Does the United States Even Have a Government Anymore?

I noticed that the current crop of Obomba Scandals!!!!! opened up almost immediately after the Correspondents' Dinner in April, almost on cue, and that the leading Obomba Scandals!!!! (Benghazi, IRS, Spying on the AP) had been in the hopper for quite some time. They were not "news," they were rehashed previous stories, pumped up to Frenzy Level 12. All of them had been reported on previously -- some, like Benghazi, becoming memes.

Suddenly, we saw the spectacle of Washington, particularly the White House, scrambling and babbling and doing its level best to both inflate and deflate these Scandals!!!! -- depending on which political team was being played for at any given moment. Polling the rabble was constant. Interestingly, none of these Scandals!!!! were resonating much with the public, so another one was introduced, Spying on a FOX reporter!!!! That got a momentary rise, but then even it seemed to settle into the background noise.

These Scandals!!!!! were not catching fire with the unwashed masses, and the White House seemed to be handling each one deftly. Rope-a-Doping Issa was easy. Calling for heads to roll was easy. Some sacrificial heads were offered up, "reforms" were launched, the Frenzy died down.

Then there came the Snowden Thing from the Guardian, and All Holy Hell broke loose -- at least for a time -- as the Nation's Sekrits!!!! were Exposed!!!! EVERYONE WAS BEING SPIED ON ALL THE TIME, AIYEEEE!!!! Run for your lives, Children, we're all going to DIEEEEEE!!!!

Yes, well. When the AP Surveillance story was being pumped up, I, among others, pointed out that everyone was subject to intrusive surveillance, had been for a long time, and now it seemed the AP was demanding an exemption. Why should they be exempt when the People are not? At what point do we turn this around and demand that the universal and blanket surveillance that everyone is under be curtailed?

I thought it was interesting at the time that quite literally no one was paying any attention to the fact that universal surveillance had been institutionalized thanks to the abrogation of responsibility by Congress, and it had been going on for years. Supposedly anti-terrorist, the surveillance was obviously in place to protect and defend the Overclass from interference by the Rabble. The obvious proof was in the OWS surveillance revelations that never got a lot of media but which are really quite shocking, especially for the granular level of surveillance of OWS and the coordination of surveillance and suppression by government and corporate interests throughout the land. This indicated that when it comes to perceived threats to the Ruling Class, the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments to the Constitution are essentially inoperative. And there is a vast ground level surveillance apparat in place, coordinated out of Washington, to ensure that it is so.

And nobody pumping the Scandals!!!! seemed to care. The only thing that mattered to them was that the media was being spied on: OUTRAGEOUS!!!! Except the Public didn't care about that. The Big Media had so little credibility with the public that whether or not reporters were being tailed by gumshoes was utterly irrelevant to most people. The public indifference toward the media's whining about being spied on seemed to come as a shock to the insular Big Media Club. How dare the rabble not care!!!?

Yes, well. That's how it goes when you betray the public's trust over and over and over again, which was how the Big Media had been operating for the entirety of the last decade and more -- at least since the Judicial Coup of 2000, and many would say since well before that, given all the phony Scandals!!!!! the Big Media < cough NYT cough > manufactured and marketed during the Clinton Apocalypse. The Post-Modern Media was as thoroughgoing an embarrassment to the concept of a Free Press as had ever seen the light of day, and that was saying something, considering how appallingly bad media had been in previous eras.

But just as that Scandal!!!!! was dying down thanks to public indifference, the Snowden Thing popped up at the Guardian and it was like manna from heaven to the parched and starving Big Media. Finally! Something to catch and hold the interest of the masses! Hurrah!

And of course what it was about was exactly what the previous failed Scandals!!!!! were not: the universal surveillance of everyone all the time, something that most people can actually relate to, though they may not be particularly opposed to it  -- depending on whether or not people they know are caught up in the Programs.

