Left-leanings of the NYT it comes as no surprise that after harrumphing like a retired colonel in his club it makes no effort to explain why capitalists are sitting on their hands. Mr. Gordon gives them a clue:
Could it have something to do with the fear that federal economic and tax policies, and Obamacare, might either throw the economy back into recession or make any investment less profitable and more risky?
Also, the NYT is shocked, shocked, I tell you, that American corporations with overseas businesses are not repatriating the profits back home. Again, Mr. Gordon suggests that it might have something to do with the fact that profits earned abroad are not subject to tax until they are repatriated - duh!
Perhaps, instead of sending 'Old Man Cable' to a gulag (see previous post) we could send him to the NYT, they would all speak the same economic gobbledegook.
Sorry about the even-more-peurile-than-normal heading to this post but the military temperature is rising on the Korean peninsular. According to my trusty, old warriors at NightWatch the bellicosity from the North Koreans has reached levels not seen since 1988. Not only have they unilaterally abrogated the ceasefire set in place at the end of the last Korean war but now their government-controlled media are ratcheting up the sense of crisis amongst their own people, warning them of imminent war. 'Fat Boy' Kim has paid an official visit to the artillery units which fired on the off-shore Islands owned by South Korea a few years ago. The NightWatch boys and girls reckon that the North Koreans will now be in a high state of readiness for war with all ICBMs loaded and ready to fire on the word of command.
Meanwhile, back in Beijing, the silence is deafening! I cannot believe they are happy about the possibility of a war - especially a nuclear war - breaking out on their borders. The leadership in China maintains its political control via the constant increase in trade and wealth shared amongst its people. If that is disrupted and zillions of Chinese suddenly loose jobs and incomes they have become used to, the government will quickly be in trouble.
The problem with 'Fat Boy' Kim's antics is that there are too many actors involved - in the two Koreas, in Beijing, in Washington and Tokyo, and thus the chances of mistakes and misapprehensions increases hugely. However, perhaps now, people will realise the dangers of loonies being allowed to 'go nuclear' - and they do not come much loonier than those in Tehran - except possibly in Pyongyang!
This is called an MRAP, or, a Mine Resistant Armor Protected vehicle. Just the job, you might think if you are an American, because it should keep the chaps safe and sound out in Afghanistan or some other murky corner of the American empire. Well, it may, but - yes, you knew there was a 'but' coming - it's not for use in foreign fields, oh dear me, no, it's intended for operations - on the street where you live!
Your Homeland Security Department (CEO: Ms. Janet Napolitano; Chairman: B. Obama) have just purchased a few of these monster machines, well, I say 'a few', what I mean is, a few hundred . . . er, well, actually, a few thousand . . . that is, 2,700, to be exact! And, just in case it transpires that all you gun-toting Republicans are better armed than your government, they have also bought a few hundredthousand million - sorry, sorry - I mean, billion bullets, er, 1.6 billion, to be exact. And whilst they are busy spending your money to 'tool themselves up', they are equally busy trying to disarm you!
Not that they don't have your best interests at heart, as you can tell from all those nice government drones that circle around your neighbourhood. And whilst President Obama might kill American citizens he is always meticulous in doing so when they are overseas - by the way, exactly where are you planning to holiday this year?
According to 'The High Priest of America', chaos would reign across the land if the so-called 'sequestration' act went into operation on Friday night. His public breast-beating was picked up by the Chorus, that is, the American media, or the PR Department of the Democrat party as it is known, and the message was shrilled forth to all and sundry. As it happened, 'all and sundry' simply shrugged and went on about their business. No planes fell out of the sky, the American army continued to waste its time and money in Afghanistan, firemen continued to put out fires and policemen did what policemen have always done, that is, give the odd villain a smart truncheon smack between the legs pour encourager les autres!
[J]ust one-half of 1 percent of GDP. It amounts to 1.4 cents on the dollar of nondefense spending, 2 cents overall.
Or, as the witty Mark Steyn puts it:
No, in an America in which every throwaway gag is a hate crime, Obama’s fake disaster movie of the month is the only joke we all go along with, even though he’s insulting our intelligence far more than Seth and the Los Angeles Gay Men’s Chorus singing “We Saw Your Boobs” to Anne Hathaway and Halle Berry.
Can you pierce the mists of time and go back all the way to the year 2007? Back then, federal spending was 40 percent lower than it is today. In a mere half-decade, has all that 40 percent gravy become so indispensable to the general welfare that not even a teensy-weensy sliver of it can be cut? [My emphasis]
If you really believe that, then America is going to die, and a gullible citizenry willing to give this laughable charade the time of day will bear ultimate responsibility. We have seen the boobs, and they are us.
