It’s Monday, June 11th, 2012….and here’s The Gouge!

First up, in a June 5th address to the Senate Finance Committee, Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution offered members what would seem to Conservatives merely common sense advice:

“I want to emphasize the importance of individual initiative in reducing poverty and promoting economic success. Young people can virtually assure that they and their families will avoid poverty if they follow three elementary rules for success—complete at least a high school education, work full time, and wait until age 21 and get married before having a baby. Based on an analysis of Census data, people who followed all three of these rules had only a 2% chance of being in poverty and a 72% chance of joining the middle class (defined as above $55,000 in 2010). These numbers were almost precisely reversed for people who violated all three rules, elevating their chance of being poor to 77% and reducing their chance of making the middle class to 4%.

Individual effort and good decisions about the big events in life are more important than government programs. Call it blaming the victim if you like, but decisions made by individuals are paramount in the fight to reduce poverty and increase opportunity in America. The nation’s struggle to expand opportunity will continue to be an uphill battle if young people do not learn to make better decisions about their future.”

Yet almost 50 years and well over $5 trillion dollars of completely ineffective welfare programs demonstrates common sense remains an almost unknown virtue among the ranks of Progressive politicians….along with a cacophony of calls it hasn’t been enough.

And since we’re on the subject of Progressive pols devoid of common sense, John Yoo, writing in the WSJ, offers his thoughts on….

Obama, Drones and Thomas Aquinas

Obama has avoided vexing detention issues simply by depriving terrorists of all of their rights—by killing them.

 

President Obama notched another victory in the war on terror Monday, when a CIA drone strike killed al Qaeda’s second-in-command in Pakistan. No one should mourn the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a charismatic terrorist who had risen to assume operational leadership after Osama bin Laden’s death last year at the hands of Navy SEALs.

Al-Libi’s death, however, may represent tactical success in the drone war at the expense of broader strategy. Recent stories in major newspapers portray a White House war room where Mr. Obama studies the files of potential targets, compiles a “kill list,” and makes the final decision on strikes—at last count, 269 in Pakistan, 38 in Yemen. “He is determined that he will make these decisions about how far and wide these operations will go,” Thomas Donilon, the White House national security adviser, told the New York Times. “He’s determined to keep the tether pretty short.”

The administration has made little secret of its near-total reliance on drone operations to fight the war on terror. The ironies abound. Candidate Obama campaigned on narrowing presidential wartime power, closing Guantanamo Bay, trying terrorists in civilian courts, ending enhanced interrogation, and moving away from a wartime approach to terrorism toward a criminal-justice approach. Mr. Obama has avoided these vexing detention issues simply by depriving terrorists of all of their rights—by killing them.

Some information about these strikes comes from the disclosure of national secrets that appear designed to help the president’s re-election. Recent leaks have blown the cover of the Pakistani doctor who sought to confirm bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad; revealed a British asset who penetrated al Qaeda and stopped another bombing of a U.S.-bound airliner; and assigned credit to the administration for the Stuxnet computer virus that damaged Iran’s nuclear program (even identifying the government lab that designed it).

American intelligence will have a steep hill to climb when it asks for the future cooperation of agent-assets and foreign governments. Notably silent are the Democrats and media figures who demanded the scalp of a Bush White House aide, Scooter Libby, for leaks by another government official of the cover of a CIA operative who had left the field years earlier.

Yet the greater threat to security comes from Mr. Obama’s micromanagement of the drone campaign. Poring over the files of kill-list nominees recalls Lyndon Johnson’s role in tightly controlling bombing strikes during the Vietnam War. During Operation Rolling Thunder, Johnson held Tuesday lunches when he and his advisers picked targets to avoid attacks that might provoke Soviet or Chinese intervention.

This misuse of presidential time produced a myopic focus on tactics. Photos of LBJ hunched over maps said it all: Staring at individual targets prevented him from seeing the broader strategic picture in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. Worse yet, it encouraged the military to set aside its judgment in favor of the president’s political preferences.

In Vietnam, LBJ and his advisers placed off limits vital targets in Hanoi, Haiphong harbor and the North’s supply chains, preventing the U.S. military from striking the enemy’s war-making capacity and isolating the North from its allies. Today the Obama administration commits mistakes of similar dimension by rushing for the exits in Iraq, hastily drawing down in Afghanistan, and failing to pressure Pakistan to control its western regions, where al Qaeda and the Taliban operate with little restraint. America’s high-tempo drone campaign cannot succeed for long without the ground support of local bases and intelligence assets.

