We the Sheeple

At first I thought we were just becoming dumber as a nation. 

I couldn’t understand how so many ordinary Americans simply couldn’t comprehend simple math. 

Simple stuff like:  If Jimmy has two apples and gives one apple each to Sally and Jill, how many apples does Jimmy have left?  Or to put it in a more relevant perspective:  if the Federal government takes in $2 trillion a year in taxes and fees, and spends $3 trillion a year, how much money does the Federal government have left to spend on other things? 

This type of stuff seemed to baffle a lot of people. 

They also seemed unable to separate something clearly false from reality. 

When Obama said in 2009: “no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what. ” – that seemed to me to be pretty straightforward.   Practically a guarantee. 

Yet when millions lost their doctors and their plans because of Obama’s signature legislative achievement, it was as if he’d never said that. In fact, Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, said that people who claimed they lost their doctors and their plans because of ObamaCare were liars. 

And a large part of the public shrugged and said, well, okay.   

When the government briefly shut down and idled 800,000 non-essential government workers, the public was outraged.  But when 5 million or more people lost their healthcare insurance they were promised they could keep, crickets.  Probably that old math problem again …

Then I had an epiphany. 

It wasn’t that the nation was becoming dumber. 

A lot of Americans just didn’t care anymore.  About anything. 

Economics.  Politics.  National defense.  Foreign affairs (unless these involved Bill Clinton or celebrities).   The national debt.  Education.  Healthcare.  Taxes.  Farm subsidies.  The growth of entitlements.  Holding politicians and government officials accountable.  The IRS investigation. 

You know, all the things Republicans and Fox News keep bringing up? 

Americans didn’t give a rat’s patoot about any of this stuff.  They couldn’t care less.

It’s clear to me now that a growing number are only concerned about what affects them personally, right now.  Stuff that happens to other people, and stuff that could happen in the future doesn’t interest them at all. 

If it doesn’t impact them now, they don’t care. 

This also means they don’t care what anybody else does, unless they get affected directly, and immediately, as a result. 

In the abstract this seems like a virtue.  Live and let live.  Don’t be judgmental.  Don’t try to tell others what they should or shouldn’t do.  If it’s not doing you any harm, what business is it of yours what others do? 

In reality, however, it’s become an easy excuse to justify indifference and ignorance. 

If people claim not to care what anyone else does, what the government does, what the laws are, or what’s happening in the world around them, it’s not a case of live and let live. They’re simply hoping things they can’t be bothered to understand will take care of themselves. 

That rarely works out well. History has proven that time and again. 

Still, a large number of Americans are apparently happy to ignore the world around them; their assumption is that someone else is already taking care of the important stuff so they don’t have to. They can’t see wasting their time trying to figure out if whoever’s running things is really up to the task at hand, or just screwing things up.  Life goes on, regardless. 

Besides, if anything was really that important, they’d hear about it on social media or someone would interrupt their favorite TV or cable show with an announcement.  Otherwise, who cares? 

Consequently, they are blissfully ignorant about current events here and abroad. They don’t bother reading a newspaper, watching the news on TV, or listening to newsbreaks on radio.  In fact, they aggressively avoid exposure to news.  News is just background noise getting in the way of something they really want like movies, music or other entertainment.  So most don’t know what’s happening in their own city or state, much less what’s happening elsewhere.  

And they don’t care.   They truly believe that what you don’t know can’t hurt you.

Now, there’s a great temptation to think this is largely a trait of the young – like adolescents, teenagers and the 20-somethings.  It’s not.  Talk to young adults in their mid to late 30s. Talk to people in their 40s and 50s, too.  Go ahead.  I dare you. Ask them about almost any current event – you’ll be stunned by how little they know. 

You’ll be even more stunned to find out how little they care.  At the same time, they’ll be stunned you even bothered to ask.

Lack of knowledge you could almost understand.  Many folks tune out under the weight of information overload. 

But lack of caring?  That’s harder to accept. 

If Americans don’t care about what their government is doing, how the government is spending their money, what laws will or won’t be enforced, and what threats lurk in the outside world, this opens the door to an autocracy that will take their indifference for consent. 

Sort of the situation we find ourselves in now. 

And American democracy will go out not with a bang, but a “whatever.”

The real two-party system ...

The real two-party system today has nothing to do with party affiliation.   It’s now the de facto ruling class versus the working class.

