The IRS Debacle Widens and My Paranoia Grows

I'm sure many readers of my last posting where I closed by raising a concern that the IRS will be the agency enforcing parts of the Affordable Care Act aka Obamacare were thinking, "Mac has gone paranoid on us. There's no reason to think anyone will be treated differently." However, today we learned that Sarah Hall Ingram, the same IRS official who was in charge of the IRS division responsible for vetting tax exempt status applications during the period when it improperly targeted Tea Party and other conservative groups for unfair, unusual, and illegal additional scrutiny has since moved on to be the head of the IRS division responsible for enforcing the individual mandate of Obamacare. Those under her will determine, among other things, who gets fined for not buying health insurance. I kid you not! Now who's paranoid?

IRS Scandal Just Another Example of Lack of Leadership

The IRS scandal which we are learning more and more about despite the best efforts of the Obama Administration to downplay it and blame 'low-level' employees is yet another window into Barrack Obama's lack of leadership ability. IRS employees in the Cleveland, Ohio office reportedly were delaying the approval of tax exempt status for groups they believed to be Conservative. It is also alleged that they passed confidential tax return information on to liberal groups to use as political ammunition. The story itself is significant and I will opine on that as well as the other major scandals that have all come to light in the last week soon but for now, the leadership implications are what I would like to address.

What was our first clue that our president and his fellow travelers don't understand what leadership is all about? For me, it was their claim that the president was 'leading from behind'. Unless one is a dogsled musher in the Iditarod, there is no such thing as leading from behind. Another indicator that Obama and those around him know little about leadership is their 'go to' response whenever they are faced with a problem: "We just learned about (insert the name of the latest scandal here) from news reports and it appears to be the actions of a few low-level employees." They say this as if it somehow absolves them from responsibility or accountability. I can only assume their logic is 'We can't be held accountable for every single person in our charge and you can't expect us to know everything that goes on in such a large organization.' Unfortunately that isn't how leadership works. As many a commanding officer in the Navy have found out much to their chagrin, the leader is responsible for the actions of subordinates, not only as a result of the direct orders they are given by their commander, but also for the implied direction that results from the 'command climate' established by the person in charge. If the leader has made their opinion on a matter clear to their subordinates or presented a position of indifference on a subject and a problem occurs as a result of an underling acting on the superior's perceived desires, then it is indeed the leader's fault - period!

From the minute he emerged onto the national political stage, Barrack Obama has demonized those who disagree with him politically. He has referred to political opponents as enemies and has falsely accused Republicans, Tea Party members, Conservatives and those for smaller government of wanting to starve children, throw granny over the cliff, let kids with autism fend for themselves - not to mention wanting dirty air and dirty water. When coupled with liberals' propensity for an 'Ends Justifies the Means' approach to governance based on their sense of moral superiority, it is easy to imagine an entrenched 'true believer' bureaucrat confusing the command attitude for policy and singling out 'enemies' for special attention. That may very well be what happened in this case but as one can see, the leader is responsible just as sure as if a direct order was given. This may also explain but not forgive the second part of their standard excuse. Since subordinates believe they are doing the bidding of their leader, when there is a problem, it never gets reported up the chain of command. Why would it? It is policy from the top, right? Or perhaps is doesn't get reported out of fear of being thrown 'under the bus' by those in charge. There are certainly enough examples of this to make it a legitimate concern.

If the scope of the problem remained confined to just those few employees in Cleveland and the president accepted responsibility and took action right away instead of trying the pass the blame, this incident wouldn't be a big deal. Unfortunately, as we learn more, we are finding out this isn't the case. Hundreds of people and organizations are now reporting that they received similar unfair treatment, making the Administration's low-level employee claim appear to be not only the result of poor leadership but also the intentional actions of scores of leftist at multiple levels in the IRS 'doing the right thing.'

Is it any wonder why Conservatives are concerned that the IRS is the government's enforcement agency for Obamacare? Could information from your tax return (e.g. what charities you donate to - an indicator of your politics) determine whether you get treatment or that pain pill candidate Obama talked about?