Yet the Snowden Thing is faltering, partly because of the somewhat bizarre nature of the skip tracing that's (apparently) taking place to apprehend the culprit. Much the same thing happened with Julian Assange, as I was reminded last night when Frontline re-ran their "WikiSecrets" program from 2010. The similarities between the Assange/Manning Thing and the Snowden Thing were remarkable. I was reminded of a lot things, including own my minor involvement in the story. Oh dear, what had I done?

At any rate, in looking back, not only on that but on the HBGary Thing that would come up not long afterwards, I felt the kind of disorientation I sometimes feel when things seem to be entering the Twilight Zone. Or is it Chinatown?

In this case, I'm asking, "Does the United States have a government anymore, or are Our Rulers just winging it?" And if they are, just who are they?

Obama and his Team? Uh, well, that's been debatable from the outset, as we saw when he set out to do certain things, like shut down the Guantanamo Gulag, and immediately he was beset by harpies, led by the contemptible daughter of One Dick Cheney, Ruler Imperial Forever or Something.  Every time she -- or he, now that he has someone else's heart -- opens their piehole, all of Washington, and particularly the White House, trembles. It is obvious as sin that they are, literally, in charge. But on whose behalf?

They -- House Cheney --  are able to publicly order Obama around like a string puppet. It's shocking. Congress is supine in the face of their bluster. WTF? As for the courts, ha. It's not simple corruption with the courts, it's something orders of magnitude worse, for We, the People have neither standing nor influence over issues like law and justice and so forth. At least in a corrupt judicial system, the People have some say, some of them even have some control, and if you know who they are, which you probably do, you at least have a chance.... in the current system, though, the People are kept completely in the dark, it's all a Big Secret.

Is there a government in the sense the public understands the concept of "government" any more? Or has what once was the Government become entirely a matter of certain private interests contending with one another to operate the levers of power on their own -- private -- behalf, either ignoring or exploiting the People in the process?

Is there really any question about it any more?

When I see the devolution of these issues into hatred for one or another of the political actors in the drama -- whether it be Obama or any other -- I shake my head in disgust. Obama and Bush were strolling around Africa together the other day, as if they were old buddies, much as Clinton and Bush stroll around together these days, and what's necessary to see here is that it -- the Presidency at the least and the governing class the Presidency serves is a continuum, not a discreet series of individuals to be hailed or excoriated in turn. Banging on about how wonderful or awful whoever sits on the Throne of Office may be simply gets nowhere. It's a form of venting to be sure, but beyond that, what good is it?

If, as seems to be, government is out of the People's hands altogether, and our public-private-partnership surveillance state fully intends to keep it that way forever and ever, amen, what, then, must we do?

That is the question for which we have no universal answer as yet, though many, many answers are being sought and experimented with. Sometimes the answer is right there in front of us, sometimes it has to be the product of struggle great or small, sometimes there is no answer -- or as is often the case, the answer is "no."

Submission and compliance and required economic extractions are all Our Rulers really want from us in any case.

As long as they believe they have that, we are, of course, free.

The AP Thing, The IRS Thing, The Beng[h]azi Thing...

Whoo boy, the Roller Coaster is in overdrive now boys and girls. Did somebody offend somebody? Or is the situation behind the scenes just too unstable to keep the ship of state aright?

This is primarily a media scandal-fest, something like the ones that went wilding during the 90's leading to the Impeachment Circus and all the rest of it. Which led, of course, directly to the Supremes' lawless intervention in the 2000 election to put the majority's candidate on the Throne. If we think back, it's easy to see how media driven this all was, from the get-go to the miserable end of the Bushevik Regime.

How many millions paid with their lives and fortunes for this political misadventure? Did the media gain from their scandal mongering? Ask Roger Ailes, maybe he'll tell you. Maybe he won't. Maybe he'll lie.

The AP Thing is a doozy; they're all panty-wadded because their counsel got notice that phone records of certain reporters had been scrutinized by the DoJ, apparently as part of a leak investigation by the gov't. Hm. Yes, well. At least they got notice.