Who makes up the ruling class?  Start with establishment types like Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Lindsey Graham and John McCain from the Republicans.  On the Democrat’s side you have Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin among others. 

In short, members of the ruling class include the deal makers in government willing to put their own and their supporters’ interests ahead of what’s best for the country as a whole.

Add the legions of government employees and their unions, politically appointed regulators, government contractors and suppliers, as well as the entire lobbying industry that relies on currying favor with the government for sustenance.  Then throw in businesses and industries that wouldn’t exist – or be nearly as profitable – without government support. 

Now you have a fairly complete 50,000 foot view of the greatest domestic threat the American public has ever faced in modern times …

The political establishment. 

The members may not always work in concert, but their goals are the same:  To enrich themselves and their friends at the government trough.   

The political establishment is essentially lawless, unless you consider the law of the jungle – in this case survival of the most politically connected.  Its legislative members routinely exempt themselves and their allies from laws and regulations they’ve initiated yet don’t care to follow, while enforcing those on the rest of us.

They see nothing wrong with carve outs for each other and their friends.  Until recently few Americans probably knew that the Republican and Democrat parties received a total of more than $36 million in government money in 2012 to help with the cost of their national conventions. 

This gift from taxpayers to the two major political parties only surfaced because Eric Cantor and others in the Senate pushed a bill to redirect that money toward pediatric cancer research. 

Guess where the $36 million originally came from?  You know that box on your tax returns to direct $3 of your tax to Presidential Campaign Financing – the box pushed by campaign finance reform advocates?  Your money was used to subsidize lavish events for Republicans and Democrats.  Nice.  

Do you still believe the political establishment doesn’t work in concert, across party lines? 

There are also apparently no penalties for its members for stealing on the job, padding contracts, investing based on insider information, breaking laws, misusing government resources, or other serious offenses that would land normal folks in prison for a long, long time.

Just remember the GSA scandal.  Also remember the guy who took the EPA for about $900,000 while falsely claiming he was also working for the CIA – over a period of almost a decade.  Now an audit of a small number of credit cards used by EPA employees showed that 75 of the 80 or so transactions reviewed had been misused for about $80,000 in personal charges, including for family gym memberships, child care and gift cards. 

And you can bet these are just the tip of the iceberg. 

Anybody who believes government employees are solely focused on serving the public is delusional; a large number are focused on serving themselves and their bosses at our expense. 

What makes the political establishment such a threat to our society is not the money they take from us and squander.  No, it’s the power they continue to accumulate, aided and abetted by a complicit media that refuses to do its job. 

With enough power the political establishment can do whatever it wants.  We’re seeing that now.  We’re so far in debt it’s almost beyond comprehension.  Yet the political establishment continues to borrow more and more so it can spend more and more on whatever it wishes.

The political establishment is already powerful, pervasive and pernicious.  It’s also seductive.  Because it controls how much money exists, who gets more or less of that money, where and how many jobs are created using that money, and how much it takes from each of us, it can use that power to bend others to its will. 

Because it controls which laws are created, and which laws are enforced and how, it has near tyrannical control over all of us.  It can use various branches and agencies of the government to harass, intimidate, and crush political adversaries with virtual impunity.  At the same time, it can turn a blind eye to criminal acts it chooses not to prosecute. 

It’s also one of the few solid growth areas in our economy.  While the rest of the country suffered mightily during the last recession, the political establishment prospered.  While ordinary businesses had to lay off workers, hiring was up for the political establishment.  It even managed to find money to buy parts of major industries, bail out banks and favored companies, and fund pet projects.

The traditional Republican Party wants you to believe none of that would have happened had they been in control.  That’s simply not true.  Establishment Republicans are just like establishment Democrats, united under the motto of “go along, to get along.”   

The truth is, when Republicans gain enough power they are no different than the current Democrats.  Republicans are just as likely to drive up the deficit while expanding the size and scope of the Federal government. 

Nixon gave us the EPA and OSHA, among others.  Reagan was the first U.S. President ever to boost the deficit over a trillion dollars in a single term, mainly through spending that largely benefitted defense contractors.  George W. Bush will be remembered for the costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he also gave us the budget-busting prescription-drug coverage plan.  And George W. was a groundbreaker when it came to deciding what parts of what laws he planned to enforce through “signing statements.” 

In reality, the only actual differences between establishment Republicans and establishment Democrats are so minor as to be laughable. They are cut from the same cloth.  They believe in using government money to win friends, influence enemies, and further their careers.

