Is Anyone in Charge?

Talk about a target-rich environment, where do we start?  The bungled roll out of Obamacare begs for deserved ridicule, to which we would ordinarily be happy to contribute. Unfortunately, this slag heap of legislation is still poised to do untold damage to one of the world's most advanced and successful health care systems. And if you think because you aren't poor and have a plan that you are happy with, just wait. Rush Limbaugh thinks that Obamacare was actually designed to fail in order to set the stage for a single payer system. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately (for us),  they couldn't manage to have the blame for its failure to land on the health care providers and insurance companies. The Executive Branch owns this turkey.

Why should we be surprised? This Administration has established a long string of operational failures. Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and other Justice Department fiascoes, The IRS investigative scandals, the long and questionable reach of The NSA's surveillance, which has just again reared its ugly head. And the list goes on. The only constant is the continual insistence that none of it is the Chief Executive's fault, nor anyone else in the chain of command, as best we can tell.

Six months ago, former Obama advisor, David Axelrod argued, on national television, that the federal government is so vast, that the president simply cannot know everything that is going on. And while this comment was related to recent scandals, it can also be applied to day to day management. We happen to think that the current president lacks the experience and aptitude needed to provide even minimal management of the vast federal bureaucracy. Someone should explain to him about the Cabinet, and the delegation process. But in fairness to Mr. Obama, even an experienced organization man like, say, Mitt Romney, would be hard pressed to provide what would pass for effective management in the Private Sector to this behemoth, which, by the way, had achieved its truly gargantuan proportions long before the advent of the ACA.

Obviously, this state of affairs has been a long time in the making, but until relatively recently, the Congress could exert some control by virtue of the budgetary process. Unfortunately, we haven't had a budget for a few years now, but rather have relied on Continuing Resolutions. Ditto for deficit funding as we routinely produce debt levels of astronomic proportions.  Obamacare is badly written and still not well-understood by most Americans, some of whom, apparently, work for the federal government. In spite of its supporters' claims, its costs, as it tries to provide subsidized health insurance to millions, are sure to rise to gargantuan levels. Adding this program on top an effectively out-of control government is not only unconscionable, but, now that it has saddled future generations with a mountain of debt, may finally bring us to the breaking point.

It is long past the time to reign in these excesses and bring our government back in line, or at least, as a first step, into the same area code, with our Constitutional principles. If not now, when?

A Much Different Inauguration Speech

Morning in America

Thirty-two years ago last month, Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as the fortieth president of the United States. He is remembered for the many admirable qualities he personified, but chief among them, we believe, was his ability to communicate his views on the workings of government, clearly and understandably. Some might disagree with his conclusions, but the American system of government was designed to accommodate differences of opinion. While thirty-two years may seem like old history to some, it is interesting to see how some of his views are fully congruent with some of our contemporary issues.

Reagan took office during tough economic times. While it was spiking inflation rather than a lingering recession,  the effects on the American workforce were equally punishing. Here he speaks of the conditions facing the country in January of 1981:

"Idle industries have cast workers into unemployment, causing human misery and personal indignity. Those who do work are denied a fair return for their labor by a tax system which penalizes successful achievement and keeps us from maintaining full productivity."

And while inflation was the villain of the day, Reagan went on to identify a major underlying problem:
.
"But great as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. For decades, we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.

You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?"

As he continued, he drilled down to identify what he saw as a major underlying cause of the current problems:

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem.

From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price."

Later, he continues to reinforce the links to our Founding principles:
 
"So, as we begin, let us take inventory. We are a nation that has a government--not the other way around. And this makes us special among the nations of the Earth. Our government has no power except that granted it by the people. It is time to check and reverse the growth of government which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed."
The contrast between this speech and the one we heard at last month's organization could not be greater. Click HERE to read Ronald Reagan's speech in its entirety. It reminds us of the attitudes and principles that could help pave the way of a return to "Morning in America."

Moving On

Helping the Seals Catch Osama

It is not without a large measure of disgust that we leave behind, at least for the moment, the quest for more information regarding the events of 9/11/2012 in Benghazi Libya. But it is now clear that we have received just about all the explanation and information we are ever going to get from the current administration.

It has been said, in so many words, that, in America, political partisanship should stop at the waters edge. We thought of this notion as we watched the testimony of the Secretary of State testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, at which the Democratic members of the committee heaped praise on the Secretary for her service over the past four years. Given that she was relinquishing her post, perhaps such testimonial was due,  but this was not the time nor the place. The meeting had been called to try and discern the causes of the Benghazi events, and who in the government should bear the responsibility. The media picked up where the Dems left off. The Boston Globe referred to those few senators asking the tough questions as "Benghazi blowhards".

As the Chief Executive of the United States, one would automatically look to the president to explain how one of our embassies came to be over run by an armed mob and our Ambassador murdered. We thought back quickly to the ubiquitous pictures of the Situation Room where the president and Secretary of State, among others, stared in rapt attention as the raid on Osama Bin Laden's lair was carried out. Success has many fathers (and mothers), failure is a lonely orphan.With regard to the events of 9/11/2012, we still have no idea where or when the president became aware of the unfolding events. But, he was quick to shift the responsibility down the chain of command. As is usually the case with this particular president, there was no cry raised by the media for further explanation.

We couldn't disagree more with the Secretary of State that "it doesn't matter"  how the raid on our embassy unfolded. But is was clear that anyone reviewing the information streaming in from Benghazi would have quickly realized that a full-blown terrorist attack was underway. Putting out a story attributing the attack to a spontaneous demonstration against an obscure video seemed laughable at the time, and even more laughable as the truth slowly leaked out. But the government stuck with this charade for days. And now, no one is quite sure just how that story was allowed to stand, up to and to including Susan Rice's marathon Sunday Morning appearances. The video was a fish story, but as bad as that fish story was, it was better, at least in the minds of some government officials, better than admitting the inept security precautions for our diplomatic corp and the totally inadequate response to the events as they unfolded, especially in the middle of an election.