I mean, this sort of thing really galls me. Ever since the imposition of the Patriot Act back in the day, warrantless domestic surveillance has been essentially universal. But now AP is calling foul, stomping its little feet and screaming, "You can't do this to MEEEEE!!!!" Everybody else is fair game? But not the AP? Bullshit. The problem is not surveillance of the press; the problem is universal domestic surveillance. Period. And that's not something the Mighty-Mighty Press has ever had the least bit of concern about. Was it assumed that the Press would be immune?

This is not unlike my annoyance at the nearly hysterical response to the "torture" of Bradley Manning by members of the blog-o-tariat, with nary a nod to the fact that what was happening to him was relatively  mild compared to what goes on in American detention facilities to tens of thousands of Americans, every. fucking. day. And which has been going on for YEARS. What happened to Manning shouldn't have happened, but in my view, you cannot separate out his treatment from the gross brutality -- and yes, torture -- that is part and parcel of the entire American detention system.

Just so with the surveillance of the AP reporters. Yes? And? This is 'Merika. This is what goes on, has been going on for YEARS, "it's the Law," and this is what has been done to millions and millions of Americans on a day-in and day-out basis. What has the AP had to say about that? Nothing, right?

The AP is demanding -- now -- special treatment for itself, to be free of "this sort of intimidation!" Great, fine. They should be free of it -- so should everyone else. But you are unlikely to ever hear that from the AP or any of those marching around with their chins thrust out in AP's defense these days.

No, they want their own special dispensation, just as many of the advocates for Bradley Manning wanted his dispensation, ignoring the thousands and the millions who faced the same sort of intimidation/torture under the color of authority every day. For whatever reason, in the minds of so many people, the masses who suffer don't matter, only the individual -- or institution in the case of the AP.

To my way of looking at these things, it's nonsense.

Separating out an individual or one institution and demanding recompense for their suffering while ignoring everyone else who is facing the same sort of thing or worse is not even a simulation of "justice."

It's grotesque.

But that's how very far we've fallen under the spell of the Individual.

As for the IRS Thing, the notion that the IRS uses its power and authority to go after certain targeted individuals and institutions, and it sometimes oversteps its authority in doing so, is hardly news. The notion that some of their scrutiny has the appearance of a political motivation again is hardly news. What's news in this case is apparently that the agency was inclined to use its clout to look into nonprofit status of TeaBagging and other rightist political organizations, something that simply is not done in this country, rightists being Free and all. Well, Patriots, you know.

Scrutinizing Leftist outfits is only right and proper, but dare the IRS -- or anyone else in Gubmint -- to probe the  behavior of a 'Bagging interest and all hell breaks loose. Again, we are dealing with demands for special exemptions and dispensations for certain (perhaps momentarily) favored individuals or groups, leaving everyone else who has the same or similar difficulties to fend for themselves. This is not "justice." I can't put it any plainer than that.

To my way of looking at it, the IRS should be abolished for cause (along with quite a few other government department and agencies) and its functions should be reformed from the bottom up. The notion of non-profit, religious, or charitable tax exemptions should be re-thought. Just what is the purpose of these exemptions, and why should certain industries and individuals be exempt while others must pay and pay more, with the tax burden being shifted more and more onto the backs of those least able to pay?

But that's not what the hoop lah is about. No, it's about "targeting" rightist outfits, purely and simply. The whole system is rotten, but as long as it doesn't "target" rightists, it's OK? Leftists can be targeted -- and have been for generations -- but not rightists? What utter crap.

 Finally The Beng[h]azi Thing. It's as if no one involved in the many "investigations" has ever heard of or utilized (deceptive) Talking Points before. Yes, of course, the talking points were not accurate. Yes? So?

How often are talking points used by anyone fully accurate? How often are they intended to spin and how often are they intended to deceive?