Are there loftier motives at times?  Certainly.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a perfect example.  So is the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. 

More often than not, unfortunately, most pieces of “bipartisan” legislation are a witches’ brew of self-aggrandizing publicity, special interest payoffs, pork, and pet projects.  (Drill down on the details of the most recent “farm bill” and see for yourself.) 

So while establishment types in both parties want you to believe the parties are fundamentally different, they’re not.  Sure, on TV they appear to be at each other’s throats.  But behind the scenes they are back slapping and high-fiving as they cut deals and swap votes to help one another.

Republican and Democrat incumbents work together to protect each other from competitive races in their home districts.  They also join forces to limit any reforms that might make them more accountable, or to tighten ethics standards.  Republicans have no problem funding a pork project in a Democrat’s district in exchange for a pork project in their district. 

Most of all, they’ll form whatever unholy alliance is needed to keep the status quo intact; neither establishment Republicans nor Democrats want to change the way things work . The system may appear perverse and counterproductive to most rational observers, but the players understand how to work it for maximum gain. 

That’s why the Tea Party is so reviled by establishment types on both sides of the aisle, and the bête noir for government employees and contractors.  The Tea Party threatens the status quo.  They are outsiders not willing to play the game according to the establishment’s rules. 

Career politicians like Boehner and McConnell, and Reid and Pelosi – all of whom kissed ass for years to get where they are – are confounded by newbies to the club who don’t bow down to their elders. Worse, the Tea Party types are vocal and not content to vote the way they’re told.

Folks like Kelly Ayotte, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee are heretics to the political establishment.  They challenge the hierarchy.  They refuse to be “managed.” They say things that are true, but uncomfortable for party leaders to hear. 

They aren’t “team” players, in simplest terms.  And for that, they’ve been dismissed as Tea Party extremists or misguided even by members of their own party.      

Make no mistake, the idea of a Tea Party-style grassroots resistance to business as usual threatens a way of life for the entire political establishment, so there’s a bipartisan move to destroy it by whatever means necessary. The last thing the political establishment wants to deal with is millions of pissed off voters who might want to cut spending and rein in government expansion. 

Just listen to how Boehner, McCain and other establishment Republicans attack the Tea Party. It’s eerily similar to the talking points for the Democrats.  The media’s also doing a job on the Tea Party whenever they can.  TV and movie producers are doing their part as well.  

Lost in all this focus on the “vast right-wing conspiracy” of the Tea Party is a very simple truth:  the Tea Party isn’t even an organized party.  As far as I can tell, this loosely knit coalition has no positions on social issues.  It appears most Tea Party-type groups are generally focused on fiscal responsibility and stopping wasteful spending. 

Which, to me, seems like a good idea. 

I suppose that scares the crap out of the political establishment.  It must; otherwise, why would career politicians, public sector unions, the media, Hollywood and others unleash such vitriol on what truly started out to be a grassroots American movement? 

The Tea Party has been accused of racism, being anti-science, anti-progress bigots, homophobes and whatever else can be slung at them.  None of which has been proven. 

If anything, perhaps the most frightening thing of all for the political establishment is that most Tea Party supporters seem like perfectly normal middle-class Americans who don’t want to see their taxes go up anymore. 

How dare they. 

The only non-violent way to stop the political establishment is to overthrow them at the ballot box.  That requires putting up and supporting commonsense candidates who represent our interests, and not the interests of the establishment.  

That means taking a reasonable approach to spending, scaling back the domestic reach of government, reducing Federal payrolls, decertifying Federal public sector unions, ending no-bid Federal contracts, enforcing ethics laws, and staying the Hell out of social issues. 

It also means realistic means testing for benefits, strengthening the safety net for those who truly need it, and making national defense a priority. 

Oh, and upholding the Constitution.  

You know, the things that are important to us. 

It can be done.  It has been done in the past.  And we need to do it now. 

Daylight Saving Time ...

The “spring forward, fall back” nonsense always infuriates me. 

I’m a reasonably intelligent guy but I’ve yet to understand why we do this.  There’s absolutely no rational reason I’ve ever seen for setting our clocks back an hour in the fall, and then forward an hour in spring. 

Proponents claim it gives people more daylight hours.  They also claim it saves energy. 

What it really does is to compel folks in the afflicted time zones to run around and reset every clock, watch and device dependent on a clock twice a year. And for what?  So they can screw up their circadian rhythm for a few days? 

