Open letter to my "representatives" (or not)

SUPPORT BOEHNER:

No budget, no pay is brilliant. Well done.

Connie Mack's penny plan is similar.

As is apparently the affirmable allegation that all recent mass murderers are Democrats and psychotic... So please introduce a bill to declare all Democrats mentally ill.

Also please note the attempts to rationalize electoral college imbalances:

http://tinyurl.com/a7l2kfx

Please introduce a bill to implement by district electoral votes. The present system is an abortion. This man was elected by 31% of the population. An abortion.

Best regards.

Truth and Fiction

> I just finished Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics".

You are all too totally brilliant, as I have observed over the past ... almost 40 years. Well, most of you...

:-)

So let's please put on our thinking caps. Surely, if anyone in this nation can figure this out, we can.

We have hideous problems facing this nation, this state, this city, this neighborhood.

We need to change the rules:

Symptomatic treatments do NOT work.

We need root cause analysis.

Our society treats every problem in a simplistic symptomatic way:

      "Here, sorry it hurts, take an aspirin."

     "Oh, I'm sorry it hurts. Here, we'll cut it out."

Or perhaps slightly more sophisticatedly:

      "Oh, I'm sorry it hurts. Here is some rat poison I will feed you in moderate amounts for a hideous amount of time and we'll hope it kills it off before it kills you off."

Hello! Is there a doctor in the house?

Palliative care is, by definition, care intended to make you feel good, not actually cure you.

And only for a while.

And that is what this "Government" - Executive, Senate, HR, AND THEIR STAFFS - are doing.

Kicking the can down the road, playing on sympathies, distracting the (lower 60th percentile) from the realities of life.

Political Correctness.

This does not work in the end.

The human body is an amazing wonderment, as is the human mind. These measures work for a very short period of time, but beyond that they are disaster.

The patient always dies.

FACT.

Similarly, in things politic, symptomatic treatments, business as usual, do not work:

+ Cut spending, cut taxes
+ Increase spending, increase taxes
+ Ban all guns, ban no guns
+ Be nice, don't be nice
+ Sue each other
+ Sue the states (e.g., Arizona)
+ Gradualism (Obama's "23 point" approach: all feelgood crap, no substance) ...

=====

GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK. There has to be another way.

=====

You CAN fire the principals, but you cannot, yet, fire their staffs, the true root of this evil;

if you fire the old man, the new man will inherit THE SAME STAFF!!!

And perpetrate more of the same incompetence, if not evil. (Has anyone watched "Yes, Prime Minister"?

So we need term limits, not only for the principals, but for their STAFF!!!

=====

Yesterday, with little detail announced by our illustrious media, the House Republicans have come up with a brilliant plan.

They are obviously listening to Bill Whittle:

"Stop playing their political games!!"

They have said,

"OK, we won't play your political game. We have the hammer, WE shall play a NEW game. Try THIS one on for size:

"I'll see your debt increase. For three months.

"But no more...

How's that for kind, courteous, temperate, objective, and rational?

"However, comma:

"In return for which I expect you to do your job as you have ALREADY SWORN UNDER AN OATH TO GOD to do. THE SINGLE SOLE PURPOSE FOR YOUR EXISTENCE is to PASS A BUDGET, which you have FAILED TO DO for the past FOUR years!!!

"So if you DO NOT DO YOUR JOB then YOU SHALL NOT BE PAID."

How's THAT for conclusive, hmmm?

=====

What person in their right mind can possibly argue with that:

DO YOUR JOB OR YOU SHALL NOT BE PAID.

How about THAT, Kemo Sabe?

Absolutely brilliant.

=====

Kind, courteous, temperate, objective, rational, and (most especially) conclusive.

Can anyone spell "Don't Tread on Me"?

=====

Now, this is the sort of kind, courteous, temperate, objective, rational, and (most especially) conclusive behaviour I expect from my employees (which they, all of them, including BHO himself, happen to be).

=====

So how can we extend that sort of kind, courteous, temperate, objective, rational, and (most especially) conclusive behaviour to discussions about the 2nd (or any other) amendment of the Bill of Rights?

=====

The first step is to DISAVOW Political Correctness.

For the rest of our natural lives.

Stop being nice. Start being honest. Tell the truth.

If necessary, be nasty.

Especially if they aren't listening.

The next is to understand that there are some people with whom you will never ever be able to argue successfully, so save your breath.

