*****************************************************************************

The social Liberal liked wealth and didn’t believe in “saving the world on stage” nor that the world can even be saved

*****************************************************************************

The following are excerpts from a Playboy magazine interview by David Sheff with John Lennon and Yoko Ono made in September 1980 (3 months before Lennon’s death) and published in its January 1981 issue:

PLAYBOY: “Just to finish your favorite subject, what about the suggestion that the four of you put aside your personal feelings and regroup to give a mammoth concert for charity, some sort of giant benefit?”

LENNON: “I don’t want to have anything to do with benefits. I have been benefited to death.”

PLAYBOY: “Why?”

LENNON: “Because they’re always rip-offs. I haven’t performed for personal gain since 1966, when the Beatles last performed. Every concert since then, Yoko and I did for specific  charities, except for a Toronto thing that was a rock ‘n roll revival. Every one of them was a mess or a rip-off. So now we give money to who we want. You’ve heard of tithing?”

PLAYBOY: “That’s when you give away a fixed percentage of your income.”

LENNON: “Right. I am just going to do it privately. I am not going to get locked into that business of saving the world on stage. The show is always a mess and the artist always comes off badly.”

 John Lennon was an unabashed capitalist and believer in self-sufficiency

______________________________________

PLAYBOY: “What about the Bangladesh concert, in which George and other people such as Dylan performed?”

LENNON: “Bangladesh was ca-ca.”

PLAYBOY: “You mean because of all the questions that were raised about where the money went?”

LENNON: “Yeah, right. I can’t even talk about it, because it’s still a problem. You’ll have to check with Mother (Yoko) because she knows the ins and outs of it, I don’t. But it’s all a rip-off. So forget about it. All of you who are reading this, don’t bother sending me all that garbage about, ‘Just come and save the Indians, come and save the blacks, come and save the war veterans,’ Anybody I want to save will be helped through our tithing, which is ten percent of whatever we earn.”

PLAYBOY: “But that doesn’t compare with what one promoter, Sid Bernstein, said you could raise by giving a world-wide televised concert… playing separately, as individuals, or together, as the Beatles. He estimated you could raise over $200,000,000 in one day.”

LENNON: “That was a commercial for Sid Bernstein written with Jewish schmaltz and showbiz and tears, dropping on one knee. It was Al Jolson. OK. So I don’t buy that. OK?”

PLAYBOY: “But the fact is, $200,000,000 to a poverty-stricken country in South America…”

LENNON: “Where do people get off saying the Beatles should give $200,000,000 to South America? You know, America has poured billions into places like that. It doesn’t mean a damn thing. After they’ve eaten that meal, then what? It lasts for only a day. After the $200,000,000 is gone, then what? It goes round and round in circles. You can pour money in forever. After Peru, then Harlem, then Britain. There is no one concert. We would have to dedicate the rest of our lives to one world concert tour, and I’m not ready for it. Not in this lifetime, anyway.”

**********************************************

PLAYBOY: “On the subject of your own wealth, the New York Post recently said you admitted to being worth over $150,000,000 and…”

LENNON: “We never admitted anything.”

PLAYBOY: “The Post said you had.”

LENNON: “What the Post says… OK, so we are rich; so what?”

PLAYBOY: “The question is, How does that jibe with your political philosophies? You’re supposed to be socialists, aren’t you?”

LENNON: “In England, there are only two things to be, basically: You are either for the labor movement or for the capitalist movement. Either you become a right-wing Archie Bunker if you are in the class I am in, or you become an instinctive socialist, which I was. That meant I think people should get their false teeth and their health looked after, all the rest of it. But apart from that, I worked for money and I wanted to be rich. So what the hell… if that’s a paradox, then I’m a socialist. But I am not anything. What I used to be is guilty about money. That’s why I lost it, either by giving it away or by allowing myself to be screwed by so-called managers.”

**********************************************

PLAYBOY: “John, do you really need all those houses around the country?”

LENNON: “They’re good business.”

PLAYBOY: “Why does anyone need $150,000,000? Couldn’t you be perfectly content with $100,000,000? Or $1,000,000?”