Honestly, there’s no point to this.  Some NY politician first brought up this idea for the U.S., which shouldn’t really surprise anyone. It was stupid when it started and remains stupid today. 

Hate to burst everybody’s bubble, but the number of daylight hours has nothing to do with setting your clocks forward or back.  There are always fewer hours of sunlight each day as we head into winter; then the number of hours of sunlight each day increases as we head out of winter.

There’s real science behind why that happens, but one thing’s for certain – changing your watches and clocks has nothing to do with it. 

So it’s always been a dumb idea.  But leave it to Congress to make it even dumber. 

It was bad enough when we all accepted when this futile illusion would begin and end.  Makers of electronic devices used this predictability to preprogram a wide range of devices so they would automatically change their displays for us.

Then, not long ago, actually with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, bureaucrats and politicians decided to change the start and stop dates. Why?  No idea.  I suspect nobody in Congress did either.  The net result was to start DST a little earlier and end it a bit later.  (It now starts the second Sunday of March, and ends the first Sunday of November – just for the record.)

So now DST is about 4-5 weeks longer than it used to be.  Woo-hoo.  Don’t you feel better knowing that your government can control the number of daylight hours there are, and has decided to give you more of them?  Well, where’s your gratitude? 

Of course all those devices preprogrammed with original start/stop dates now have to be manually set.  But that’s a small price to pay for more daylight hours, right? 

Now, if we ended this madness what would happen?  Would schoolchildren have to trick-or-treat in the dark again? Would energy consumption soar?  What about school kids waiting in the dark for their school bus?   

Will all Hell break loose?

Nope.  Just look at Arizona.  They’re not on DST.  And they seem to be doing quite nicely without it.  As we would.   

The coming revolution ...

I keep wondering when the public is going to wake up and realize what’s happening.

I’m starting to believe it either won’t, or it has and doesn’t care.   It’s possible we just haven’t reached a tipping point yet, and when we do all Hell is going to break loose.     

I think we’re hurtling toward a cliff.  In fact, I believe we are accelerating toward it now.  Every day we get closer to the abyss.  Or to a revolution. 

There is a point when the elasticity goes out of a population.  There ceases to be a flexibility to roll with the punches, to turn the other cheek, to absorb and not retaliate in kind. 

It happens most often when predictability and stability are in flux.  That’s because people prefer predictability and stability; the alternative is chaos and chaos always makes people uneasy. 

When institutions start acting unpredictably they are like the canary in the coal mine; anxiety rises that chaos is imminent.  If government starts acting erratically, anxiety goes up.  When banks can no longer be trusted to keep your money safe, anxiety goes up.  When government starts being seen more as a corrupter than a protector of values, anxiety goes up.  

When established norms – like enforcement of laws, punishment of lawbreakers, protection of civil liberties, and the right to free speech – are no longer the norm, anxiety also goes up. 

In short, anxiety goes up whenever the foundations upon which we build our daily lives – and are at the heart of our core belief systems – are shaken.  People often don’t recognize it for what it is.  They have a feeling that something’s wrong, something’s out of balance, but they can’t put their finger on precisely what it is often because it’s so many things. 

Little things start to add up.  Then the hits keep on coming. 

When there’s enough anxiety among enough people, they will attack the source of chaos in an effort to restore normalcy.  Because that’s what most people really want – they want consistency and predictability; in other words “normalcy.”  They can get used to some changes over time, but not sudden shifts in the tectonic plates of their reality.

That’s where we are now.  A large part of society wants to overturn what are essentially bedrock American values. 

Like self-reliance.  The work ethic.  The value of a good education.  The dignity of supporting yourself and your family.  Being responsible.  Leading the free world.  Maintaining peace through strength.    

And being a nation where the rule of law is more important than the rule of man. 

America is still the land of opportunity, which is why so many other people in the world want to come here.  Those immigrants – legal or otherwise – still believe in the American Dream:  if you work hard, you can succeed. 

Too bad so many citizens here no longer believe that.  Too bad so many of them want to destroy our basic values to make themselves feel better. 

Maybe they want to lessen their guilt for failing to take advantage of the opportunities this great nation has always provided.  I suppose it’s easier for them to change the rules and blame others instead of sucking it up for their own lack of ambition to change their lot in life.    

The bigger problem is that so many of them now no longer believe in democracy, maintaining the balance of power in our government, and protecting our basic rights to free speech, assembly, and to worship how and where we please. 