In this case, the whole thing appears to be a mighty clusterfuck. It's not the first time. And until the AP and IRS Things, it seemed that the "investigations" of the clusterfuck were going to be taunted and dismissed by the media as so much political posturing by the Rs (which they are), but now, with the other "scandals" on the table as it were, Beng[h]azi will loom large on the topic list for some time to come.

I assume all this is coming to a head now (even before the Summer Driving and Shark and Missing White Woman Season gets going) because someone who matters in the media was offended by someone in the White House, possibly even by the President Himself. The media skin is sometimes very thin, and the least insult, or even an accidental one, can open the gates of Hell on an otherwise unsuspecting officialdom.

It's happened before. I would just remind readers that the Watergate Thing happened largely because A Person Who Mattered in the Media (Katherine Graham) took offense at the White House, and took personal offense at Richard Nixon for some insult or slight or other, and she vowed to have his ass in a sling or know the reason why. She got what she wanted.

A lot of people tend to think the Watergate story reporting and the subsequent investigations leading to the resignation of Richard Nixon was somehow a high point of public and media integrity. I would suggest it was nothing of the kind. It was instead an act of gross and deliberate revenge for... an insult. There were crimes committed, lord knows, in the course of the Nixon administration, monstrous, horrible crimes, compared to which the Watergate burglary was small potatoes. The point, which got completely missed, is that it is in the nature of our system of governance for the government itself to operate lawlessly, criminally, and often murderously. It is in the DNA of the institution, and the only way I know of to change things is to start over with a different institution.

Thus, as criminal as the Nixon administration was, it was by no means uniquely criminal. It was typically criminal. Decapitating the operation doesn't change its fundamental nature. But in the course of events, someone who mattered in the media demanded and got revenge against Richard Nixon, thus in effect decapitating the government, yet not changing it in any important way (she didn't care about that, after all), and here we are, forty years down the line, and guess what?

Nothing has really changed but the optics.

But at least the media now has its summer shitstorm laid out. What will happen to the Sharks and the Missing White Women?

And what of the Summer Driving Season?

Homicidal Cruelty

These mass-shooting incidents are so frequent and so similar, is it any wonder some people think they may be... intentional?

Yesterday was a whirlwind of snow and cats and ice and hail and biscohitos and all sorts of peripheral things that had to be done or got through somehow (snowy/icy mountain passes in blizzard-like conditions aren't the most fun to drive, etc.) so we missed yesterday's Big Story of the mass slaughter of school kids in Connecticut until well into the afternoon.

We sat stunned and horrified as the news trickled in through our computers and then came to dominate the television for the rest of the day and into the night.

Once again America is subjected to the bloodfest and slaughter in supposedly safe and sanitized public spaces -- in this case an elementary school in an upscale suburb of New York. Almost 30 are dead now, most of them children in a kindergarten class -- a class that was initially reported to have been taught by the shooter's mother who was reported to have been killed in the massacre.

Some truly idiotic woman was on the NBC news feed that we were watching, counseling America on how to talk to your children about this incident, pointing out how rare they are, how "this has never happened before" and how everyone is doing everything they can to "keep our children safe," and how important it was to make sure children were not exposed to the wall-to-wall coverage of this "very unusual" incident.

It was just bullshit. Even the anchor was dumbfounded by her counseling crap. As if children today don't have access to news.

This is the second mass shooting in a week, in an ostensibly safe place, by a young adult shooter who apparently had mental health problems before he went on his very public rampage using very lethal (and legal) armament. Then killing himself. Conveniently exiting the scene, in a manner of speaking, before the investigation even gets under way.

 The usual suspects are now hammering away at one another on the internet and in the media over the question of when is the "right time" to discuss gun control and the problem of gun violence in this country -- assuming, of course, that you believe that gun violence is a problem. Apparently some Americans don't.

The President's spokesmouth cautioned the assembled media flacks that "now is not the time" to open a discussion about... well... this.

Jeebus.

It is literally never the "right time."