Benghazi: Oh What a Tangled Web Liberals Weave...

The scandal developing over the Benghazi cover-up has the potential to be one of the most damaging events in modern American history because it involves the deaths of 4 Americans including the US Ambassador, the Executive Branch, cabinet-level officials, major government departments and agencies, the outcome of a presidential election, international relations, and the wrongful detention of a man for exercising his right to free speech.

If the full story about what really happened at the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on September 11th, 2012 is ever known, the political and historical fallout will be unprecedented. The Obama Administration has made this a political issue from the beginning, aided and abetted of course by its allies in the main stream media, so it is a bit ironic that Democrats are accusing Republicans of making this political. Of course this is political but it is certainly not one-sided. There are also those who are predicting that even if this does lead to political ramifications, this will only amount to a Democrat Watergate. This is a gross underestimation of the significance of what has transpired and those involved will be lucky if this is only a "Watergate."

There can be no doubt that this is bigger than a Democrat Watergate. There are similarities to be sure: the Executive Branch involvement, the cover-up and a presidential election but that is where the similarities end and even these are only superficial. In the case of presidential involvement, Obama is a more active participant than was Nixon. President Obama personally perpetuated the lie as to the cause for the Benghazi attack. As to the election, nothing gained from the Watergate break in would have changed the outcome of the election - Nixon still would have won by a landslide. The same can't be said about Benghazi. Had the depth of the Obama Administration's negligence and incompetence been allowed to become an issue during the election, it could have enabled Romney to maintain the momentum he had following the first presidential debate which may have led to a different result. The real differences lie in the remaining issues.

First, 4 Americans, including the American Ambassador, died as a result of the attack in Benghazi and if the actions or inactions of those in charge enabled it to happen, they need to be held accountable. Further, the intentional perpetuation of the lie that the attack was the result of a reaction to an obscure YouTube video disrespectful to Islam actually brought the video to the world's attention and sparked subsequent violent protests that led to dozens of additional deaths and injuries. There were no deaths as a result of Watergate.

Second, this scandal, unlike Watergate, involves more than just the president and his inner circle. Benghazi appears to involve other high-level government officials, departments and agencies. There now appears to be little doubt that Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of Defense Panetta both played important roles in the failures that resulted in the attack, the deaths of the Americans or both. The lapses in security, judgement, and procedures, the refusal to provide additional security despite repeated requests, and the failure to provide assistance during the attack all demand answers. Additionally, the shenanigans that have taken place to advance the YouTube video lie has damaged the integrity of the US Intelligence community specifically the CIA which was apparently directed to rewrite their input to the now infamous "Susan Rice Sunday morning talk show talking points." It has now been revealed that at least 12 rewrites were ordered to remove wording that called the attack an act of terrorism or remove references to Islamic extremists. The 'then' CIA director, Gen. Petraeus, resigned out of the blue in November supposedly over an extra-marital affair. At the time I thought to myself, how could this not have been discovered during his confirmation? It has since been reported that Gen Petraeus was opposed to changing the wording in the talking points. Coincidence or retribution for not playing along? As the old National Enquirer advertisement used to say, "Enquiring minds want to know."

Third, had this been allowed to fully come to light during the presidential campaign, the revelations of poor judgement, inaction, and complete indifference on the part of the president and his administration would most likely changed the outcome of the election. What took place would undoubtedly have called into question President Obama's fitness for office. A complete timeline which the American people have yet to see would most likely reveal a very damning sequence of events on the part of Mr. Obama and his administration including an indifferent attitude toward the fate of Americans in harms way that allowed the president to simply "Call it a night" and get no additional updates on the developing situation. Americans were fighting for their lives and a US Consulate - sovereign US territory - was under attack, and the president was literally asleep!  Anyone with even a modicum of intellectual honesty would have to admit this is more important than Mitt Romney's tax returns, Sandra Fluke and the phony 'War on Women' and gay marriage.