Many Americans clearly prefer a simpler authoritarian style of government.  Which is great, as long as whoever is leading that government is doing what you want. 

When an authoritarian government ceases to do what you want and starts doing things you don’t want, then it’s not so great. 

In fact, you start thinking of it in different terms.  Like oppressive.  Dictatorial.  Tyrannical. 

So you see, it’s often a matter of perspective.  Right now, a lot of Americans are all in on the power grabs by the Democrats and Obama; they don’t see anything wrong with it.  To them, it’s a way to get what they want without the bother of following the Constitution or established law. 

Which is all fine and good – for them, for now.  But if a Republican as far right as Obama is far left – say Rick Santorum – gained the same power and started using it just as cavalierly, they’d be outraged. 

Let’s say Santorum decided to make prayer in school mandatory.  Suppose he decided to start channeling big chunks of Federal money to the Catholic Church, and decided his DOJ should instruct state Attorneys General to no longer prosecute pedophile priests.  What if he decided to use an Executive Order to wipe out health insurance for everybody but Roman Catholics? What if he pushed through appointments to the Federal bench of only conservative Catholic men who shared his views on contraception, abortion and the role of women?

Some people – especially Catholic conservatives – would cheer him on.  Others would be horrified.  But really, what’s the fundamental difference between all that and what Obama has done?   Not much.   

It’s abuse of power.  It’s just a question of who is abusing it. 

There’s a reason why the founders insisted on a balance of power among three equal branches of government.  Specifically, it was to prevent this from happening. 

Right now Obama and Democrats are tipping the scales too hard.  Public anxiety is rising. 

ObamaCare alone would be enough to have many wondering what the Hell is going on.  We’ve lost our leadership of the free world and now have to look to Russia to solve diplomatic problems.  Our enemies no longer fear us, and yet the Administration is opening promoting scaling back our military to pre-WWII levels.  AG Holder did instruct state Attorneys General recently that they didn’t have to enforce laws they didn’t agree with.  VP Biden was  quoted recently as saying how great it is that single mothers can quit their jobs to spend more time with their kids because they don’t have to rely on a job anymore to get healthcare.

WTF. 

It’s getting too crazy.  And irrational.  And that’s the breeding ground for revolution. 

The 47% solution

Mitt Romney got hammered in the press when he said – in a secretly recorded speech – that 47% of the public wouldn’t vote for him because they were dependent on government benefits.

Democrats went wild.  They accused him of being a heartless monster.  How dare he attack people who – through no fault of their own – needed government benefits to simply survive? 

Democrats kept saying how callous and uncaring he must be to think that the 47% wanted to be dependent on government assistance.

Why, everybody knew the 47% would much rather be working full-time jobs and earning their own way.  But for one reason of another – age, infirmity, bad luck, whatever – they just can’t.  They needed government assistance.  To deny it would be cruel. 

To support this, the media trotted out a carefully selected portrait of the 47%.  They showed veterans. The homeless.  Grandma and Grandpa.  Children in single-parent households.  The unemployed.  And of course the disabled and their caretakers.    

Oh the humanity … And oh, what bullshit. 

Mitt was correct.  His only error was getting caught speaking the absolute truth. 

Certainly there are people getting government benefits who truly need them, or have honestly earned them.  Certainly there are also people using those benefits as a temporary measure until they get back on their feet.  And certainly there are some who would rather be working.

But it’s also apparent that a significant portion of able-bodied, working age adults getting those benefits simply don’t want to work.  Or work harder to get ahead.  And they don’t have to. 

They are perfectly content to use government money instead of their own to fund their lifestyle, feed their kids, pay their smartphone bills, and subsidize their trips to the grocery store.  Why wouldn’t they?  If they work it right, they can get the equivalent of a $40k to $60k annual income without ever leaving their couch.    

And now, free or heavily subsidized healthcare.   Why work at all? 

They’ve done the math.  The government’s pushed them in that direction as well.  It’s promoted the idea of Uncle Sam helping pay for all kinds of things.  So you can’t blame them for taking free money when it’s being pushed at them. 

The CBO just released a report that the way the Affordable Care Act is written it actually will encourage some workers to quit their full-time jobs and take lower-paying part-time gigs to get more generous subsidies.  We might lose the equivalent of 2.5 million full-time jobs over time as a result.     

Some seem surprised at this.  I’m not.  Democrats aren’t either.  In fact, some of them have been promoting this as another example of the ACA’s “liberating” effect on the working public.  They have gone as far as to state that this is a very good thing because it opens new “options” for workers to have more free time to spend with their families.   