I've been using the term "homicidal cruelty" to describe the attitude of Our Betters toward the rest of us, particularly in the context of the entirely out of touch -- and embarrassing -- Fiscal Cliff arguments going on in DC. The entire political and media class has been obsessed with a singular objective for months now:  how to ensure that social insurance programs and benefits are cut enough that there is significant "pain" among the recipients -- to show the "markets" that the politicians are "serious" about deficit reduction.

People are dying and death rates -- among seniors especially -- will increase as a result. That is supposed to be an "unfortunate but necessary" consequence of "getting serious about the debt." It's shameful, and the spectacle of Our Betters nattering on endlessly about the "necessity" of this "shared sacrifice" is sickening.

But there you are, that's the American ruling class today. They are intent on imposing their homicidal cruelty as extensively as possible on as many people as possible as their bounden right and duty. They are obsessed with doing it. NOW!

So here's another mass slaughter essentially in the backyard of the New York media market (which has helped generate the kind of wall-to-wall coverage of it we've seen) and the upshot has been strange and ugly.

The slaughter itself is horrifying. Here we are -- again -- with another young man who has mental health issues and access to high powered weapons who somehow snaps and goes on a shooting rampage killing however many he can (in this case, including his mother and dozens of elementary school children) before killing himself.

The upshot is not to try to "fix it" -- or even to discuss what happened from the standpoint of "fixing it" -- but to instead celebrate the militarization of the police, the lockdowns of schools (just like they were prisons), and to reassure one another that even though these incidents are inevitable -- due to "freedom" -- we can rest assured that the authorities are doing everything in their power to keep us safe.

Yeah, right.

No, what they have been doing for a long time now is essentially allowing these incidents to occur on a regular basis. They have such a salutary effect on the public, after all. The mass shooting incident, which is practically unique to the United States, has the effect of inspiring ever greater numbers of the People to fear and dread, panic in some cases, and that effect enables their acquiescence and dependency on authority for their "safety." Except they aren't "safe." Anywhere. Ever. For there will be another mass killing soon enough, and another and another. And still more.

Because it is never the right time to discuss or do anything about the orgy of bloodletting in this country. Never.

Bloodlust and bloodletting is the price we pay for "freedom," you see.

Ending the slaughter means the end of "freedom..."

Got it.

No other country has anything close to the American level of constant slaughter and bloodletting -- unless they are engaged in a civil war (or in some cases resistance against invasion, aggression, and occupation.)  Of course the marketing and easy availability of firearms makes the constant killing remarkably simple to accomplish if that's what someone wants to do. There is really nothing standing in the way, certainly not social opprobrium or more than minor legal impediments. Guns and their marketing are among America's major industries, after all. It's considered rude and unpleasant to dispute the value of the personal armament industry, and any attempt to curb the industry and the resulting bloodletting is met with fierce resistance and ever greater levels of financial support for candidates who support the industry.

The tens of thousands killed and injured by gun violence and gun accidents in this country every year are victims of a low-level civil war that seems to be maintained relentlessly... and we might ask why. Who benefits? Apart from the politicians and the gun industry, of course.

Why do the People permit it? Or do they have a voice and a choice?

I'd say no.

Most Americans have nothing to do with guns, but they can't ultimate avoid gun violence -- whether the vicarious sort that comes via the media or for real -- because of the relentless determination on the part of some of Our Betters to ensure and enable it, and to make sure that it is glamorized in entertainment and publicized extravagantly.

"Freedom" you see. But freedom for whom to do what? Freedom for a certain category of predator and/or mentally ill individual to go on a rampage and cause mayhem and misery. How very useful.

It is, isn't it?

And aren't we lucky that it can only be curbed by curbing American "freedom."

Wonderful...

[And in case you didn't notice, everything you know about this incident -- or knew yesterday, anyway -- is wrong. Where does all the early misinformation come from...?]