To stop an enemy without territory, population or regular armed forces, the U.S. must have access to timely, actionable intelligence gleaned from captured terrorists. The interrogation of terrorist leaders not only led the CIA to bin Laden’s doorstep. It helped produce the success of the last decade: not a single follow-up al Qaeda attack in the U.S. Exclusive reliance on drones and a no-capture policy spend down the investments in intelligence that made this hiatus possible, without replenishing the interrogation-gained information needed to predict future threats.

According to press reports, aides claim the president is a student of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas who brings their views to targeting choices. This is scarcely believable.

But even taking the claim at face value, just-war theory should broaden, rather than limit, the use of force against terrorists. The work of the Catholic theologians drew upon traditions stretching back to the ancient world that would have considered terrorists to be hostis humani generis, the enemy of all mankind, who merited virtually no protections under the laws of war.

Some church thinkers approved of wars for conversion (i.e., the Crusades), reprisal, conquest and punishment. While Mr. Obama surely does not seek a return to these earlier forms of conflict, a return to first principles such as hostis humani generis may prove a better guide for a nation at war than a president’s day-to-day instincts.

The only instinct this man possesses is self-preservation; and he’s more than willing to sacrifice whoever and whatever he has to….

….to ensure his own survival.

In a related item, we turn to today’s “No SH*T!” segment….

GOP leaders skeptical about U.S. attorneys’ freedom in leaks probe

 

Attorney General Eric Holder’s announcement that two U.S. attorneys have been assigned to lead a criminal investigation into possible, unauthorized leaks of classified information is being met with skepticism by GOP lawmakers questioning whether the attorneys will be able to act independently of the Obama administration.

“I have no doubt that these U.S. attorneys are excellent prosecutors,” GOP Sen. Saxby Chambliss, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said. “However, they would still be operating under the Obama administration’s Department of Justice. The better solution is to appoint an outside counsel to impartially investigate what will likely lead to a White House inquiry.”

No SH*T!

But as Jonah Goldberg, writing at the AEI website details, the more The Obamao flops and flounders like a gaffed grouper, the more desperate he becomes….

Searching for a Surrogate

 

Der Schlickmeister: still big with sex surrogates

Watching Bill Clinton act as Barack Obama’s “No. 1 surrogate,” in the words of National Public Radio, is as exquisitely painful as watching a runaway monkey with a paintball gun at a museum.

Most of the pundits have focused on Clinton’s motivations for refusing to read his lines from the White House script. That’s understandable given that Clinton is a one-man reality show whose diversity of motives makes the ladies of the “Real Housewives” franchise seem nun-like in their simplicity.

But asking “Why?” of Bill Clinton is a sucker’s game. Sure, he may give you an answer for why he did what he did, but any answer he gives you will be the verbal equivalent of an ice sculpture: impressive, but not expected to last long in the light of day. When he said that Mitt Romney is qualified to be president and had a “sterling business career,” he might as well have dropped the microphone and walked offstage, “Clinton out.”

In Aesop’s fables, the scorpion explains to the frog that he had no choice but to sting him. “Hey, man, that’s just how I roll,” the scorpion texted the frog, in what I imagine is the newly updated version. But at least the scorpion has the class to own up to his deed. The funny thing about Clinton is that he just pretends everything is hunky-dory, like the guy who tries to suppress a grin as he watches you drink the laxative-spiked punch, or Vizzini in “The Princess Bride” when he thinks the Dread Pirate Roberts is the one about to die from iocane powder poisoning. Bill does what Bill does. Just ask Hillary.

For the record, Clinton says he’s “aghast” at all the “flutter” about him wanting Obama to lose. In other news, my dog is aghast at rumors he likes bacon.

Still, the more interesting question is: Why does Obama need Clinton to be his Surrogate Numero Uno in the first place?

It’s not like Obama and Clinton love each other. Obama’s been dissing Clinton for years, saying Bubba’s presidency wasn’t “transformative” and all that. And then there was the unpleasantness in the 2008 primaries. And yet, Bill remains the White House’s go-to-guy.