LENNON: “What would you suggest I do? Give everything away and walk the streets? The Buddhist says, ‘Get rid of the possessions of the mind.’ Walking away from all the money would not accomplish that. It’s like the Beatles. I couldn’t walk away from the Beatles. That’s one possession that’s still tagging along, right? If I walk away from one house or 400 houses, I’m not gonna escape it.”

**********************************************

PLAYBOY: “What is the Eighties’ dream to you, John?”

LENNON: Well, you make your own dream. That’s the Beatles’ story, isn’t it? That’s Yoko’s story. That’s what I’m saying now. Produce your own dream. If you want to save Peru, go save Peru. It’s quite possible to do anything, but not to put it on the leaders and the parking meters. Don’t expect Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan or John Lennon or Yoko Ono or Bob Dylan or Jesus Christ to come and do it for you. You have to do it yourself. That’s what the great masters and mistresses have been saying ever since time began. They can point the way, leave signposts and little instructions in various books that are now called holy and worshiped for the cover of the book and not for what it says, but the instructions are all there for all to see, have always been and always will be. There’s nothing new under the sun. All the roads lead to Rome. And people cannot provide it for you. I can’t wake you up. You can wake you up. I can’t cure you. You can cure you.”

*****************************************************************************

The bottom line for organized religion is……..the bottom line

*****************************************************************************

It has been reported this week that Cardinal Timothy Dolan, when head of the Milwaukee Archdiocese, advised the Vatican to place some $57 million of church funds in a trust that protected them from being tapped by sex-abuse victims through lawsuits. “By transferring these assets to the trust, I foresee an improved protection of these funds from any legal claim and liability,” he wrote, a year after the archdiocese spent more than $10 million on litigation and compensation to victims. The Vatican quickly approved the transfer.

Associated Press

Timothy Dolan: Cardinal, Disciple of Jesus, Asset Protector

________________________________________

In 2008, Vatican authorities recommended the imposition of a 10-year precept, or suspension, on Thomas Trepanier, a self-admitted  offender. Then-Archbishop Dolan asked the Vatican to instead defrock the priest. “If word got out that the Holy See had left the door  open for a reconsideration of Father Trepanier’s case in 10 years our  credibility would be seriously damaged,” he wrote in a letter to Rome. The  Vatican ended up restricting the priest from ministry indefinitely. Cardinal Dolan was right to be concerned about the church’s credibility but given that it takes a ferocious public position against same-sex relations between consenting adults yet is missing in action when children are abused, Cardinal Dolan only touched the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the Holy See’s credibility challenges.

In a statement Monday, Cardinal Dolan denied he  transferred the funds to shield them from insolvency proceedings, calling that assertion an “old and discredited” attack. For those old enough to recall the Cold War, such a reaction sounded very similar to how the Kremlin would respond when accused of wrongdoing. Next up, the Vatican will lament the level of cynicism in society. Such is also the lament of rulers who are used to being unchallenged.

It is very possible that such funds should have been transferred as they were collected under the pretense of cemetery maintenance. But $57 million is a lot of landscaping and obelisks for the cemeteries. And the timing of such transfer is dubious, to say the least. This seems a far cry from the hand-to-mouth institution that Christ implicitly advocated when he was on this earth. And it’s doubtful the Holy Trinity would’ve approved of the billions that churches around the world collectively have in various investments.

Since its inception, the church and other organized religions have claimed that they are not democracies (translation: keep your mouth shut and your wallet open when the collection basket rolls around). But in the last several decades, because of technological, political and social evolution, people now are able to question institutions like the church that they never have before, much to the good of such institutions despite what its ossified leadership might claim.

Inevitably, the Catholic Church will always be prone to being questioned so long as its primary focus is operating as a business and not its stated mission of spreading the Gospel of Christ.

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

The demise of Detroit could be an invaluable teaching moment with lasting positive effect

*****************************************************************************

Recently, the city of Detroit told some debt holders that they will have to accept pennies on the dollar or risk getting drawn into the largest U.S. municipal bankruptcy ever.