The truth about the ACA, or ObamaCare, is that Democrats created it by design as a Trojan Horse.  The purpose of the ACA was really never solely to insure the uninsured as claimed. 

It was to fulfill a number of liberal Democrat ideals. 

One of those – never stated, but clearly implied by various policies – is apparently to diminish the importance of a work ethic. 

I guess that’s to improve the self-image of all those people who could work but don’t want to.  We don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings, do we?   That’s why we created the EBT card system, isn’t it?  The EBT card looks and functions just like a credit or debit card. Isn’t that thoughtful? 

There used to be a certain dignity to having a paying job of any kind and earning your own way.  Kids cut lawns, delivered papers, shoveled snow, babysat or ran a lemonade stand because the money they earned was their own.  And kids were proud of that.  Most young adults were thrilled when they got their first “real” full-time job, despite the lousy pay and often crappy hours. 

Work wasn’t always fun, but working was always a good thing. Most everyone agreed.   

Somewhere along the way, liberal Democrats changed their perspective on work.  They flipped the concept, for some unknown reason, to say that while there’s nothing wrong with working, there’s also nothing wrong with not working. 

Not working became acceptable in their view.  This went hand in hand with rewarding people for doing nothing.  Or working less.  Only now, the rewards get better and better all the time. 

Some months ago I reported the tale of the guy who turned down a promotion and raise because earning more would mean a cut in the childcare subsidies he was getting.  The tsk-tsk of the article I was quoting from was how unfair it was that he couldn’t keep the extra pay AND the generous subsidies at the same time. He had to give up one to keep the other.  He chose the subsidies. 

A lot of people have figured this out.  The message the government is sending out is if you really don’t feel like working, you don’t have to.  If you don’t feel like working that hard, we’ll support you in that, too.  Want to lope along in a part-time job so you have more time to hang out with your pals, that’s cool.  We’ll make sure you don’t starve.  And if you get sick, we’ll take care of you. 

What a country.  What a future. 

So is anyone really surprised that the CBO found that the ACA will help slackers everywhere to have more “freedom” and “options” about how much they want to work?  The less they work, the less they make, the higher the subsidy they get.  If they don’t work at all it’s essentially free. 

If we keep going this way the 47% will soon be in the majority.

Maybe that’s the goal:  to get people to vote for a living instead of working for a living.  

The real State of the Union Address …

As I stand before you tonight I’d like to say that the state of the union is sound.

That would be a lie.  Well, not really a lie if you look at it through my eyes. 

Sure, the economy still sucks and millions are out of work.  But thank God most of you can’t do simple math.  Otherwise you’d understand how bad things really are.  I mean, the only reason the unemployment numbers look as good as they do is because so many of your fellow citizens have simply given up.  They’ve left the workforce altogether. 

Where have they gone?  Honestly, I don’t really care.  All I know is that they don’t count against the unemployment numbers anymore, so that’s a relief. 

So if you spin it the right way, I can make a case that the economy’s getting better because the official unemployment rate is down.  Plus the stock market’s been up lately. 

Now of course neither of those are realistic indicators about the health of the economy.  The unemployment number’s a joke; the more people give up, or move onto disability, the better the number gets.  And as far as the stock market, you might as well use how casinos are doing as an indicator of economic health.  It’s pretty much the same thing.  And about as relevant. 

No matter.  My celebrity friends and pals in the media will do anything to rub elbows with me and Michelle.  They’ll write and say whatever I want in hopes they’ll get a little face time or at least a Christmas card from us. 

It’s good to be the President. 

But I want to be honest with you – the job itself is kind of a pain in the ass.  While it’s very cool to hang out with celebrities, fly around the world and go on vacations to exotic places on Air Force One with my entourage and relatives, I’m not enjoying doing the job of President.  You know, the annoying stuff – like working with foreign leaders, defending every little thing I want to do, and being criticized by Fox News and that blowhard Rush Limbaugh. 

Then there’s the constant nagging from those who say I’m ignoring the Constitution, not upholding my duties to execute the laws, and just making stuff up as I go along.

That really pisses me off.  Especially the “ignoring the Constitution” stuff. 

Look.  I’m a Constitutional scholar.  I know what’s in the Constitution.  I just don’t think it’s that useful anymore.  In fact, it’s too restrictive.  What do you expect from a document written a couple of hundred years ago by a bunch of now-dead white guys?   

