Rancor Within The Ranks

In a way I'm happy to see the power struggle within the ranks of the Republican Party.  Leadership is weak and consensus non-existent.  They need both.

Who can get excited about Mitch McConnell or John Boehner?  Both persona's shout BOR-ING.

The same can be said about Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid too.  And they're having some of the same problems as the Republicans.  The young bucks don't toe the line. New leadership is needed on both sides of the aisle and the young bucks need some schooling that current leadership seems unable to provide.

The Republicans seem to have a problem with defining terms.  Like what exactly is a conservative these days?  Is it the belief in small government and fiscal responsibility or is it that plus all the 'conservative' social issues which have no place in governance?  It needs to be cleared up.

To make matters worse they seem to have a problem deciphering the difference between compromise and capitulation.  They have a tendency to cave to what the liberals want while getting nothing in return.  On the other hand they can be incredibly, stupidly stubborn like thinking they can defund Obamacare with the threat of shutting down the government.  Obama is never going to go along with it so why waste the effort?  There is no positive outcome should they insist on trying.

Their time could be better spent.  Instead of fighting like they do with the Democrats among themselves, they ought to sit down privately and talk through their differences.  When the continuing resolution vote comes around in September it would be wise to come forward with a unified face.

Or are they beyond having the ability to do so?  Are they so caught up in animosity with anyone who disagrees they are blind to what they're doing to their own party, never mind the country.

There won't be a viable third party before 2016 but there might as well be - a third, a fourth, maybe even a fifth because the voters will follow where their personal interests lie without regard for the country as a whole.  The social conservatives will follow a Rick Santorum. Centrists may follow a Chris Christy.  Those with a Libertarian/isolationist bent will look to a Rand Paul.  All under the guise of Republicanism. Yet none of them actually are because they don't follow a main stream.  Thus a divided party adding to an already divided country.

Until the end of September.  That's all the time they realistically have because campaigning for 2014 will be heating up.  If the Democrats take the House and hold the Senate it's all over for the duration. By 2016 the country will be beyond recognition from what it had been to generations past and quite likely beyond redemption for generations to come.

If You Can't Beat Them, Confuse Them

The American People, that is.  Not so long ago the President told us al Qaeda was all but dead and gone.  Then we had Benghazi which has spawned not only a contradiction but cover up upon cover up.

Now we have dozens of U.S. Embassies scheduled to close tomorrow due to 'credible' threats from - who else? Al Qaeda.

So what's going on here?  Is the administration trying to give credence to the NSA's information gathering by exposing this threat?  If nothing happens they can then say, "See how valuable it is?  We were able to thwart this massive threat."

I for one don't think the terrorist organizations are dumb nor uninformed as to what we do to track them.  I think there is a good possibility they're jerking our chain much as the Russians, Chinese and North Koreans so love doing. If a massive, multifaceted attack is planned I can't see them signalling it to the extent they apparently have.  Also, why if it is expected to be so massive, haven't they done more than warn travellers and personnel in the threatened areas to vacate or avoid it all together rather than just a caution?

Is it just a misdirection while attacks are really planned elsewhere while the attention is focused on North Africa and the Middle East?  Or is it a massive misdirection in an attempt to show the administration is on top of it?

It is puzzling at best.  Will tomorrow come and go with a big nothing and we all sigh in relief yet just down the road on September 11 it starts all over again?

Time will tell. Misdirection, obfuscation and mass confusion seems to be the hallmark of this administration.  Like what was the CIA really doing in Benghazi and if it was so innocent why not tell us or let the personnel be interviewed rather than be threatened, relocated and names changed?

I'd like to wager on what the Sunday closures are all about but I can't.  Only those who caused them know and they aren't talking.  If it isn't purposeful confusion by the administration, I'd think the NSA's listening program's value is questionable at best.  Or do they think they can keep us in line by scaring us one more time?

Immigration Reform - "If I Only Had A Brain!"

The fight over immigration reform rages.  The Senate wants comprehensive reform - to tackle the issue in one fell swoop.  The House wants to take it in increments.  The latter makes more sense to me.  At least there is a fighting chance we'll know who sticks the pork where.

One of the biggest fights is whether we should make those illegals legal including a path to citizenship first or secure the border.  I'd suggest neither.  My idea which would never be implemented would be that no one who entered the country illegally shall ever have the privilege of being a citizen.  Legal yes, citizen - no.  That's the price. Actions have consequences.  But that's hardly the end of it. There are those, fully one third of the estimated 11 million illegals, who came here legally.

Having said that it seems to me no one is looking at the issue from the right perspective. First of all, no one should be looking at immigration reform as a way to get votes.  That's about as self serving as you can get and a large part of what's wrong with  the country today.  The law makers are self serving.  They don't care about the immigrants, only the way they may vote. They've made that abundantly clear.