Despite a spiffy skyline, Detroit is in deep fiscal trouble

___________________________________________

Kevyn Orr, the attorney hired by Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder to lead the restructuring of Detroit’s troubled finances, told
representatives of the city’s creditors that the city plans to stop making payments on some of its debts and won’t make payments in the foreseeable future on at least $2 billion in unsecured municipal debt as part of a move to save cash.

The total bill for the city’s long-term liabilities is nearly $20 billion, and the city is now insolvent, according to Mr. Orr. His decision to suspend debt payments could serve as a trigger for Chapter 9 bankruptcy in a matter of months, and the plan for the city of about 700,000 that he unveiled on Friday could serve as a road map under bankruptcy.

At most risk is the $11 billion in unsecured debt. That includes almost $6 billion primarily in medical benefits for retired city workers; more than $3 billion for retirees’ pensions; and about $530 million in general-obligation bonds. Retirees are set to get less than 10% of what is owed them under the plan.

I usually don’t find myself in agreement with officials of unions (government worker or private industry) but I agree with Ed McNeil of AFSCME when he says “bondholders need to take a larger cut” in their payouts. In fact, at the already proposed near wipe-out of pennies to the dollar, I say make it no payout at all. This would have the positive long-term effect of educating investors, politicians and the public at large on the infeasibility of unrealistic government spending that exists out there. Perhaps investors will be more discerning next time when they place their money into a municipal trough, especially the likes of Detroit. It would also show the unions and politicians that once you burn investors (bondholders), they will not be eager to lend their money again. Thus, future potential bond money will be placed into more efficient uses like the private industry (General Motors?).

Finally, having followed the death-flails of Detroit for a while, I recall a suggestion that Detroit woo government workers back to its city-limits. I agree and suggest that it populate itself with its municipal retirees as well as existing employees and make such the predominant population (and tax-base) for Motown. What a lesson in economics that would be!

In short, let’s turn Detroit into a national tutorial on over-sized government by giving such proponents all the rope they ask for.

I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

As the country soul-searches over conscientious-objectors like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden, Confederate and Union soldiers provide a great example of serving country

*****************************************************************************

This week marks the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War’s Battle of Gettysburg.

The battle was spread over 3 days and various parts of a large battlefield and saw extraordinary courage, as was common in that and many other American military endeavors.

In Day 2 of the battle, Union troops, out of ammunition, successfully defended their position on a hill called Little Round Top with the ultimate act of desperation: a bayonet charge. On day 3, Confederate troops charged up an incline in which they were completely exposed to cannon and rifle fire. As fraught with danger and potential death, few on either side questioned their command. They were there to serve and they did, many sacrificing their lives in such service. The sense of duty was so strong that even most Confederate soldiers who were to partake in the foreseeably doomed Pickett’s Charge could not fathom doing anything other than following orders. They had their doubts about the decision made by the seemingly invincible Robert E. Lee but they knew that the only course of action was to follow his orders. History and God would ultimately judge  the wisdom of such decision, not his troops on that day.

The boys at Gettysburg, Confederate and Union, came to perform their duty and left larger policy decisions to those above them

________________________________

Such has resonance given recent events in which United States Army soldier Bradley Manning passed classified Iraq War material to the gadfly website WikiLeaks and former government consultant Edward Snowden disclosed its activities of surveillance . Both claimed they did such in disagreement and protest over how their government was acting.

Fair enough. Few other pages than this one get more dyspeptic over the typical conduct and intrusiveness of modern government. Everything from over-regulation to taxation to revenue-obsession to the occassional scandal like that with the Internal Revenue Service regarding tax-exempt organizations give credence to a healthy skepticism of Uncle Sam and his state and local underlings.

But there is a right and wrong way to do things, especially when dealing with national defense. Mssrs. Manning and Snowden not only made high-impact decisions without having the full picture, but they acted in such a manner that could least constructively deal with their concerns. Wikileaks and the world media, no matter how influential, would only amplify the debate and not actually change policy of the U.S. government. They would’ve gotten far more results with less downside had they gone the official whistle-blower route. After all, there is always a politically ambitious congressman who will listen to and expound upon a potential government scandal.