It became very clear to everyone, except 52% of American voters, within a couple of years of Obama's presidency that he was a born-again liar of monstrous proportions. At long last the ninnies in the Republican party have summoned up such strength of purpose as they possess and have decided to call this bluffer's bluff. And the last word goes to the American Stock Exchange which rose on Friday!
A depressingly accurate editorial in this week's 'Speccie' (no link to the editorial) entitled "Little Britain". Perhaps 'Miniscule Titchy Britain' might have been even more accurate. The writing on the wall, or perhaps, the writing down of our armed forces, has been evident since 'Dave' cut the defence budget but simultaneously increased the Foreign Aid budget by exactly the same amount. What bullets will not achieve, apparently bedpans and blankets will! Anyway, it is now clear that it is not just that Britain has no appetite for foreign adventures/projecting power (you choose!), the fact is that today we are incapable of it. The French, with a little help from their friends(!), managed to fly a few troops to Mali in order to shoot up some 'Fuzzie-wuzzies' who quickly ran away but who, once reorganised, now appear to be coming back. In the meantime, nos chers alliés, having run out of real bombs, were forced to drop concrete bombs during their recent Malian campaign. And 'Dave', with all the dexterity of a card-sharp, has now reversed his earlier policy by ear-marking part of the Aid budget to the military. By jingo, it's this sort of clear, decisive thinking that has got us where we are today!
We're fucked, the French are fucked, NATO is fucked - and Obama doesn't give a fuck! He, of course and not without cause, is fed up with defending Europeans who refuse to cough up a reasonable amount of dosh for the service provided, and anyway he has turned away to face what he considers to be a truly grand strategic problem - China. Given the potential riches already flowing from shale oil, his interest in the Middle East is also waning. If Europe is still highly dependent on Arab oil then, he will let it be known, let them take on the burden of providing the security for it. It is now clear beyond doubt that he has no intention of lifting a finger to stop Iran gaining nuclear capability. All those many Europeans and Brits who moaned and groaned about 'irresponsible American adventurism' now have what they wished for. Let's hope they enjoy it!
Sorry for the confusing pun in the title but Mr. Astrue, himself, used it in one of his sonnets and you all know how adept I am at nicking other people's jokes! Who be Mr. Astrue? you ask, well, he's sort of a nonentity, I suppose, as only a Commissioner for Social Security in America can be. Off the top of my head I cannot think of a more tedious reply to offer to a polite enquiry at a cocktail party as to how I earned my living and to answer, "I am the Commissioner for Social Security"! You would instantly spot your interlocuter's eyes searching desperately over your shoulder for someone - anyone! - more interesting to talk to. However, in Mr. Astrue's case you would be deeply mistaken. He is a very interesting fellow, indeed, as I informed you all back in May 2010 when I quoted some of his superb poetryincluding one written in strict Shakespearean sonnet form. Anyone who can do that with style is exceedingly interesting in my book!
Thus, I was very irritated the other day to catch just a glimpse of his picture on Fox News and hear the tail-end of a report to the effect that as outgoing - they are only appointed for six years - Commissioner for Social Security he had made a speech critical of both Congress and the White House, and I had missed it. In effect, he told them that the entire American political establishment were refusing to face up to the fact that by 2033 the system would be broke and paying only 75 cents in the dollar! The Business Insider site reported it thus:
Instead of making the hard choices to fix Social Security's financial problems, policymakers "use it as a tool of political rhetoric," Astrue said.
Astrue, 56, has headed the federal government's largest program since 2007 — he was nominated by former President George W. Bush. By law, Social Security commissioners serve six-year terms, so President Barack Obama will now have the opportunity to choose his own nominee, who must be approved by the Senate. Astrue's last day on the job was Wednesday.
The trustees who oversee Social Security say the program's trust funds will run dry in 2033, leaving Social Security with only enough revenue to pay about 75 percent of benefits. Already the program is paying out more in benefits than it collects in payroll taxes.
Instead of making the hard choices to fix Social Security's financial problems, policymakers "use it as a tool of political rhetoric," Astrue said.
Astrue, 56, has headed the federal government's largest program since 2007 — he was nominated by former President George W. Bush. By law, Social Security commissioners serve six-year terms, so President Barack Obama will now have the opportunity to choose his own nominee, who must be approved by the Senate. Astrue's last day on the job was Wednesday.
