Had a great time last night at two award ceremonies in New York!  The first ceremony was hosted by the Independent Book Publishers Professionals Group where they recognized their Next Generation Indie Book Award Winners.  Although it was a tightly packed crowd at the Harvard Club of NYC, the event was very nice.  There were presentations and comments by members of the Jury Panels, who made it clear that to win in the Non-Fiction categories was extremely tough, as virtually all nominees were outstanding.  It made me feel a but odd being amongst recognized authors that have received many awards in the past.  As I was waiting in line for my "photo-op" with the presenters, a well-known author (not telling who) commented that he was amazed to hear that one of the authors was being recognized for his very first book!  I could only muster a response of "Wow, that must be so special!"  Well, it kinda is, but I was not going to admit I was that guy!
      I then raced to the Independent Publisher's IPPY Book Awards at the Providence NYC some 11 blocks away.  I must have looked like a regular New Yorker because people were moving out of my way as I hustled up the busy streets of Manhattan.  I made it just in time to accept my IPPY Award and to meet my kids there!  We had a great time and I enjoyed the event immensely!  No matter how hard I try to keep things in perspective, I still seem to be pushed by events into believing that I am an actual author.  Oh well, it was great fun.  Attached see the two medallions I was awarded last night.  Back into the city today and tonight.  Have a great Thursday!

     Currently in New York City preparing for tonight's National Book Award Celebrations hosted first by the Independent Book Publishers Group ("IBPPG") presenting their Next Generation Indie Book Awards at the Harvard Club of NYC.  Then I am off to the Independent Publishers' IPPY Book Awards at the Providence NYC.  It should be a fun and interesting evening as both events kick off this year's BookExpo America, the largest literary convention in the World.  I will certainly check back in tomorrow with details on the evening's events.  Until then, be well.

       This past week was certainly an interesting one, and not just because of the games being played in Congress with the aid of many in the  Media to portray President Obama as a "failed president."   I could not help but look at the actions undertaken in Congress this week to ponder what Americans think when they see what that branch of government has been doing.  Although the Media has made sure we know all about  House committees investigating Obama on Benghazi, the IRS and the electronic eavesdropping on the AP and Fox News' James Rosen,  how many Americans know what our Congressional leaders have been up to this past week?  I'm willing to bet, not many, because if they did, we would be seeing more outrage focused on them instead of Obama!  Where is the Media on this week's Congressional action?  Quiet as usual with the typical attitude of  "Move along folks, nothing to see here..."  So let's take a look then!
          You may recall that the Keystone XL Pipeline was a huge political issue during the recent Presidential Election Campaign with Republicans leading the way demanding the pipeline be built so that:  1. Jobs can be created and 2.  America can become energy independent.  Republicans framed the entire issue as both an economic and foreign policy imperative. For those that are not regular readers of my blog, welcome - but check the archives for blogs identifying GOP leaders using the above-referenced pipeline talking points.  So what does the GOP-led House push this week?  HR3, a Bill calling for the immediate construction of the final section of the Keystone XL Pipeline between the Canadian border and Steele City, Nebraska.  Ironically, the final authority by law to determine whether the pipeline meets environmental and foreign policy concerns (Canadian tar sands)  lies with the Executive Branch under the Constitution, but the GOP moved ahead without heeding the law and instead passed a Bill circumventing the President's authority by a vote of 241-175 (and Fox viewers think Obama is the "tyrant" skirting the Constitution at every turn).   So why the need to move forward with such a measure?  Because of the Economy and Energy Independence right?  WRONG!
      In an effort to force the House to require all petroleum produced from the Canadian Tar Sands crude be sold to Americans, the Democrats proposed an Amendment to HR3.  In other words, if the pipeline is constructed, all oil related products refined from the tar sands must be dedicated for domestic consumption.  I mean, isn't that one of the reasons Republicans claimed the pipeline was needed?  It's about energy independence right?  Apparently not!  The GOP-led House voted down the Amendment that bans all exports of the refined crude!  What gives then?  Perhaps the pipeline was never intended to supply oil to Americans (what Obama was claiming all along). Perhaps Republicans spun talking points for political gain in the last election cycle?  I'm shocked (not)!  To make matters worse, Democrats then attempted to require all firms receiving refined petroleum from the tar sands pay into the Oil Spill Liability Fund (that existing oil producers pay into).  Doesn't it make sense that the oil producers benefiting from the sale of the refined Keystone XL related tar sands oil pay into a fund that provides coverage for environmental damage in the event of a leak or spill?  Of course it does.  But the Republicans struck that Amendment down by a vote of 223-194.  What gives then?  Why shouldn't the firms involved pay into the Liability fund like they already do for all other existing pipelines?  Can anyone answer this question?  What impact will the pipeline have on the environment should a spill occur? 
      In an effort to avoid that very question, the GOP also passed an Amendment "green lighting" the project by affirmatively rejecting State Department environmental concerns.  The Amendment usurping the Executive Branch's control passed the House along party lines, 246-168.  Seems the Republicans in the House have called for the Bill to proclaim all environmental issues "minor"  and the pipeline be built on an expedited basis.  So the pipeline and the crude it carries will not be sold to Americans, will not make us further energy independent and the environment be damned.  To add insult to injury, House Democrats proposed an additional Amendment requiring the petroleum producers  achieve "carbon emission neutrality" so the environmental impact of the additional release of carbon emissions from the refining of the dirty tar sands is minimized.  What does the GOP-led House do?  Vote the measure down by a vote of  269-146!  Are Americans paying attention to the fact these Republican positions don't even come close to their talking points promoted in the past election?  Where is the outrage?  Lost in the Media fixated on the "shiny objects" of Bengahzi, the IRS and the DOJ snooping!  Is it possible the entire "scandal" parade was designed by the GOP just to begin to usurp presidential authority while the nation is told to "Move on, nothing to see here?"
      So when it comes to protecting separation of powers, the environment and Congressional integrity (an oxymoron?), the Republicans cannot be found.  Despite their repeated political talking points, it can be proven  they have sold out to big business at our collective expense.  As President Theodore Roosevelt once said; "It is difficult to make our material condition better by the best law, but it is easy to ruin it by bad laws!"  Will Americans ever learn to distrust the Media and politicians when they tell us "Nothing to see, move along?"