The rebellious great singer Bruce Springsteen said “Blind faith in your leaders, or in anything, will get you killed.” Perhaps true, on occasion. But blind defiance of your leaders, like Mr. Manning and Snowden have, can cause an equally high mortality rate for both individual and country, especially now in the death-struggle that western civilization has with Islamo-fascism.

The boys at Gettysburg 150 years ago would likely agree and it is hard to do better than them.

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

Plugging government leaks the bureaucratic way: with government forms

*****************************************************************************

With the recent leaking of the NSA metadata surveillance program by the young Edward Snowden and the commencement of the trial last week of Bradley Manning for giving classified military documents to Wiki-leaks, I pondered just how such breaches in security could occur.

The citizen in me concluded that there are those who are downright unpatriotic if not traitorous. But the armchair sociologist and lawyer in me, which (surprisingly) won the debate, concluded that these and other leaks were nothing more than the result of lousy legal word-smithing resulting in miscommunication between generations. To wit, the employment agreements that Mssrs. Manning and Snowden signed were just poorly drafted, allowing for ambiguity and confusion as they and their contemporaries do not think in the same way as prior generations did (select children of the ’60s aside). They did not mean to violate the terms of their employment and endanger the country, they just didn’t know what the parameters were; they were confused. After all, at 30 years of age, a Generation X-er should not be expected to understand all that legal mumbo-jumbo in such agreement, especially as there is no app for it. And there is no way someone of their generation could intuitively grasp the arcane concept of duty in this day and age.

So, in support of my government, I hereby provide the following employment agreement (in addition to all of the tax money I shovel to Uncle Sam and his state and local underlings) which is a standard form used with (ADDITIONS, CLARIFYING LANGUAGE AND LIKELY EMPLOYEE FEEDBACK) for the government to  give to all of the Generation X-ers hired by government so that there may never again be another un-tidy security leak like this:

********************************************************

CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NONDISCLOSURE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (A PROMISE TO KEEP SECRETS)

AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND THE UNITED STATES AND ZIGGY WIKI-APP (THEM AND YOU)

1. Intending to be legally (IF NOT MORALLY NOR REALITY) bound, I (THIS MEANS YOU) hereby accept the obligations contained in this Agreement (ALL OF THEM) in consideration of my being granted access to classified information (REALLY IMPORTANT STUFF). As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications, that is classified under the standards of Executive Order 12958 (GOOGLE IT FOR A BETTER EXPLANATION THAN OUR LAWYERS CAN PROVIDE HERE), or under any other Executive order or statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of information in the interest of national security (AGAIN, REALLY IMPORTANT STUFF!!); and unclassified information that meets the standards for classification and is in the process of a classification determination as provided in Sections 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4(e) of Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive order or statute that requires protection for such information in the interest of national security (DON’T EVEN ATTEMPT TO FIGURE IT OUT, JUST TRY TO KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT). I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information, special confidence and trust [GET OVER THE DUSTY, OLD TERMS] shall be placed in me by the United States Government (“THE MAN”).

Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden are not traitors but merely Generation X-ers who needed clearer employment agreements

_____________________________________________________________________________

2. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information, including the procedures to be followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I contemplate disclosing this information have been approved for access to it, and that I understand these procedures (REMEMBER THAT APP YOU GOT? USE IT WHEN YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT SECRETS OVER A LATTE AND IT WILL GIVE YOU GUIDANCE [ON BOTH THE SECRET AND WHAT KIND OF LATTE TO DRINK]).

3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation (I WILL ALSO LOSE STARBUCK PRIVILEGES AND HAVE MY I-WHATEVER TAKEN AWAY FROM ME). I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of the information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted (TRANSLATION: UNLESS SOMEONE OR THE APP ALLOWS YOU TO). I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above (ADDITIONALLY, I WILL CONSIDER A CAREER CHANGE GIVEN THAT I CAN’T  SEE THE OBVIOUS).

4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or the termination of my employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances (I’LL GET TO SLEEP IN).

5. I hereby assign to the United States Government all royalties, remunerations, and emoluments that have resulted, will result or may result from any disclosure, publication, or revelation of classified information not consistent with the terms of this Agreement (WHATEVER).