Of course, being a Bush appointee, and telling the President he was not doing his 'jarb', is not the way to have your appointment extended. But I expect the highly intelligent Mr. Astrue knew that perfectly well and is probably very happy to get back to really important things like composing Shakespearean sonnets!
Please don't misunderstand, I'm not knocking quiet times, I like them - boring is good in my book, especially when it applies to international affairs. But still, somehow, in some way, it don't feel right!
Take Europe for example. Nothing has changed fundamentally, half of them are flat broke, they haven't managed to take even faltering steps towards unification, and yet the markets seem supine. Sky News are running some adverts for a forthcoming report on conditions in Spain and the other 'Mediterranean' countries and they are truly appalling. Whole families sitting linked arm to arm round their homes in an effort to thwart the bailiffs coming to repossess them. I do realise that it is necessary to take statistics from such places with due caution but on the other hand all reports indicate massive youth unemployment of the sort that set off revolutions in countries on the southern side of the Med. And yet ... and yet ... I read somewhere in the last few (for me, hectic!) days a report based on polling evidence that although the populations concerned - Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Irish - are on the rack, support for remaining inside Europe and the euro is still strong. Apparently they are all terrified of reverting back to their own currencies which is, of course, their only real chance of prospering again reasonably quickly. They might not like the German boot on their necks but they are prepared to shut their eyes and kiss it!
Meanwhile, over on the other side of the globe - thank God! - the North Koreans are proving yet again that the loonies are in charge of the asylum, first firing an ICBM and then letting off a nuclear firework. Happily, for the moment at any rate, this seems to be more of a Chinese problem than anyone else's - although South Koreans and Japanese might think differently! It is now crystal clear that either China is unable to control N. Korea, or, is secretly quite happy for them to kick sand in the face of their opponents who are mostly China's opponents as well. My trusty 'intel operators' at NightWatch sum it up thus:
US and Allied deterrence measures have prevented war for six decades, but lately have had no measurable influence in deterring North Korean provocations, preventing the development of nuclear weapons and missile delivery systems or in stopping sales of North Korean missiles and conventional weapons to Pakistan, Iran, Syria and Libya. The US also has shown itself recently to be slow or unable to respond to provocations in a timely fashion. As a result, the new North Korean leader seems less intimidated by the US than were his forbears.
China cannot or will not restrain North Korea. [My emphasis]
What is even more worrying is that the pompous, ignorant and arrogant dimwit in the White House appears to have no concerns and instead concentrates what passes for his mind on how to spend more and yet more dollars he does not possess on utter futilities like so-called 'green industries'. Even if 'sequestration' does not occur in a few weeks, he still intends to slash and burn defence spending whilst he diverts funds towards the Democrat voters of America. In the meantime, North Korea either sells to, or advises on, nuclear weaponry and delivery systems to every enemy of the USA, Iran being one of the first in the queue. Back in Washington, 'Mr. Smug 'n' Mighty', with his nose raised, concentrates on delivering ponderous speeches concerned almost totally with American domestic politics. He is Wilson and Roosevelt combined.
Well, you can enjoy it if you're not an American. If you are one, it may not be quite so amusing. Still, those of a philosophic nature may enjoy the irony, as the Federal money supply dries up, that they didn't have much of it in the first place and anyway, it was Obama's wheeze, so, a case of a kidder kidded!
Sorry to be even more obscure than usual but it is all to do with that great mystery known as the American government's financial arrangments - or non-arrangements, if you prefer. As so often in these arcane American affairs I rely on 'The Kraut' for guidance:
For the first time since Election Day, President Obama is on the defensive. That’s because on March 1, automatic spending cuts (“sequestration”) go into effect — $1.2 trillion over ten years, half from domestic (discretionary) programs, half from defense.
The idea had been proposed and promoted by the White House during the July 2011 debt-ceiling negotiations. The political calculation was that such draconian defense cuts would drive the GOP to offer concessions. [My emphasis]
I stress the final paragraph because it is an example of that great universal Truth that when Democrats get clever you may expect a pratfall or their trousers falling down almost immediately!
It backfired. The Republicans have offered no concessions. Obama’s bluff is being called and he’s the desperate party. He abhors the domestic cuts. And as commander-in-chief he must worry about indiscriminate Pentagon cuts that his own defense secretary calls catastrophic.