They couldn’t predict the future.  They couldn’t imagine how much things would change.  How needs would change.  They couldn’t possibly foresee how having a smartphone and free calling and texting would become an inalienable right.  Or that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” would need to include a big-screen TV, a nice car, broadband access and free birth control as basic human rights. 

Want more proof?  There’s that 2^nd Amendment thing about the right to own guns.  Seriously … what were they thinking?

And their whole idea of a balance of power in government may have made sense in the 18^th century, but doesn’t cut it today. 

Because of their lack of foresight, here I am, the most powerful leader on earth – the leader of the free world, plus with the ability to nuke anybody back to the Stone Age – yet I still have to put up with Congress and the Supreme Court.     

That’s just wrong.  The people elected me to do what I want.  Period.  To govern as I saw fit.  Period.  To decide which laws should be enforced and which I could ignore.  

And to fundamentally transform America. Period. 

So in that spirit, here’s what I propose going forward:

First, for America to have the ability to respond rapidly to emerging challenges, we need to streamline government significantly.  Therefore, by Executive Order, I am ordering that all Executive Orders from me carry the full weight of law from this day forward. 

Tomorrow I will exercise that new authority to order the following …

1.)    Justices Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Alito are hereby officially “retired” from the Supreme Court.  In their place I am appointing Elijah Cummings, Eric Holder, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Chuck Schumer to the Supreme Court, and naming Justice Ginsburg as Chief Justice. The next available opening will go to Dick Durbin.

2.)    Congress as we know it is abolished. It’s an anachronism. Instead of Congress representing the will of the people, the President will reflect the will of the people, with the advice and consent of his Twitter followers, in his or her sole discretion.  

3.)    I will establish a new government agency called “The Ministry of Truth” which will have the authority to shut down media outlets and imprison reporters and other public voices who do not meet its standards for accuracy and sensitivity to government policies.

4.)    I am also establishing a new government agency called “The Ministry of Popular Culture” which will be given authority to regulate what is acceptable to display, show, or broadcast in all media.  I am pleased to announce that the first head of the agency will be Ru Paul.

5.)    I am also unilaterally repealing the 22^nd Amendment, which unrealistically limits how many times someone can be President.  I say if the public wants me again and again, we can’t let that amendment get in the way. 

6.)    Finally, I am reforming our antiquated and unfair tax system. We will move to a flat-rate tax of 80%, with exemptions from taxes to groups and entities I favor, and who promise me their undying fealty no matter what.
   

Now, many of you are probably wondering why I haven’t brought up such issues as immigration, a woman’s right to choose, ObamaCare, and income inequality.

There’s a simple reason.

I really don’t care about any of those things.  No, seriously, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about that stuff.  It’s all boring crap that will never be resolved.  I know that.  Democrats know that. Republicans know that.  There’s no realistic solution to any of those. 

I’ve only brought those up at times to throw red meat to my most ardent supporters and keep the money coming in.  Oh, and to inflame my opponents into saying stupid things I can use against them. 

So yes, I only used those things to get elected. 

I don’t need to worry about that anymore.  Soon there won’t be any limits on how long I can be President.  I won’t have to kiss the butts of Congress, or even pretend to respect the dullards now on  the Supreme Court.    

I will have fully transformed America.

You’re welcome.   

Today’s topic: Income inequality …

Every time I see stories about “income inequality” I think my head’s going to explode. 

Especially when Obama and Democrats like Schumer, Reid and Pelosi start spouting off about it being the most pressing issue of our times. 

And also when the media attempts to pull at our heartstrings with tales of fast-food workers earning minimum wage who can’t support a family of four on what they’re paid.  Well, duh …

It’s laughable to see millionaires like Obama, Schumer, Reid and Pelosi claim to represent the interests of the downtrodden out of “compassion.”  They couldn’t care less about the poor except when they need their votes.  It’s the same with immigration reform; they only care because they hope converted illegals become dedicated Democrats. 

Why anyone gives any credence to these shameless hypocrites is beyond me. 

But the media does and is more than happy to promote the Democrats’ view of America today as a “Dickensian” nightmare. 

[If you hadn’t noticed, “Dickensian” is now the word du jour among class warriors.  The recently elected far-left mayor of NYC won on a theme of New York as a “tale of two cities” that he planned to fix with sweeping progressive reforms.  The poor and uneducated may not have understood the literary analogy, but apparently liked the idea of soaking the rich for more free stuff.]