The best you can do is ignore them. The worst you can do is blow them away.

It's sort of like a divorce.

I have written off several. (Most closer to ignoring them than blowing away, except perhaps emotionally but it's somewhere in the middle. We can always talk about the weather. If they can't get it and won't listen then they are purposely trying to hurt me, so I don't need them...)

The best-seller book *A Conflict of Vision* by Thomas Sowell explores this phenomenon in great depth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Conflict_of_Visions

and it is supported by over 105 studies, cited in the book.

So, I propose:

FACTS.

In short, if you haven't got the same original vision, you are pissing up a rope. If you cannot match your vision with that of another then any interaction shall be fruitless. So stop messing up your pants. The only solution is brute force.

=====

How to achieve brute force?

Again, be kind, courteous, temperate, objective, rational, and (most especially) conclusive in the public eye in order to reach out to the people in the hump:

     - the ones looking to the left at Pelosi and to the right at me.

The MIDDLE of THAT bell shaped curve.

There are lots of nice, kind, courteous, temperate, objective, rational, and (albeit perhaps not very) conclusive people in the middle of that bell curve. THOSE are the people we must reach. By being kind, courteous, temperate, objective, rational, and conclusive.

=====

Now, an interlude from our sponsor: An article of faith from Winston Churchill: "the American people will always do the right thing (but only after they have exhausted all other options...)"

(or words to that effect...)

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Winston_Churchill

=====

This was borne out by the actions of the House of Representatives on Friday afternoon. Absolutely brilliant. Lots of squirming and pants-wetting on the opposite side of the aisle. How can they parry THIS?

=====

One (almost) down. Now the next: the Second Amendment.

=====

This is war.

Do not surrender.

Do not be nice.

The answer is NO:

+ Balance the budget.
+ Uphold the Constitution.
+ Reduce the debt
+ The right to bear arms (including whips, knives, swords, clubs, and brass knuckles) shall not be infringed.

An AK-47 is an automatic weapon, arguably an "assault" weapon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47

An AR-15 is not:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15

Sleep tight tonight, knowing that there is an armed NRA member near you. 

Coherent, temperate, rational, and logical thinking

I'll make it pretty later.

I have thought seriously, objectively, comprehensively, and coherently about "the problem". But my solutions invoke forbidden territory: Political Correctness. This is a chat group, so perhaps we all should just be nice and talk about the weather. But just being nice sidesteps issues that affect us all. So here is a coherent, temperate, rational, and logical summary of my analysis.

I have a correspondent who is quoted below.

He is obviously thinking in the same direction:

I just finished Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics".  Reminded me way too
much of my stint in Treasury Board staff here in BC.  We were never quite
this stupid and you could take 3 zero's off all the numbers but at the end
of the day, 

Try taking EIGHT zeros off the U.S. budget and pretend it is a family
budget.

For example: Government budget (removing eight zeros):

http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/p/US-Government-Federal-Budget-FY2012-Summary.htm

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

 and others)

Trillion = 12 zeros, removing eight puts you in the thousands:
   
 Annual Income:   24,690.00 
 Annual Expenses:  37,930.00 
 Additional Annual Debt:  13,240.00 
 Total Current Debt: 163,700.00 

 Years to pay off ***if ALL Income*** were spent on paying it off,
nevermind the necessary expenses, like food and rent:

 6.63 

it would appear politicians and the political animals that

gravitate to them as staff are the same the world over.  

And always have been, since Herod, Pilate, and hideously many before.

More recently, Hitler, Stalin, Marcos, Castro, Chavez, and several other
current center stage actors in the Mideast and elsewhere, maybe right
here in River City.

Enemies foreign and domestic. Especially the domestic...

It is called pathologically narcissistic liars. Read, or just glance, at
People of the Lie:

http://www.amazon.com/People-Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/0684848597
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Scott_Peck
http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/Perspectives/MalignantNarcissism.htm 

I could be way off base but a superficial look from way outside the situation would lead me 
to believe that only cutting spending the amount it would take would leave
millions starving in the streets.

Mmmm. It depends.

On a white market that might be so, but the black market survives,
especially in a free capitalistic market.

There are hideously huge entitlement programs already extant that would
not be touched. Military pensions, social security, for starters.

But then there's the black market.

Wanna know how many snowy sidewalks $40 in cash will clear when you live
ten blocks away from a public housing project? Give it a try.