And it was all his idea - my dears, simply too, too, delicious! And now, 'Mr. Wonderful' is in full panic mode because the sequester gets under way in just three weeks. 'The Kraut's advice is simple - let him swing in the wind:
Republicans should explain — message No. 1 — that in the fiscal-cliff deal the president already got major tax hikes with no corresponding spending cuts. Now it is time for a nation $16 trillion in debt to cut spending. That’s balance. [...] If they do nothing, the $1.2 trillion in cuts go into effect. This is the one time Republicans can get cuts under an administration that has no intent of cutting anything. Get them while you can.
Of course, the damage will be immense but infinitely worse if the cuts are administered with the blunt axe of the sequestor arrangement. The damage will be mitigated if the cuts are administered with some care and thought - but the Democrats are just going to hate sitting down with Repubs and even mentioning that dreadful four-letter word - cuts!
Naturally, the Democratic Senate, which hasn’t passed a budget since before the iPad, has done nothing. Nor has the president — until his Tuesday plea.
The GOP should reject it out of hand and plainly explain (message No. 2): We are quite prepared to cut elsewhere. But we already raised taxes last month. If the president wants to avoid the sequester — as we do — he must offer a substitute set of cuts.
Otherwise, Mr. President, there is nothing to discuss. Your sequester — Republicans need to reiterate that the sequester was the president’s idea in the first place — will go ahead.
I have already arranged my knitting needles and wool and I have booked my seat in the first row before the scaffold. Can't wait! Oh dear - a dread thought! No, surely not, tell me it ain't so - the Repubs can't miss this opportunity, can they . . . ?
Now look, before I go any further I want you lot to reralise that this is a serious post and I don't want any giggling, sniggering or jokes about 'waiter, there's a tit in my soup' - geddit?! Also, this post is my way of offering thanks to my e-pal and longterm Commenter, 'Jock McDearieme', who contributes so much to this blog in his famously, er, pithy style! Anyway, I bring glad tidings for him and for you via the SunSentinel of South Florida that the very latest for sophisticated diners in the USA are 'Breastaurants' and even as I write a new chain is opening - The Tilted Kilt. Here in this photo are who I believe to be the Head Waiter and the Sommelier:
Jokes like 'I wanna pop your cork, baby', or, 'is the breast of chicken smooth and firm' are definitely not permitted. These very nice gals take their jobs seriously, as does their boss, the very suitably named Mr. Sloboda:
Breastaurants don't hire their employees, they audition and cast them, said Joe Sloboda, a restaurateur behind the upcoming Twin Peaks South Florida franchise.
"We want to make sure people on our team will fit the role, with the right personality, the right skill-set," he said. For example, the Tilted Kilt announced it will hold "casting calls," this weekend from 12-5 p.m. for "all roles".
Well, darlings, I think I'll withdraw my earlier offer to go and help torture prisoners in Gitmo and instead volunteer my considerable theatrical skills to Mr. Sloboda to help him judge the talent, as it were. I think, in a very real sense, my sweets, he needs me! He also runs a chain of Breastaurants called Twin Peaks. With that sort of sophisticated wit he should return my favour and write some of this blog!
I think I mentioned the other day that I had made a special trip to London to see a production by my AmDram group which was so far on the other side of appalling as to be out of sight - actually, that's not a very good metaphor because I wish to God it had been out of sight - and sound - and all sensory perception!
So today I decided to go and see Zero Dark Thirty on the utterly mistaken - I now know the hard way! - assumption that it was a film best seen in a cinema rather than my TV. Apart from the 'story line' being almost incomprehensible one was asked by the film makers to accept that a very young and attractive - natch! - female CIA officer spent 12 years of her career doing nothing but chase round the world looking for Osama bin Laden. She appeared to have no other duties, no outside life, no nothing, just chasing old OBL - well, not him, really, just a tedious multitude of whiskery rascals who might or might not know him! Easy to make a mistake, after all, it being a well known fact established back in the days of Empire that all natives look like each other, a tactic they use to fool the white man! Anyway, this lot totally confused me because I couldn't work out who was the 'baddie' and who was the 'goodie' as they all sort of hung around looking at each other suspiciously in the crowded streets of Peshawar, or Islamabad, or Timbukto, or it might have been Bradford. Apparantly they wasted years of their time doing this sort of thing - and wasted hours of mine watching them doing it.