To hear the class warriors, you’d think honest, hardworking people are starving in the streets because evil, greedy rich people either don’t want to give them decent jobs, or want to work them to death for a pittance.  The rich also conspire to pay no taxes so they can buy private jets and yachts they don’t need, and ship American jobs overseas to make bigger profits for themselves. 

Okay.

I’m not saying there aren’t greedy, amoral pigs in the private sector.  The Obama Administration knows them very well; many of them – like Goldman-Sachs and other big Wall Street firms – were among Obama’s biggest campaign contributors.  Not surprisingly, many also benefitted from Obama’s bail outs and loan guarantees, and are today paying out million-dollar bonuses to their executives. 

Where’s the Democrats’ outrage over this? 

Cue the crickets …

As to the plight of the people they make such a big deal about – you know, the working poor barely scraping by – how do you think many of them got that way?

Not a nice or politically correct answer, but the truth is a great many of them made some stupid, half-assed decisions somewhere along the line that virtually guaranteed their lot in life.

Granted, there’s no law against being stupid.  But there are consequences, especially if you aspire to a decent job with upward potential in the private sector.

Drop out of high school and you’ve automatically disqualified yourself from the majority of those jobs.  Getting convicted of a crime forever minimizes any chance of a good job.  Not making the effort to read, write or speak proper English dramatically limits career prospects.   

Even excessive tattoos and piercings – like see-through ear plugs – can also hold you back.

Hey, people have free will.  They make choices.  And with those choices come consequences.  The typical consequence is getting stuck in a low-paying, low-skill, dead-end job – if they are lucky enough to get a job at all. 

Some escape those circumstances through a combination of hard work and a degree of luck.  A very few get temporary government-funded jobs to help other people just like them. 

But most don’t, and they’re the working-age adults still manning the counter at Wendy’s, delivering pizzas, blowing leaves off your lawn, and cleaning rooms at a local motel. 

Or simply hanging out waiting for their next government check to arrive. 

Frankly, I’m really tired of hearing about how hard they are struggling to make ends meet.    

The reason why many – not all, of course – of these adults have crappy, low-wage, dead-end jobs, or are so dependent on government assistance to survive, is largely because of dumb decisions they made along the way.   

There, I said what many of us probably feel.

Nobody wants to man up and tell the truth to these people – and especially children in low-income families:  When you screw up big time, and make dumb decisions in your youth, you will likely suffer the consequences long into the future.  Unless you hit the lottery, win American Idol, play professional sports, or some rich relative leaves you a fortune – all very long shots – those bad decisions will continue to bite you on the ass for years to come.

In other words, there are long-term consequences to being short-term stupid.   

If you want to bring up income inequality – and why some people make more than others – you’re going to have to confront the real reasons. 

Not everybody is equal.  Not everybody is as smart.  Not everybody is as talented.  Not everybody is willing to do the work required to get ahead.  Not everybody has taken full advantage of their educational opportunities – whether that’s to get prepared for higher education or a trade.  Not everybody has the same work ethic. 

It has very little to do with gender, race, ethnicity, religion, or how much money your family had in the majority of instances.  It has more to do with talent, ability and ambition.  Many people in high and well-paid positions in business today started from humble beginning; they got where they are despite where they were from.  That’s the beauty of the American system. 

Now, for all of Obama’s public concern about the growing spread between the rich and poor, the rich have actually gotten a lot richer since Obama came into office.  That’s undeniable.  It’s not because the rich squeezed the life out of the poor, but because Obama policies carried out by the Fed – like keeping interest rates near zero – have largely benefitted the rich while hurting ordinary folks’ yields on CDs and savings accounts. 

The Fed’s near-zero-interest policies have allowed those with money to borrow and gamble with essentially free money, fueling the booming stock market.  And when the stock market booms, the rich get richer.  Investment banks and brokerages pay huge bonuses.  Executive comp tied to stock gains balloons.   The gap between the top and bottom earners grows even more.    

So yes, there’s income inequality in America.  And yes, the income gap between the rich and poor is growing.  But it’s ridiculous to concoct bogus reasons for this simply to feed a class warfare narrative solely for political gain.   

Attempts to achieve income equality have always failed for one simple reason:  people – and their talents, abilities, knowledge and ambition – aren’t equal.  So some are worth more than others and will always be paid more than others.    

And no law, regulation, or Executive Order can change that fact of life.