6. I understand that the United States Government may seek any remedy available to it to enforce this Agreement including, but not limited to, application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of information in breach of this Agreement (AGAIN, WHATEVER). I also agree that if I break this agreement and commit an egregious leak that threaten the national defense, I must act as an on-call and celebrated national security expert for 1 year on any MSNBC show.

7. I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law (ALONG WITH ALL FREQUENT FLIER MILES I ACCUMULATE WHEN I’M ON THE LAM LIKE THAT SNOWDEN FELLOW DID FOR BREAKING THESE SILLY RULES). I agree that I shall return all classified materials which have, or may come into my possession or for which I am responsible because of such access (BUT NEVER MY I-WHATEVER).

8. I have read this Agreement carefully and my questions, if any, have been answered. I acknowledge that the briefing officer (THAT DUDE THAT IS CRAMPED AND SEEMS CONSTIPATED has made available to me the Executive Order and statutes referenced in this Agreement and its implementing regulation (32 CFR Section 2003.20) so that I may read them at this time, if I so choose (LIKE I EVER WOULD).

SIGNATURE/DATE

/s/_______________________________

THE UNDERSIGNED ACCEPTED THIS AGREEMENT ON _["WHENEVER"]_

SECURITY DEBRIEFING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I agree that I will not communicate or transmit classified information to any unauthorized person or organization (EVEN IF I THINK I CAN DICTATE NATIONAL SECURTY POLICY BETTER THAN OUR NATIONALLY ELECTED LEADERS).

_____________________________

SIGNATURE/IP ADDRESS OF EMPLOYEE

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

The outpouring of grief over an actor who played a mobster shows that society yearns for people who stand for real things, not Kardashian ephemera

*****************************************************************************

At first blush, it is somewhat difficult to understand how a great many people can mourn the loss of James Gandolfini as much as they do.

Certainly at 51 years of age, he died young and for those of us who are quickly approaching the mid-century mark, this is yet another reminder that mortality is the only other inevitability after taxes (and even someday people may well be immortal, even if never avoiding government tithing).

But his youth does not seem to be the predominant reason for people’s heartfelt sorrow. After all, bad people die young and society could not care less, if not is happy.

Whether Tony Soprano or James Gandolfini, you knew where he stood, much unlike many of our political, business and religious leaders

_______________________________

The 2 predominant themes that seem to be coming from those weighing in on the late actor is: 1) he played the infamous Tony Soprano and 2) he was a nice guy.

These propositions seem mutually exclusive but are not. Their common thread is that both Tony Soprano and the nice guy took a stand; you know where they stood whether they were right (nice guy) or wrong (Tony).

This is a far cry from so many of our leaders in society who waffle (politicians), obfuscate (corporate and religious leaders), or downright lie (too many to list but, amongst others, politicians and corporate/religious leaders).

While we don’t want our leaders to be like Tony Soprano and it is likely too much to ask them to be nice like James Gandolfini, it should not be a bridge too far to ask them to be straight-shooters.

As Tony Soprano once eloquently put it, “Why don’t we put our &@%!$# cards on the table here.”

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

Even for the children of the ’60s, getting old is a better alternative to not getting old

*****************************************************************************

Recently, The Wall Street Journal did a piece on the 1960′s rock singer David Crosby’s passion for sailing on his schooner (“David Crosby’s Schooner Muse”, Mansion, June 7, 2013) which was enlightening on several levels.

For starters, the “children of the ’60s” now own and are sailing big boats (although Mr. Crosby started back then). That’s a far cry from the materialism they denounced in the height of their youth. Whether it is Paul McCartney, The Rolling Stones or any other  ’60s icon, these people have teams of lawyers and accountants to grow, protect and count their riches. It’s good to know capitalism is not just for the haughty few.

Despite best efforts, David Crosby and his generation have enjoyed their wealth and reached old age regardless of their disdain for Geritol

_________________________________________________

Second, Mr. Crosby seems to have mellowed and realizes both his limitations as well as the error of his ways regarding free-range substance use. In short, sailing on his boat provides a greater high then whatever he can pump into his body.