The film opened with prolonged 'torture' scenes, although, as torture goes it was pretty milk and water stuff - well, mostly water, actually, poured over towels held to the suspect's face. Not a sign of a pair of pliers or a blow torch anywhere and if they show it in Germany I fear there may be giggles from the odd retired Gestapo officer if they are in the audience! I fear that the real CIA will cringe in embarrassment at this sequence because the techniques applied were totally crude and inept and I suspect - I hope! - that they are far more intelligent than that. Of course, during this, the little CIA girlie looked rather upset because, this being Hollywood 'n' all, you couldn't have the heroine stamping on his goolies with her high-heels and shouting, "Give him one for me!" No, no, you see, she's really, really sensitive so she has to look - pained.
The final sequence is the raid itself which, like most of the rest of this film, was incomprehensible. I mean, they had a scale model of OBL's house and compound and the attack force would have had a briefing and some training so you'd think the film makers would have used that to explain the plan of attack to us, the audience. No chance, it must have been TOP SECRET, or something, because all we see is men in big helmets with headlamps on their heads running around blowing in doors, killing people but trying to be nice to the 'likkle-kiddie-winkies' before pumping OBL full of so much lead they could hardly carry him.
Final scene of all, in which you would have needed a heart of stone not to burst out laughing (thank you, Oscar, such a dear boy!) was little 'Miss CIA' sitting alone in an air force transport and as the camera closes in we see a tear trickle down her face - 'cos she's nice, see; really nice, geddit; and sensitive, too!
I wonder what it would take to send the Navy Seals in to blow up Hollywood?
But of course, some 70+ years on when traitors are unmasked, everyone shrugs and mutters, "Alger who?" or "So what?" before changing the subject. Almost no-one pauses to cogitate upon the possibility that if it was like that then, why wouldn't it be like that today? Even so, a recent book [1], reviewed in The American Spectator, undertakes the unpleasant task of raking the muck that surrounded and infected the government of FDR during WWII. The authors retread the path laid bare by the Venona Project in which the American and British intelligence services combined to decrypt tens of thousands of messages sent by the various Soviet agencies. The result was to bury a lance of truth into the Leftist myth that Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White were patriots, the Rosenbergs were innocent and that Whittaker Chambers was a liar. It is now indisputable fact that the exact reverse was true. Even more, the deeply unpleasant Sen. McCarthy was, in essence, right and the equally unpleasant Richard Nixon was right to defend Whittaker Chambers. All those attending the Yalta Conference were either knowingly or unknowingly dancing like Russian puppets as Stalin jerked their strings. To be fair to Roosevelt, which he barely deserves, he was by this time in failing health and was thus well and truly in the manipulative hands of the likes of Harry Hopkins. Thus, half of Europe was handed over, bound and gagged, to a monster. To those, like Enoch Powell and Andrew Alexander, who maintain that the Cold War was totally unnecessary I can only suggest that 'there is none so blind as them wot is determined not to see'! If Stalin could have grabbed more of Europe he would have done - and he worked hard enough at destabilising both Italy and France to say nothing of the Berlin blockade.
Today in the USA, the Left have no need of foreign powers to assist in their planned destruction of their democracy. They subverted the main organs of society decades ago and thus today they have the overwhelming support of the MSM, the universities, most of the professions, a gargantuan - and growing - civil service and, via the schools, the hearts and what passes for the minds of the young. Home run, really!
1: Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government By M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (Threshold Editions, 294 pages, $26)
Sorry for the bad language but sometimes the sheer amount of blatant, unrepentant and deliberate lying by our politicians becomes too much to suffer in silence. Let me put it in clear English:
David Cameron is a deceitful lying liar!
I am sick of him and his equally untruthful pal in the Treasury telling us all bare-faced lies by claiming that they are "paying down Britain’s debts.”
David Cameron’s policy is to increase Britain’s debt by 60 per cent, more than any European country. To increase it more over five years than Labour did over 13 years. Just yesterday, we learned the national debt had hit £1,111 billion and it’s heading to £1,400 billion.
You will not be surprised to know that his chubby-cheeked deputy, Nick Clegg, is also lying through his teeth:
His deputy, Nick Clegg, has previously boasted that his government is “wiping the slate clean of debt”. An utterly misleading analogy. Here are the Treasury’s published plans:-
And they get away with it by relying on the fact that 99% of the population do not understand the difference between a deficit and a debt. Yes, you can cut your deficit by not over-spending quite as much as you did the year before but if you are still over-spending then your debt increases!
And if we allow this to continue the result will be catastrophic, as this superb YouTube explanation of the real fiscal cliff the Americans are heading towards - not the pretend one they keep avoiding - makes clear. Please, I do urge you all to watch this video, he has the ability to make the complicated easy to understand.
You will also note that 'Ed 'n' Ed' say nothing because they would be telling the same lies themselves so they have no desire to educate the voters!