Fourth, the lies surrounding Benghazi have caused enormous damage to US international relations. The public contradiction by the Obama Administration of the Libyan President Mohammed Magarief's statements that the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack unrelated to any video embarrassed an important ally in the region - a truly moderate, pro-American, Muslim leader who is for free elections, women's rights, and freedom. This humiliation and loss of face has damaged our relationship with the kind of leader we were hoping would emerge in Libya as a result of the removal of Gadaffi and in the broader middle east as a result of the Arab Spring. Now Libya's beleaguered president's situation is far less secure, his feelings toward the US are reportedly (and understandably) sour, and the notion in the rest of the Arab world that the US is not to be trusted has most certainly been reinforced. As a side note, President Magarief was so angry that he refused to let FBI investigators into his country for 3 weeks which hindered the investigation. To date, no one responsible for the attack has been brought to justice as President Obama promised and they are presumably at-large planning new attacks. Maybe OJ can take time off from finding Nicole and Ron Goldman's real killers to help Mr Obama find those responsible for killing Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

Lastly, the Benghazi lies and cover-up have led to the detention of the man who made the YouTube video. But what was his crime? Doesn't the 1st Amendment protect his right to make a video - even one that some might find offense? Apparently not one that offends Muslims. At the funeral of one of the victims, Secretary of State Clinton promised the father that, "We will get the man who made that video." I guess Hillary Clinton is more interested in enforcing Sharia law than protecting someone's rights guaranteed under our Constitution.

The Obama Administration, Congressional Democrats, their apologists in the main stream media, and liberals everywhere would have you believe that Benghazi has been fully investigated. In the words of Presidential Press Secretary, Jay Carney, "... Benghazi happened a long time ago." and he implied we need to move on. This morning on Face the Nation Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) called the hearings and renewed efforts to get to the truth a "Witch Hunt".  These people continue to attempt to obscure what happened  and demand that we put this behind us but there is no time limit on determining the truth. The failures, the lies, the cover-up and the violation of the publics trust have had such serious consequences that those responsible for this scandal have to be held accountable.  Sir Walter Scott expressed it best when he wrote in his epic poem, Marmion, The Battle of Flodden -  "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive." It's time this web is fully untangled.

Liberal Thinking 101 (Part 2 of n): Liberals - The Picassos of Analysis

I would say that one way to define analysis is:  Analysis is the art of gathering facts, piecing them together in a logical manner and drawing conclusions from the picture they paint. If that painting resembles the work of Pablo Picasso, you can bet the analysis was done by a liberal. Take for example the issue of children's nutrition and obesity.

Fact 1: Unlike when I was in school and only about 15% of kids took part in the free or reduced lunch program, today nearly 60% of children in our public schools receive meals under this program. (Sources: National Center for Education Statistics; 2008 Digest of Education Statistics; US Agriculture Dept.)

Additionally, some school districts provide breakfast and dinner as well. Amazingly, some even open their doors during vacation periods to provide free meals.

Fact 2: Today, over one third of all American school children are obese. (Source: Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Flegal KM. Prevalence of obesity and trends in body mass index among US children and adolescents, 1999-2010. Journal of the American Medical Association2012;307(5):483-490.)

Fact 3: "...Only six percent of schools in the United States offer daily physical education classes, reports The Early Show's Debbye Turner....the number of quality physical education programs nationwide has been on a decline for 20 years....the number of overweight kids in the United States has tripled in the last two decades." (Source: www.cbsnews.com, Dakss B, Obesity Up, Phys Ed Down, February 11, 2009)

The obvious conclusion at least to liberals like New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg: sugary sodas are the culprit - especially those sold in 16 oz or larger cups. 

Now multi-billionaire lefties like Michael Bloomberg aren't stupid. I guess they just exercise artistic license with the facts.

What Must Our Wounded Warriors Be Thinking?

Tuesday marked the 10th anniversary of start of the Iraq War and this morning as I was checking out MSN.com, I stumbled across a story about botched celebrity plastic surgeries.  Actually it was a link to a story on a Hollywood Tabloid site. It showed pictures of 23 celebrities (movie stars, singers, athletes, etc.) - people like Mickey Rourke, Carrot Top, Tara Reid, Joan Rivers, Donatella Versace, Bruce Jenner, and Lisa Rinna who had plastic surgery that went wrong. It showed the before and after pictures but for the most part, these people aren't disfigured, they are now just odd looking.