And so, people of determination and integrity with a historical (as in
3000 years of Judeo-Christian culture) work ethic will do just fine.
Especially if paid in cash.

As for the rest, Darwin rules. We don't need them.

No matter which side of the political
spectrum you are on or how secure your gated community, nobody would see 
this as a recipe for re-election.   

First, I don't live in a gated community. Au contraire, I live said ten
blocks from said public housing project directly on the so-said "Ho Chi
Mihn trail" from the minority community center to the said public
housing project. We suffer daily vandalism and breakins of cars and
other property, because these people are angry, ignorant, unemployed,
perhaps mentally deficient, and otherwise disenfranchised. So they take
it out on our Audis, BMWs, and Volvos. So hardly a gated community.

But I digress. You are correct. Nobody would see this as a recipe for
reelection.

But why should they be reelected anyhow?

We need to address a fundamental deficiency in our form of government:
TERM LIMITS.

We have term limits for the executive, Thanks Be To God. Although some
idiots are trying to overturn that. In your dreams...

But not for either senate nor house of "representatives"
(representatives not: see People of the Lie).

As a result you end up with the same sycophantic drudge of People of the
Lie you cite above.

If instead we had a three term limit:

+ First to learn and maneuver into position (committee positions, etc.)
+ Second to perform
+ Third to get jaded, corrupted, and suck up to contractors for a
post-term "consultant" (read lobbyist) position

then we would find people of courage and integrity who want to get in
there, fix something, and get out and go home.

As was envisioned by the founding fathers.

If you raised taxes enough to cover spending you would drive anybody capable of running a hot dog stand to
defecting to a low tax country like Russia. 

Duh. As you have already cited. My boat is in the UK. It shall not
return here.

 It would appear to me that the only route likely to succeed would be a combination of tax increases and
spending cuts.  

Well, I disagree. Do the eight zero math above.

If you do the math on the proposed marginal tax increase it is something
like 6.2K in model above. 620 Billion divided by eight zeros:

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/08/tax-changes-2013/
http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/01/fresh-from-fiscal-cliff-standoff-obama-demands-another-tax-increase-for-2013/

The fact is that constitutionality and a host of other reasons have
sucked "more taxes" about as dry as they can be sucked.

To quote Denver: tits on a boar hog.

The only remaining solution is CUTTING EXPENDITURE.

Now, I have spent some twenty years in Defense Department and local
budgeting. I can point out time and time again excessive hideous waste
and profligacy that could be axed without ANYBODY's ox being gored,
except the fat cats collecting the money. Why does my town's Fire Chief
need TWO SUVs plus a Ford Crown Victoria? Etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.

WHY?

Because of Political Correctness. Because of people being afraid to
speak out, to say what they know to be true because they are afraid of
being called "not nice".

"You don't understand, Commander."

"I understand perfectly. You are a liar, a cheat, and a thief. How's
THAT for understanding, Mr. GS-15? Go to hell. Your program is axed."

"Want to complain? Here is my boss's phone number. Make my day."

No one ever did.

What I don't understand is what mix of political stripes and,

majority / minority mix could / would do that.  What am I missing?  How
much runway is left before there is no way out?

There IS no way out. There IS no more runway. There IS no way out than
radical action, a fundamental change in the paradigm:

We are at a tipping point.

There are millions of people in this country who are totally fed up,
madder than hell (Google "madder than hell" for fun). We are at the
straw being added to the camel's back. Mark my words.

The only mix of political stripes that will solve this is a massively
hideous tragedy (like World War II) or a collection of people of courage
and integrity willing to speak the truth in coherent, temperate,
rational, and logical terms.

What part of this, anyone, please, is not coherent, temperate, rational,
or logical?

But as usual with big government, instead of coherent, temperate,
rational, and logical thought we get soundbite politics and political
correctness.

+ You cannot discuss matters coherently, temperately, rationally, or
logically with incoherent, intemperate, irrational, or illogical people.
So don't bother. Just use overwhelming force.

+ The salvation is the people in the middle looking left and right. That
may be you.

+ To win the people in the middle we must be coherent, temperate,
rational, and logical.

+ If THEY are coherent, temperate, rational, and logical they will see
your argument's validity and vote accordingly.

Now, THAT is overwhelming force.

No more Political Correctness.

God bless us all.

And have mercy on us, we miserable sinners.

Amen.

You spineless scum

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-house-nears-fiscal-cliff-vote-20130101,0,1277358.story