It’s a fascinating weakness of this presidency: Obama has no reliable surrogates. Joe Biden is the vice president, and 90 percent of his job description is to be a carnival barker for his boss. But, particularly since Biden forced the president’s hand on gay marriage, it’s apparently dawned on the White House that Biden is less than dependable as a wingman. Sure, he might begin a statement by saying, “This president saved us from another Great Depression.” But you never know if he’ll finish by adding, “My neighbor has three rabbits,” or, “These are not my pants.”

The president has tried to be his own surrogate, personally going on the attack against Romney. But all that does is remind voters that Obama doesn’t want to talk about his own record — and further diminishes his tattered bipartisan brand.

That’s probably one reason they tried out David Axelrod as an anti-Romney hatchet man in Boston the other week. But you know your audition as Obama pitch man hasn’t gone well when 90 percent of the media coverage boils down to either stories about how you were booed by Romney supporters, or stories about how everyone’s asking, “What meth-head thought Axelrod would be a good surrogate?”

And where are the president’s Cabinet secretaries? Todd S. Purdum, in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, writes about how Obama’s Cabinet — which was sold as a “team of rivals” — has turned into a “team of mascots.”

Still, the great thing about mascots — at least the human variety — is that when they’re told to dance, they dance. The problem for Obama is that his Cabinet secretaries are the human manifestations of his record, and Obama’s record isn’t particularly popular. Put Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on TV and you run the risk of someone asking him about the exploding national debt. Put Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on a stage and someone might ask about her trampling of religious liberty, or be reminded of that whole “ObamaCare” thing the president doesn’t want to talk about.

That leaves Bill Clinton — and a lot more “Clinton out” moments to come.

Which should make the next five months, if nothing else, entertaining.  Even absent his father’s ethnicity, Obama’s unique in the annals of the American presidency.  Like a political Seinfeld, he’s a candidate about nothing.  Prior to his first campaign, he’d done nothing, accomplished nothing and ran on nothing….unless one considers “hope” and “change” as a substantive political platform.

And now, after almost 3-1/2 years in office, one could well believe his first term never happened….absent of course the elimination of bin Laden, which resulted from prior policies he pretends to decry.  Obamascare?  What the hell’s that?!?  TARP?  Never heard of it!  Stimulus?  Another leftover from the prior Administration.

Here’s the juice: his entire Administration can be summarized in one word: “present”; he’s there, with absolutely nothing to show for it.   Other than of course another $6T in debt.

Moving on, James Taranto offers a humorous anecdote on Progressive’s inability to grasp the reality of Wisconsin:

The Kids Are All Right

 

We cracked up at this headline from the lefty site AlterNet.org: “8 Ways Delusional Right-Wingers Are Blowing Wisconsin Out of Proportion.” We especially liked No. 4:

How Could it Be a Referendum on Union Rights When Nobody Ran on Union Rights?

A slim majority of voters approved of Walker stripping the rights of public sector unions. But a final nail in the coffin for the narrative that Walker won on that issue is the simple fact that [Democrat Tom] Barrett chose not to campaign on it. In fact, Barrett touted the fact that he wasn’t labor’s first choice (unions had backed Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk, whom Barrett defeated in a primary) and bragged on the campaign trail about how he had been a tough negotiator with public employee unions as mayor of Milwaukee. He presented himself as the centrist who can “make tough choices”–basically parroting the case that Walker made in 2010.

That may have been a huge tactical error–hindsight is 50/50 [sic]–but it is the case, and suggesting that this election was all about Walker’s union-busting is simply divorced from the reality of the campaign.

In case Joshua Holland, author of the AlterNet piece, is reading this, we’re not going to explain why this is ridiculous. We’re confident it’s obvious to everyone else, and we take sadistic pleasure in the thought of him trying to puzzle it out.

We’ll offer the same thought another way: Hey, Josh….like….

….what’re you smokin‘, dude?!?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, courtesy of BuzzFeed.com, a former aspirant to leadership of The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight once again demonstrates why he ain’t toppin’ the ticket:

Rick Perry Shouted Down At Texas GOP Convention

 

Rick Perry: and you thought compact fluorescent light bulbs were dim!