ADDITIONAL:Isobell Hardman at The Coffee House reports that Fraser Nelson's accusations of falsehood were repeated at a Downing Street briefing this morning - so hopefully the MSM will pick it up and run with - particularly in teh future if they repeat those lies:
Fraser has explained the reality – that Cameron is in fact increasing Britain’s debt by 60 per cent – in this post with two unnerving graphs, and the Prime Minister’s spokesman conceded that ‘the debt as a percentage of GDP has risen’. Asked whether the Prime Minister understood the difference between the debt and the deficit, he said: ‘Yes, he does.’ By way of explanation for the broadcast, he added:
‘The point the Prime Minister was making is that it is the Prime Minister’s government that is taking the tough decisions to deal with the economic crisis the government inherited and we are making progress with that.
‘We have a long-term fiscal consolidation plan set out across this Parliament which will see debt as a percentage of GDP falling by 2016/17, that’s how we are getting debts under control.’
To be fair to 'Ed 'n' Ed', they have picked up on it:
Naturally Labour – regardless of its own plans for borrowing – is making as much of this as it can, complaining today to the UK Statistics Authority about the claim in the broadcast.
What a very odd ceremony the presidental inaugeration has become. It strives, quite rightly, to become a piece of serious political theatre but then manages to turn the whole thing into a Neil Simon comedy! Perhaps the funniest 'gag' was some shrieking diva called Beyonce who slaughtereed the national anthem, not inadvertantly due to nerves, but deliberately by having recorded it earlier and then 'lip-syncing' it before an audience of the Great and the Good - and the not-so-good - according to thelavalizard.comwho told us:
Standing less than three feet away from the newly reelected President Barack Obama, Beyonce pretended to be singing live as she shamelessly basked in the glory of her crazed fans who praised her for her so called “flawless” vocals. Meanwhile, Obama’s mother-in-law looked visibly upset, probably because she isn’t a fan of silent comedy.
There then followed a magisterial procession of, well, Secret Servicemen, actually. Dozens of them, hundreds possibly, all marching steadily along with narrowed eyes, their top coats carefully unbuttoned so they could reach those nasty, horrid gun-thingies that kill little kiddie-winkies and should be banned except that Obama and his missus want to live, all of them desperately trying to look like Clint Eastwood. They were preceded by a phalanx of what looked like several thousand motor-cycle cops which must have made it a Whoopie Day for any speeders on the motorways around Washington. They were followed by an enormous fleet of cars - all big, all black, all anonymous except that they all screamed just one word - 'Government!' Of Mr. and Mrs.' O' there was no sign which was, as they say 'over there', tough tittie for all those suckers folks who had spent fortunes and wasted hours if not days trying to get there for a view of 'The One'. Eventually the cavalcade stopped and the doors to a limo opened and out stepped the POTUS and his missus, the FOTUS. Graciously, they walked about a hundred yards to prove they really were there and hadn't sneaked back to the White House for a quiet G&T before facing what was obviously scheduled to be a ghastly evening.
You see, they knew what others did not, that a certain Ms. Jennifer Jones - no, me neither - was scheduled to sing the song that would accompany the POTUS and the FOTUS as they took to the floor for the first dance of the Presidential Ball. Judged by the report in thelavalizard.com there should be a law rushed through Congress against cruelty to songs:
Speaking of unbridled yelling, Jennifer Hudson proved that nobody can do as far over the top as her this evening at the Commander-In-Chief’s Ball. The big-mouther singer was given the chance to serenade newly reelected US President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama but completely ruined the moment with her wails.
Hudson was loud and obnoxious as she bellowed Al Green’s “Let Stay Together”. Honestly, she clearly forget how to use her indoor voice as she tackled the Obama’s favourite song as though she was charging for the last whole wheat bun at Subway. You know, because she’s on a diet.
If you are of the 'Max Mosely Tendency' then feel free to visit the 'Lava Lizard' site and listen to it but this blog holds no responsibility for your ear drums. Finally, of course, we come to the star of these peculiar American celebrations - Lady Gaga! Words fail me so instead here is a picture:
And, yes, those really are gun-thingies on her tits! Is this really what entertains them in The White House? Incidentally, in the linked piece below from The Independent (the favourite reading of my e-pal 'Dearieme'!) someone called Nick Hasted gave her 'performance-lite' a truly tremulous, gushing review.Perhaps they should rename him 'Nick Hasty'! I trust it resulted in a Bill Deedes-style response: Surely shome mishtake here: Ed.