Finally and related,  Mr. Crosby, against his best efforts, has reached the age of 71. I seem to recall The Who singing “I hope I die before I get old” and many of their contemporaries in the ’60s conveying such thought but it appears that like every generation before them, including the World War II generation that they butted heads with, the children of the ’60s followed the same path of life (aging, materialism and yes, general reality) that the rest of us have and will follow. The weekend at Bernies’ concerts they now hold show that the alternative to old age is not an alternative. If only their parents were around to see it.

And to borrow another thought from The Who, not only are the kids alright but they have grown up, perhaps to their chagrin.

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

Not being blown up justifies reasonable intrusions into our privacy

*****************************************************************************

The fainting and palpitations continue over the National Security Agency’s surveillance of phone traffic. What its critics don’t realize is that they are forcing a debate that they will likely lose.

Back during the Cold War (seemingly several millenia ago), there was a saying “better dead than red” meaning that living under communism was worse than being dead. The phrase was over-wrought but did reflect a disdain that many in the west had for the oppressive system in the Soviet Union. The updated version to that siren call now seems to be “better dead than have your communications read” by the government, which is not only unhinged thinking but not even happening except when probable cause exists. The program that has caused such an uproar does not look at the text of calls but merely patterns of when calls are made and how often.

Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson was correct when he said “the constitution is not a suicide pact.”

_________________________________

This is why it was so welcome when last week President Obama defended the Bush-era surveillance program as necessary to protect Americans at the price of only “modest encroachments” on personal privacy.

Unlike Candidate Obama on the campaign trail in 2008, President Obama realizes that “You can’t have 100% security and also then have 100% privacy and zero inconvenience.” Mr. Obama when on to tutor us that “you know, we’re going to have to make some choices as a society.”

Bravo, Mr. President, and better late than never. Somewhere, Dick “Darth” Cheney is nodding in approval.

Our evolving president seems to understand what too many Liberals and Tea Partiers don’t: that as U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson said decades ago, the constitution is not a suicide pact. The liberties and freedoms it affords must be balanced against existing threats to it that would permanently deprive people of such liberties if allowed to. Giving unlimited liberty and privacy to the citizenry today is of little benefit if it results in destruction or deprivation of freedom tomorrow and thereafter.

And never missed is how Liberals have no problem with government controlling facets of people’s lives from health care, to the most inane aspects of the employer-employee relationship to even the kind of auto we drive yet Liberals get unhinged when government makes the smallest and most benign intrusion into the machinations of society in order to protect us from our enemies.

It was inevitable that as distance occurred from the 9/11 attacks, the weighting of privacy and convenience would begin to catch up with security and national defense. Fortunately, the public seems disinterested in trading the allusion of more privacy for carnage like the 9/11 attacks. Let’s hope this September 12th mentality sticks.

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

From the IRS to local police, government bureaucrats at all levels serve their own agendas

*****************************************************************************

The recent revelations of IRS employees mistreating the tax-exempt applications of conservative groups has caused not only consternation amongst the right and middle America along with full-scale denial and subject changing (see: MSNBC, any show), but also a quest for explanations.

It has been put forth by many that government had become too large, too unwieldy. Yes, given the extraordinary size and growth of government, there is no doubt that government at all levels (federal, state, local) could afford to go on a fiscal Slim Fast diet and society as a whole would benefit. A recent example of this is the sequester in which modest cuts were enacted and voila!, the Republic not only carried on but stock and bond markets actually acted with approval. Last I checked, birds were not falling out of the sky nor the earth swallowing people up because the insane trajectory of federal spending has been slowed.

In the end, too many government bureaucrats are unhelpful and self-serving. Surprise!

_______________________________________

Then there are those who claim that the IRS scandal was politically motivated and urged from the highest echelons of government, including President Obama, if not explicitly then with the mood, tone and atmosphere he and his administration set, as many have argued since this scandal erupted. But just putting the punch bowl out does not mean people can abuse it and then blame the party host. Such tone argument smacks of what Liberals do when some whacknut shoots or blows people up: blame Conservatives or their interests. Bill Clinton did this a few days after the Oklahoma City bombings when he tried to pin the non-ideological, non-partisan Tim McVeigh and his barbaric Oklahoma City bombing atrocity on Conservative talkshow radio. As with most things Clinton, people saw through the sheer cynical nature of what he said and he quickly retreated and, in Clintonesque fashion, would have blamed right-wing talk show radio itself for the ill-conceived assertion.