Texas Gov. Rick Perry was shouted down by members of his own party Thursday for his enthusiastic support of Lieutenant Gov. David Dewhurst in the contentious race to replace Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Perry was greeted warmly by the audience at the state Republican convention, drawing laughs and applause at one-liners making fun of his short-lived presidential campaign. But the mood darkened as if at the flip of a switch when Perry restated his endorsement of Dewhurst, who is opposed by Ted Cruz, the former state solicitor general. Cruz, a favorite of the tea party, libertarians, and social conservatives, forced a runoff with Dewhurst in last month’s Republican primary.

“We need more strong, conservative Texans in Washington, including my friend and colleague David Dewhurst,” Perry said in the middle of his speech. What followed is a matter of dispute, but neither was a good omen for Dewhurst or his political patron. Thousands of Cruz supporters responded with boos or a long chants of “Cruuuuzz,” lasting for over 10 seconds as Perry tried to continue with his remarks. But as soon as the chants stopped, they loved Perry again, particularly as he closed his remarks with a long section about serving God.

Asked about the response after his speech while fleeing a flock of reporters, Perry replied, “I thought they said Dew.”

Yeah….

Moving to the “Why There’s Never A Cop Around When You Need One!” segment, courtesy of G. Trevor, Lord High King of All Vietors, this just in from the Washington Examiner….

Montgomery County police union used felons to gather signatures in ballot drive

 

Montgomery County’s police union used felons, including a fugitive and a man convicted of forgery, to collect signatures for a ballot measure that would kill legislation reducing police collective bargaining rights, court documents show. The county cites the Fraternal Order of Police’s use of felons among reasons why at least 6,700 of the 34,828 signatures validated by the County Board of Elections are insufficient to put the measure, protecting police officers’ ability to negotiate any management decision, on the November ballot.

The felons were responsible for collecting signatures and certifying they were gathered legally.

“The notion that a felon who under Maryland law would be prohibited from voting in an election, and who at any time was at the risk of arrest by the very individuals on whose behalf he was circulating the petition, would be responsible for preventing fraud flies in the face of common sense and is truly laughable,” attorneys for the county wrote in documents filed in Montgomery County Circuit Court.

One felon, Keith Gregory Moore, of Grand Rapids, Mich., was convicted of forgery, fraud, aggravated assault and home invasion, the court filing shows.

Another petition circulator, Jessie James Rowe, of Kalamazoo, Mich., was a fugitive felon at the time he was gathering signatures — and still is — the document says. In June 2010, Rowewas convicted of possession of methamphetamines or Ecstasy. A warrant was issued for his arrest on July 2, 2010, after he tested positive for marijuana, amphetamines and opiates, violating his bond. As of May 17, when the county filed the court documents, the warrant was still outstanding. In 2004, Rowe pleaded guilty to operating a meth lab.

The county wants the 2,744 signatures Rowe collected and the 543 gathered by Moore tossed out. Both were hired by California’s PCI Consultants, which the FOP contracted to gather signatures. Union Secretary Jane Milne referred questions to PCI. A PCI representative did not return calls. The union asked that the criminal records be omitted from the court record because the county submitted them after a legal deadline.

The union and Board of Elections argue that criminal history is not relevant….“Unless there is evidence that a voter’s signature is false, it does not matter if the circulator lacks credibility as a witness,” the union wrote in a court motion.

Public employee unions: they’re right there behind you….picking you’re pocket, 24/7; now with a little help from some old friends!

And in the “MSM Bias….WHAT Bias?!?” segment, courtesy of Jeff Foutch and Breitbart.com:

CBS Chief Moonves Attends Obama Fundraiser, Outs Journalism as ‘Partisan’

 

Last night in Los Angeles as our economy burned, President Barack Obama continued along his record-setting fundraising pace (events, not cash raised) with a stop among the glittery Top 1% at a LGBT fundraiser that included Ellen Degeneres, Cher, Chaz Bono, and CBS Corp. CEO and chairman Les Moonves. Part of what Moonves does is oversee the CBS News division, which makes the fact that he attended a political fundraiser fascinating, but not as fascinating as what he told The Los Angeles Times:

CBS chief Les Moonves and his wife, Julie Chen, waited patiently for their wristbands. Obama, Moonves said, “has shown great leadership” on the issue of gay marriage.

Though he heads a news division, Moonves said, “ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now.” He hastened to add that despite his presence, “I run a news division. I’ve given no money to any candidate.”