Well, why not? After all, Sen. Chuck Hagel was only a sergeant in the Vietnam war and I was a corporal - substantive, mind! - in the British army at roughly the same time, even if I was idling my time away living amongst the fleshpots of Singapore whilst he was up the sharp end in Vietnam earning serious medals. And anyway, now that he, as a putative Republican, has been chosen by President Obama to be the next Secretary of State for Defence then as far as I am concerned he has assumed the character of one of those targets they used to hoist up at the end of our firing range at which I used to waste quids worth of ammo as my shots went everywhere except near the picture of a charging enemy infantryman at which I was supposed to be aiming! Of course, being of a peaceable nature myself I would not do this without provocation but the fact is that just about everyone and his uncle are taking potshots at poor old Chuck. He must feel as though he's back in Vietnam.
The puzzle of the Chuck Hagel nomination for defense secretary is that you normally choose someone of the other party for your cabinet to indicate a move to the center, but, as the Washington Post editorial board points out, Hagel’s foreign-policy views are to the left of Barack Obama’s, let alone the GOP’s. Indeed, they were at the fringe of the entire Senate. [My emphasis]
So what’s going on? Message sending. Obama won reelection. He no longer has to trim, to appear more moderate than his true instincts. He has the “flexibility” to be authentically Obama.
According to 'The Kraut', there are three main areas of policy with which to judge Sen. Hagel's approach. The first, is military spending which is scheduled to go under a $600 billion scalpel, a policy vehemently opposed by Sen. Hagel's predecessor which might have been the cause of his early demise. But 'Sgt.' Hagel, having looked at the army from the bottom up, knows the unbelievable amount of waste and profligacy, to say nothing of kick-backs and profiteering, that goes on inside a defence budget. So in this he may be right, as Mark Steyn makes clear in The National Review:
But beyond the politics is a real question. He’s [Hagel] not wrong to raise the question of Pentagon “bloat.” The United States has the most lavishly funded military on the planet, and what does it buy you? In the Hindu Kush, we’re taking twelve years to lose to goatherds with fertilizer.
Something is wrong with this picture. Indeed, something is badly wrong with the American way of war. And no one could seriously argue that, in the latest in the grim two-thirds-of-a-century roll call of America’s un-won wars, the problem is a lack of money or resources. Given its track record, why shouldn’t the Pentagon get a top-to-toe overhaul — or at least a cost-benefit analysis?
Quite so but I can't help wondering how much of baby will be thrown out with the bath water, by which I mean, the really slick technology required for research and development of the very latest in weaponry costs zillions even with Scrooge in charge of the Pentagon. The Chinese have zillions, not in cash terms but in science graduates prepared to work for peanuts provided they get a flat in one of those empty modern cities that litter their landscape. What I'm trying to say is that if government is hopeless at running over-spent budgets which at least produce the goodies in the end, how efficient will they be at cutting back budgets without ending worthwhile research projects?
The second Hagel policy item ' The Kraut' concentrates on is Israel:
The issue is not Hagel’s alleged hostility but his public pronouncements, his refusal to make moral distinctions, for example. At the height of the second intifada, a relentless campaign of indiscriminate massacre of Israelis, Hagel found innocence abounding: “Both Israelis and Palestinians are trapped in a war not of their making.”
I'm not sure one can afford "moral distinctions" in international affairs but whilst the Israelis no doubt have much blood on their hands it as nothing compared to the corrupt, vicious and self-perpetuating war policy of the Arab regimes which they have maintained as a means to maintain themselves. That has now failed and even worse collection of loonies is in charge of their various asylums. There is also a real-politik argument in favour of supporting Israel, particularly now. The new Islamist regimes will hate us whether we support Israel or not, so we might as well keep the Israelis going for as long as possible in order to keep otherwise idle and mischievous Arab hands and minds busy. It is an Obama-rish fancy that playing 'nicely-nicely' with your sworn enemies will somehow placate them. Read some history, Mr. President, and you, too, Sen. Hagel!
Thirdly, of course, comes Iran, and 'The Kraut' spells it out:
Hagel doesn’t just oppose military action, a problematic option with serious arguments on both sides. He actually opposed any unilateral sanctions. You can’t get more out of the mainstream than that.
He believes in diplomacy instead, as if talk alone will deter the mullahs. He even voted against designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization.And most tellingly, he has indicated that he is prepared to contain a nuclear Iran, a position diametrically opposed to Obama’s ostensibly unalterable opposition to containment in his first term. What message do you think this sends the mullahs?