On the other side of the spectrum there was the recently-fired acting IRS Commissioner who testified before the House Ways and Means Committee and described the targeting (and that’s what it was to any sober and rational person no matter how partisan they may be) of Conservative groups as “foolish mistakes” made by “people trying to be more efficient in their workload selection.” Having read the statements of German leadership on trial after World War II, one could call such “The Nuremberg Defense.”

Liberals also go back to a change in IRS regulations made in…..1959 which while it certainly deviated from the original statute’s wording and intent, by no means could be interpreted as giving the IRS the green light to go after any particular group, Liberal nor Conservative, the way it did.

Which leads to the real reason why career employees at the IRS decided to target Conservative organizations: perceived job security.

The Nobel laureate economist George Stigler pointed out that “Regulatory capture” occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or special concerns of the industry it regulates.

In the case of the IRS targeting Conservative groups, one could surmise a sort of “bureaucratic capture” in which IRS employees, fully aware that Conservative groups are critical of their mission (read: jobs), proceeded, if not on their own, then very happily and with extraordinary zeal when the slightest hint from their leadership came that right-wing groups should be focused on. After all, survival is a very strong instinct whether in animal, human or government apparatchik.

Such self-interest occurs at all levels of government and affects everything from constricted government agency hours to cramped job descriptions to penalties handed out by government for technical violations of laws that have no adverse effect. For anyone who thinks a policeman is handing out a traffic ticket for an insignificant infraction and not thinking about what is likely their unfunded pension, I’ve got some Greek bonds I’d like to sell to you at a premium.

Administrations come and go, along with their ideologies. But bureaucrats are entrenched and will always serve themselves, often to society’s detriment.

-I.M. Windee

*****************************************************************************

The Un-Natural hangs up his cleats for another year

*****************************************************************************

Yesterday was the last day of my son’s little league season. The playoffs were similar to the National Hockey League’s: everybody is in (even of you’re a girl’s soccer team) and you have to lose 2 games to be eliminated. With the full-shouldered help of my son, his team met that 2 game requirement quickly. If I said I dropped to my knees in thanks when the last out was made and the long, sometimes agonizing, season was over, I would not be exaggerating that much. And then, like one of the 7 stages of grief, came a flood of reflections:

• My son may not know the baseball diamond well, but the tree-line beyond the outfield has got to be burned into his memory; he stared so much at it.
• Related to prior, the coaches could recognize my son’s back from a mile away.
• The Natural is a 1984 film starring Robert Redford which recounts the experiences of Roy Hobbs, an individual with great “natural” baseball talent. Like me, my son’s Little League experience would be best titled The Un-Natural.
• 8-year olds on a baseball diamond are like a bunch of cats performing ballet.
• Marriage requires patience; coaching little league requires extreme patience.
• This year’s missing-in-action: baseball glove: $35; aluminum bat: $45; leather bag with 6 baseballs: $50; 1/2 of daddy’s stomach-lining: priceless.

Unlike Lou Gehrig who had to leave the game prematurely, the North Howell Little League concession stand should be relieved to know that “The Un-Natural” will be back next year for another record-breaking season of candy and hot dog consumption

_______________________________________

• For a 90-minute little league game, are 2 beers too little? 4 beers too much? Do the answers change if the game is played in the afternoon or evening?
• All too often, it seemed like the only reason my son went to the games was to eat hot dogs and consume candy from the concession stand. In fact, he set a single-season record for polishing off 21 ring-pops in 17 games. His dentist and the concession stand hopes he eclipses such achievement next year. My money is with him, and ultimately the concession stand.
• For some who step to the plate, the coach yells “make contact and get on base!” For others it is “knock it out of the park!” And for a select few, who shall remain nameless, the best the coach can muster is “survive.”
• The manager of my son’s team mastered the art of delivering his “there were bright sides to our loss today” speech and sometimes he even delivered it before the game was played.

-I.M. Windee