It’s plausible Moonves could’ve attended this bigtime fundraiser as a guest, meaning someone else paid for his ticket so he could maintain that he has “given no money to any candidate.” But what’s the head of a major news division doing at this kind of partisan event to begin with? He certainly wasn’t there to cover it for CBS. And what’s he thinking publicly gushing over Obama’s “great leadership” on the divisive issue of same-sex marriage?

Anyway, his statement about how “partisanship is very much a part of journalism now” is not only interesting considering he said it at a Obama fundraiser, but it’s also a falsehood.

Partisanship has always been a part of journalism, especially at CBS News. It’s just that the network always has and always will hide its partisanship behind a phony shield of objectivity and nonsense loopholes such as, “I’m at this bigtime fundraiser but have never given money to any candidate.”

But what Moonves is doing here is finally (and probably by accident) admitting that the media is partisan. It’s also interesting that he’s outing journalism in general, not just the openly partisan media that has blossomed online or on talk radio. He’s calling “journalism” partisan — and indeed it is.

So the only surprise is that someone with Moonves’s status is finally admitting it…..[and] outing all of journalism at an LGBT event.

On the Lighter Side….

And since we’re on the subject of massive brain farts, here’s the “Your Tax Dollars At Work” segment, courtesy of Bill Meisen and the great state of Oregon:

‘Human error’ to blame in $2 million Oregon tax refund scam

 

Only a diabolical genius like Reyes could have outsmarted the brilliant bureaucrats at Oregon’s Revenue Department

A state computer red-flagged an allegedly fraudulent $2.1 million tax refund, but “human error” allowed the scam to slip through the Oregon Department of Revenue, a spokesman for the state agency said Thursday. As a result, the department will look at all big tax refunds — “starting with the biggest and working our way down” — to make sure it hasn’t missed more cases where people have swindled the state out of large sums of money, said Derrick Gasperini, communications director for the department. Officials also will review internal controls, he said.

“We do catch fraudulent refund claims throughout the year,” Gasperini said. “That’s why this one is a shock.” He said it would be the biggest case of tax fraud Oregon has seen.

Department of Justice agents arrested Krystle Marie Reyes, of Salem, Wednesday on accusations that she used Turbo Tax computer software to file a fake tax return claiming she had earned $3 million and was owed a refund of $2.1 million. Oregon revenue officials approved the refund, and Turbo Tax issued Reyes, 25, a prepaid Visa debit card with the full refund amount on it.

She spent $200,000 between February and April before reporting the card stolen. At that point, state revenue officials “double-checked” the tax return, determined it was fraudulent and notified the Justice Department, Gasperini said. Intuit, the company that owns Turbo Tax, has returned $1.9 million to the state, Gasperini said.

It’s unclear what might have happened if Reyes had not lost the debit card. The incident has raised questions about the capability of the Revenue Department to detect fraud, and at least one key lawmaker is calling for a formal explanation from agency officials. “It’s very concerning that something like this happened,” said Sen. Ginny Burdick, D-Portland, who chairs the Senate Revenue and Finance Committee. “We do need to get to the bottom of it.” Burdick said she expects to bring the issue up when her committee meets in September during several days of hearings in preparation for next year’s full legislative session.

The Revenue Department uses a series of checks for fraud, including automated and manual inspections of tax returns, Gasperini said. None is foolproof, however. “Our processing system did flag (Reyes’ tax return) for manual review” because of its size, Gasperini said. “We manually reviewed it and our internal controls failed. Someone did approve a $2.1 million refund. Really it was human error.”

He said he doesn’t know why the refund was approved, and was unable to confirm whether any employee has been disciplined for the mistake. Internal auditors are looking at what happened and at how to prevent it from happening again, he said. Auditors in the Secretary of State’s Office will review their results. “We’re looking to secure the broad interest of the department rather than trying to find a scapegoat in this particular instance,” he said. He added that the department constantly tries to strike a balance “between issuing timely refunds and catching fraud.”

Turbo Tax spokeswoman Colleen Gatlin said she couldn’t comment on what happened because it’s the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation. The company is cooperating with law enforcement, she said. “We do have processes in place to detect and prevent fraud,” she said, but the company has a policy of not talking about them, for safety reasons….

Finally, we’ll call it a wrap with the “If It Sounds To Good To Be True….” segment, and this tantalizing headline:

Kenyan politician among 6 dead in helicopter crash

 

For a moment there….JUST for a moment….

Oh well; hope springs eternal.