And that’s the point. Hagel himself doesn’t matter. He won’t make foreign policy. Obama will. Hagel’s importance is the message his nomination sends about where Obama wants to go. The lessons are being duly drawn. Iran’s official media have already cheered the choice of what they call this “anti-Israel” nominee. And they fully understand what his nomination signals regarding administration resolve about stopping them from going nuclear. [My emphasis]
Mark Steyn makes more or less exactly the same point but adds in a gloomy assessment of the future in the first half of the 21st century:
The rest of the world can see coming the Pentagon downsizing — and the inevitable, commensurate decline of U.S. power. Pacific Rim countries will have to rethink reliance on the counterbalance of the U.S. Navy and consider acquiescence to Chinese regional hegemony. Arab countries will understand that the current rapid decline of post-Kissinger U.S. dominance in the region is not cyclical but intended to become permanent.
Hagel is a man of no independent stature. He’s no George Marshall or Henry Kissinger. A fringe senator who left no trace behind, Hagel matters only because of what his nomination says about Obama.
Meanwhile, in The Spectator, Andrew J. Bracevich, turn his fire onto the Chiefs of Staff themselves. He is amused by General Martin E. Dempsey, the COS Chairman, who continues the Pentagon custom of holding regular strategy meetings in which all the 'brass', with plastic booties on their shoes, stride around a map of the world painted on the floor of an enormous room deciding on their strategy for this or that eventuality which he describes as "a made-for-Kubrick set-up" inviting hilarity and scorn. I'm not so sure of that. Generals are supposed to think of the strategic threats to their country. In fact, if the COS had done a little more of it, as well as doing it better, in the 1930s they might have been better prepared for the 1940s! But Mr. Bracevich will not have it:
Yet Dempsey’s map hints at the dirty secret that members of the fraternity of strategists, civilian and military alike, are loath to acknowledge. The formulation of strategy begins by assuming away complexity, reducing reality to a convenient caricature. Strategic analysis is almost by definition dumbed-down analysis. To conjure up solutions, you start by simplifying the problem.
Reading his essay I decided that what Mr. Bracevich is really complaining about is not strategic thinking but poor strategic thinking! Well, we'll all drink to that, especially the poor old 'Grunts' and 'Toms' who get left with the job of putting it into action. But that sort of 'conclusion' does take you very far. Von Schlieffen, von Moltke the Younger and the entire German General Staff went in for arguably the greatest exercise in strategic thinking the world has ever seen, even down to the intervals, measured with Prussian exactitude down to minutes, between hundreds of trains moving across Germany in 48 hours. Six weeks after the war they started, they lost - even if it did take them another four years to own up!
Anyway, all those of you (and there are a few not a million miles from my regular commenter, DM!) who pray for a docile America kept so busy turning swords into plough-shares that it will quietly ignore the rest of the globe going to hell in handcart may be about to live your dream. Let's hope it doesn't turn into a nightmare!
That Abe Lincoln has a lot to answer for! First of all, the trailer for the current film was on last night as I waited for Les Mis to begin. Obviously one cannot judge the film by a few quick takes here and there in a trailer but I must say that Daniel Day-Lewis's shouting, peremptory, desk-banging attitude got up my nose! The second thing that Abe has to answer for is finally provoking me into buying a good biography of his life. I have one which has remained on my book shelf untouched since I first bought it from a charity shop. It is a slim volume written by Jan Morris but I am somewhat reluctant to start it because one of the reviews describes it as "blending fact, narrative and imagination"(!) which is not what I am looking for. As that old American TV policeman used to say in every episode, "Just gimme the facts". And I want the facts even more now that I have read a letter in today's Telegraph (can't find a link) from the historian, Alan Sked, in which he says that:
Lincoln was a racist who deliberately started a war that killed more than 650,000 people. He had no intention of freeing slaves, who freed themselves by fleeing to Unionist lines during a war that was going badly for the North and in which they became needed as recruits. [...]
Until the day he died, Lincoln's ideal solution to the problem of blacks was to "colonise" them back to Africa or the tropics.
Eh? What? Is that really true? Tell me it ain't so - but better still, recommend to me as honest a biography as you know of. 'SoD' gave me a fistful of book tokens for Christmas and, on your advice, I will invest some of them into a good biography of the man about whom I know nothing other than the 'saintly' glow which emanates to this day from his historical persona; a glow, incidentally, which, in so far as I ever think about it, I view with some suspicion!
Recent Comments