It comes to light in one of those now famous audits that come about too infrequently that the Department of Homeland Security has lost track of 1 million people it knows entered the country.  They have no idea where they are now.  Still here?  Have they returned home?  This is ridiculous.  All the special visas in the world that allow people to enter the country legally aren't worth squat when it's so easy to over stay knowing the likelihood of getting caught is slim to none! We have nothing in place to track them.  Until that glaring gap in the system is closed what's the point of everything else?

Those who cross illegally will remain a problem until guest worker programs are put in place but so far Homeland Security has done nothing other than push back deadlines for even coming up with a plan as to how to do it.  We're supposed to feel good because the figure is down to 1million from 1.6 million two years ago?  One million is a lot of people!

It seems no one is utilizing brain power here all for the sake of votes.  I would think the money used for the purchase of 40 million rounds of hollow point ammo per year might have bought some brain power but then that's a pretty tall order in of itself.  They'd need to do brain replacements or enhancements not only for Homeland Security officials but for all of Congress as well! The Wizard of Oz's Scarecrow could have done better.

Talk About Blatant Media Bias!

We know the media has a liberal bias and we know it is in love with both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  I've come to the conclusion it's because of their star power more than actual ability to function ably in high office.

Hillary will be 69 in 2016.  Some have suggested that's too old but maybe not this day and age.  It all depends on her health as a whole.  A better question may be how much botox it will take to keep her looking viable against her competition who will all be younger.  You know how it is between how men look at a certain age and women.  As Hillary faced her last days as Secretary of State, the wear and tear definitely showed.

The media, however, are going to do their level, or not so level if you're considering playing fields, best to make her look as good as possible.  It has been announced that two films about her will be released before the election.  One will be a four hour mini-series on NBC starring Diane Lane. It will cover the time from the Lewinsky scandal through her years as Secretary of State.  Funny, these were years where her record was relatively clean except for the one big Benghazi blunder.  But then we know how the networks can whitewash things so no matter.

The other, Rodham, will cover the early years she spent with Bill and the time she spent on the House Judiciary Committee when Nixon was impeached.  She was dismissed from that duty, by the way, for various misdeeds including lying and removing files from the offices of the committee without permission.  The CNN feature film is considering Scarlett Johansson, Reese Witherspoon and Amanda Seyfried for the role.  She was, of course, much younger in those days.  It is reported that the film will pass over those indiscretions.  So much for reality TV!  What it will be is revisionist history.

It will be interesting to see if these films actually come to be.  I expect they will and we'll see Hillary as the dynamic, squeaky clean wonder woman we've all come to love.

My next question is how are they going to give equal time to her opponents?  Maybe it can be finessed so that it's not required.  All I know is I'm really, really glad the same consideration isn't being given to Anthony Weiner!  

Is Nothing Sacred Anymore?

We stopped at a Bureau of Land Management Office to find out whether or not we needed permits to tromp over their lands and get maps for our quest to find petroglyphs.

We were surprised at what little information they had to offer.  The maps were copied from a book and distances off the beaten path were unknown. Permits, though, were not required.

The visitor bureaus weren't much better.  We were puzzled.  It seemed to us they didn't want to encourage people to hike back the canyons to find these ancient art forms that tell the history of the people.

Considering the monsoonal flow was upon the area and storms and flash floods could pop up at any time, we thought that might be the reason why.  We beat hasty retreats more than once.

If we hadn't had a GPS we wouldn't have even been able to find the roads.  They were marked on the GPS, not on the actual roads.  It made for a challenging adventure and with persistence we had a fair degree of success.

One area, in Nine Mile Canyon in Utah, we were rewarded with a treasure trove of old petroglyphs representing several different periods.  We also found the answer to our question as to why the surmised reluctance to help us on our way. It had nothing to do with the weather.

Unlike the National Parks and Monuments where rangers can keep an eye on what's going on, these are just out there.  Known, of course, because there were rudimentary instructions as to how to reach them but available to anyone willing to do some hiking.  No guides.  No signage.  Just an ability to be observant.

The responsibility of being unsupervised brings with it those who choose to ignore it.  Those who will deface and destroy anything just because it's there.  You see it all the time on buildings and railroad cars and a myriad of other places with ease of access.  We did not expect to find it in out of the way places, places so secluded you hear every step you take and every insect that chirps.  Where the air is fresh and pollution free.

Yet there is pollution. Intruding on living history.  Intentional.  You can see several sets of initials scratched into the glyphs in the photo.  This is but one example of many that we saw. Why?  We're not very good stewards of anything any more.  I cannot  help but hold such behavior with anything other than contempt.