So the official answer is that no one is really to blame, but we will make sure we do better next time. Algeria? Algeria is for the little people. The idea that the president's primary duty is to administer those vast areas of government for which he is directly responsible and the Secretary of State perhaps needed to pay attention to the management of her department rather than trying to amass a record number of frequent flier miles. In this day and age of the sound bite and the big idea, the management needs of the government are easily forgotten.

 And so we must, to some extent, move on less we become one of the lone voices crying into the wind. Gun control, immigration and the continuing saga of the federal deficit provide handy issues to redirect the attention of the electorate. But the questions of Benghazi will return, just in time for the 2016 presidential election, when we will hear that "those questions" have all been answered and the page has been turned. And the woman who couldn't find the time to read every cable, will be seeking the chief executive's job.

At Least She Showed Up

It all seemed to start with an extended love-fest orchestrated by the Democratic Committee Members, who fell all over themselves thanking Madam Secretary for her tireless service and olympian accrual of frequent flyer miles.

The take-away boiled down to just a few salient points:

The Secretary was, and presumable still is, fully responsible.

Nothing was her fault. It's a cruel world and stuff happens.

There were organizational lapses, and heads have rolled, sort of.

She can't read everything.

"What difference does it make?"

And isn't Congress partially to blame for its parsimonius funding?

Did we really expect a mea culpa?

For those searching for a more balanced analysis than what you might get from, say, the Boston Globe, check out the article on National Review On-Line.



http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338619/benghazi-rhapsody-editors

Stay Tuned Today

At 9:00 this morning, The Secretary of State will appear before a public meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding the September 11th attack in Benghazi.
at 2:00 pm, she will meet with the House Foreign Affairs  Committee to discuss the same topic. Lawmakers continue to have many questions regarding the government's reaction, or lack thereof, on the terrorist attacks on the U.S. Consulate in which the American  Ambassador, and three other Americans, were killed. More troubling, perhaps, was the government-issued explanation which pointed to a spontaneous civil demonstration on the attack, rather than an organized terrorist attack. This explanatory disconnect, which was allowed to stand long after the truth was generally known, raised many questions, most still unanswered.

In our most recent post, we suggested that Madam Secretary might well leave office without appearing before congressional committees. We are pleased that she has finally heeded the call to appear and answer questions. Apparently she will do the former. We hope that she will also provide the widely sought information that is sorely needed to begin to heal this wound to the national psyche

Still Waiting

Last month, we commented on the fact that the Secretary of State had still not appeared before a congressional committee to explain her department's handling of the Benghazi fiasco which resulted in the death of the American Ambassador and three other  Americans on September 11, 2012. To cut to the chase, it hasn't happened yet.

Yes, she was hospitalized at one point and it would be crass to suggest that her illness was just a touch too convenient. Of course it might also be considered out of line to release a misleading explanation of the Benghazi affair, even as it became clear that the truth lay elsewhere.

But if any questions linger as to the Secretary's physical fitness, we all might well have been re-asssured to read in this morning's Wall Street Journal, the following quote regarding this weeks' hostage taking at an Algerian gas field:

"It is absolutely essential that we broaden and deepen our counterterrorism cooperation going forward with Algeria and all countries in the region," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday.

I am sure that it was not lost on the Secretary that Libya is Algeria's next door neighbor.

So, in spite of her statement that she had the responsibility, it does not appear that an official explanation of the lack of response and misleading explanation of the Benghazi attack is forthcoming, even though, it would appear that the secretary is, indeed, back at the helm at State. Moreover, with John Kerry's confirmation hearing scheduled for this week, it is now apparent that the Mrs. Clinton intends to retire to Chappaqua without shedding any light on the governments bungling of the Benghazi affair.

As was predicted in our last post, the clock is now running on the timing of the emergence of the "we turned that page" riff.

  

Still Waiting for Answers

For those of us that are calendar-impaired, it is now nearly four months since the awful events at Benghazi, Libya unfolded, leaving four Americans, including our Ambassador, dead at the hands of Islamic terrorists. Were it not for this terrible toll suffered in conjunction by a total destruction of diplomatic respect and protocol. the lack of response by the American Government would be laughable.

While many Americans think that this chain of events certainly raises to the highest level of governmental concerns, the president has chosen to push what little responsibility he has taken down the chain of command. The head of the CIA has been sacked, but not for any malfeasance related to his responsibility for the Benghazi deaths. Apparently several mid-level State Department drones were fired, but on further investigation, it seems that they haven't really lost their jobs after all.

All of which leaves us with Hillary, who is still(?) head of the State Department. While she did accept "responsibility" albeit phoned in from Peru, she has gone from being silent to, as of late, being invisible as well. Her strategy here seems to be to keep running out the clock until her replacement is sworn in.

This strategy should come as no surprise to those of us who remember the Clinton White House years with its chains of unanswered questions regarding Whitewater and those Rose Law Firm billing records. Assuming that she continues to be a no-show at the Congressional hearings on Benghazi, there is really only one last touch stone left in this saga. Hillary obviously subscribes to the Leona Helmsley school of social responsibility which might counsel: Hearings? Hearings are for the little people.

So now, the last remaining question is the over and under on the exact date that Hillary will turn the final page on responsibility. This would be the date on which some intrepid questioner will ask herself about the 9/11/2012 fiasco. The response will be a quick look of disbelief, followed by something along the line: We've been over and over that and it is, frankly, old news. We think the American people want to turn the page and put that behind us. When this happens, the campaign for 2016 will have officially begun.