Making the Rounds

Click image to enlarge. From leftycartoons.com

It's funny because it's true. But why stop at "24"? Libertarian types are legion, in fact, to hear them tell it, every Libertarian is his/her own "type," like unto no other... And every one perfectible if only they were allowed their liberty.

As the sainted Janice put it in song:

Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose
Nothin', I mean nothin' honey if it ain't free, no no

Just like a ball and chain:

In Which Ché Pasa Channels Scott Horton

As should be clear by now, I consider denouncing and struggling against puerile "Libertarian" punks like Rand Paul to be just fine and dandy, whereas, more often than not, I will defend someone like Elena Kagan -- or even Arch She Demon Hillary Clinton -- when others are denouncing and struggling against them.

And the difference is....?

Bystander suggested I might be channeling TBogg. I'm sure TBogg would not be channeling my own self!

Meanwhile, there are far more important and fundamental issues before us than this or that individual getting wrung through the Wringer of Scrutiny on a blog post or on national teevee.

For some time I have been making the point that our so-called Justice system is grossly corrupt and politicized to the point of being merely the simulacrum of Justice, not the real thing at all, not even remotely so. And that the Federal system lost all credibility when the Supreme Court sacrificed its integrity to lawlessly decide the election of 2000.

It's been downhill ever since. And yes, I know there were many faults in the system prior to 2000. I know.

Well, Scott Horton has a post up at No Comment "Montesquieu—Tyranny in the Shadow of the Law" which I think encapsulates our overall dilemma when it comes to the very conception of Justice in this country today. It wears the mask of the Law, but it is under the control of certain powerful men and interests. It is, forthrightly, a tyranny, in service to tyranny.

Il n’y a point de plus cruelle tyrannie que celle que l’on exerce à l’ombre des lois et avec les couleurs de la justice...

Indeed.

Let us go now and ponder.
(h/t for the phrase -- which I haven't heard since high school -- to coram nobis over at Glenn's Place.)

On Stack

Burn baby burn.

The other day, a very disturbed middle aged man flew his private plane into the IRS offices in Austin, Texas, in what appears to have been a fairly spectacular Propertarian protest at his incessant pilferage by the taxing authorities and the professional classes he turned to for help against the depredations.

They were all trying to take his stuff, so what he did was get up off his chair, turn off his teevee and computers, put a match to his big suburban house, get in his airplane and fly it into the IRS offices -- killing one and injuring some dozen others -- and leave a hearty "Fuck you all!" note to anyone who would question his actions.

OK then. Joe Stack is the latest Patriot Hero.

And the Bourgeoisie Arises.

All they needed was permission and a spark. Now it's on.

Save us all from this sort of crap.

While I point out that this man was a Propertarian who was apparently radicalized to violence in Texas, many have run around claiming "Oh no! He was a Marxist! He mentioned Communism and quoted Marx and denounced Capitalism and everything! See?"

Yes. Well. Apparently the term "Irony" has lost all meaning, and nobody has any idea how you can mention Communism and quote Marx and denounce Capitalism and be a Propertarian.

Is there a public educational system at all in this country any more? If so, what is its function? Can we dispose of it and get another? Please?

I read this man's screed -- hardly the Manifesto it's made out to be -- every single word, and it is plain as day that Joe Stack was a Propertarian pushed to the wall beset by all the demons of hell who were trying to take his stuff. His outrage at what the IRS was doing in trying to assess taxes on his income and property and what he had been through in trying to get help from professionals and at what had happened to his various piles of savings squirreled away for a rainy day and his retirement, and on and on and on was the standard Propertarian litany of woe at trying one's damnedest to be independent of all the fetters of the communal society, only to be subject to the constant theft of one's property the government and the elites. It's never ending. They won't let up.

Well, if you don't want them to get your stuff, what do you do? Of course, you put it in a pile and burn it all to ashes, then you get in your plane and you crash it into the offices of those who have made you so miserable for so long.

Anybody knows that. Arise! You have nothing to lose but your chains!

See how it works?