The anniversary of the war and this site made me think about all our servicemen and women who have required plastic surgery to repair horrific burns and other injuries they received during combat and how their before and after photographs differ so dramatically from those of the celebrities.  Most of the military folks were average Americans - not the "beautiful people" from stage and screen. And unlike the celebrities, many of our wounded warriors will bear physical scars for the rest of their lives despite the best efforts of our government to repair the damage.

What must it be like to be one of these heroes, see these "beautiful people" and know that they did this to themselves? I would imagine that the celebrities are very distraught over the poor results of their surgeries. However, compared to the injured Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines, how fortunate these Hollywood-types are.

Many of the Hollywood left were very critical of the war especially during the Bush presidency. They were careful to not appear to be unsupportive of the Troops but I personally can't help but wonder if, with their deep seated rage over the war, some of their anger transfers over to those who served? When the lefties in LA and New York see those injured, do they say to themselves, "You volunteered. You were enabling that illegal war. You got what you deserve." I know that statement is going to make some angry but I think if you are honest with yourself, you would have to at least admit to the possibility.

From what I have seen, most of our wounded appear to be dealing with their situation with a great deal of grace and dignity. There doesn't seem to be a lot of room in their lives for self-pity. If they are feeling pity for anyone, odds are it is when they see these vain, shallow and self-absorbed celebrities and their botched surgeries. They have to be thinking, "I can't believe these attractive people did that to themselves." and then the pity they feel for them must be on many levels.

You Can Be Sure Congressional Liberals Are Watching Cyprus

Over the weekend, the Cypriot Parliament announced it was considering imposing a 10% tax on all bank deposits held in that nation's banks as part of an agreement for an EU and IMF-backed bailout plan. The panic that ensued sent shock waves through European financial markets and led to a run on banks forcing the country to impose a bank closure to prevent the further withdraw of deposits. The banks remain closed. It now looks as if the proposal has been rejected but this is an ominous precedent especially since we know American liberals love to look to Europe as a source for "good" ideas.

To borrow from my Navy past, Cyprus finds herself "In Extremis" which is a term that means in grave circumstances that require significant action to avert disaster - with ships this refers to a collision at sea. When collisions occur, the accident investigations almost always find that the captains of the two vessels fail to recognize (or deny) the danger, make a series of small course and speed corrections that don't change the eventual outcome, and ultimately are forced to take drastic steps in their futile effort to avoid calamity. Sound familiar?

Deny: "There's no immediate debt crisis." - Pres. Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner

A series of small course and speed corrections: Continuing Resolutions, Debt Ceiling increases, and sequestration.

In Extremis maneuver: Seizing assets from private citizens.

That would never happen here you say? I wouldn't be so sure.

With our out of control government's insatiable appetite for revenues and seemingly endless ability to squander money, Congressional liberals might consider a European-style levy, penalty or tax on bank assets a "good" idea when facing a fiscal In Extremis situation. Even though their Cypriot counterparts came to their senses and rejected the idea, are you confident our Congress would? Cypriot citizens even rejected their Parliament's counter proposal to only impose the tax on "the rich". What would our current "Politics of Envy" generation Americans do? The answers to these questions are anything but certain.

Will Biden Lecture Pope Francis?

I saw where Vice President Biden just arrived in Rome for Pope Francis' inaugural Mass. My guess is he will get an audience with the new pontiff. Knowing the hubris of the Obama Administration and Democrat leadership, I'm sure he will feel compelled to lecture the Pope on Church doctrine and argue for a change in the Church's position on gay marriage, abortion, and ordaining women as priests. He needs to be careful however, since this didn't go very well for Nancy Peloci when, as House Speaker, she attempted to lecture Pope Benedict. Rumor has it that Benedict gave her "what fer." I wonder if VP Biden is capable of benefitting from her experience. Learning from the past would be a first.