     According to the New York Times, Wall Street Bankers have been using their lobbyists to not only influence legislation, but to actually write the language of the legislation itself.  Oh, the shock!  Really?  Is this revelation supposed to be something new?  According to an article in the Times yesterday, Wall Street lobbyists have gained direct control over proposed laws and regulations favoring their financial institutions.  Moreover, the article pointed out that "Lawmakers who this month supported the bills championed by Wall Street received twice as much in contributions from financial institutions compared with those who opposed them, according to an analysis of campaign finance records performed by MapLight, a nonprofit group."   Why should this "revelation" surprise anyone?
         In a show of partisanship, MSNBC reported that the "activity" "reported by the Times is a direct result of Republican approval, yet the article itself made it clear that Democrats and Republicans have provided legislative privileges to Wall Street firms that have provided them with campaign cash.    The defense to this shocking Times report?  "The practice was common in Washington."  As some folks know, this is a far too common activity in Washington, where donors of big money gain significant influence over the language of legislation affecting their "special" interests.  Old time Political Scientists have labeled this common practice as a process known as the "Iron Triangle."   Modern Political Scientists call it part of the "Issue Network."  So what are "Iron Triangles and/or Issue Networks?"
        It has been a common practice for decades for lobbyists working for interest groups to influence legislation.  Here is how it works; 1.  Interest Groups preferring favorable legislation donate campaign cash to politicians working on committees relating to the Groups interests; 2. Interest Groups flood politicians with cash with the promise of more if their interests are protected in certain upcoming legislation; 3.  Interest Groups approach low level bureaucrats in departments relating to their Groups' activities, promising them that Congress will protect the bureaucrats' "turf" with related appropriations.  Thus, the creation of the "triangle" between members of Congress and/or their staff, working directly with Interest Groups pursuing favorable regulations/legislation, together convincing the bureaucracy that the favorable regulations/legislation are necessary.  All feeding off each other until the favorable regulations and/or legislation are written (in accordance with the directions provided by the paying/donating Interest Group(s). 
       So why the shock and amazement that members of Congress have ceded to financial institutions their Constitutional authority to write actual language of legislation controlling those financial institutions?  Do Americans really not know that the practice of Iron Triangles/Issue Networks has been controlling Congress for decades?  Are people that clueless that the money influencing lawmakers and the bureaucrats by Interest Groups actually guides the day to day policy formation our elected leaders are charged instead with developing and completing?  Money is the culprit and the Courts supporting Interest Groups' abilities to influence public policy through the mechanism of the Iron Triangles in Congress is abhorrent (See Citizens United v. FEC).   Iron Triangles/Issue Networks is a Bi-Partisan problem in Washington.  Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of perpetuating this game of "Pay to Play" in Congress.
     Next time the New York Times publishes a "shocking"report revealing the actual selling off of Congress to Interest Groups, remember it is just "business as usual" in Washington.  As FDR once wrote; "In politics, nothing happens by accident.  If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

      Sorry for not posting much this week.  Tuesday night was an awards ceremony relating to work, Wednesday night was an awards ceremony relating to Venice Baseball (ranked Nationally #1, #2 or #3 according to three polls) and tonight was a scholarship awards ceremony.  Just a typical week before graduation.  I hope to "get back at it" tomorrow (Friday) evening.  Until then, have a great Thursday night.

    As Americans share their thoughts and prayers for the victims of the massive tornado in Oklahoma, politicians in Washington have already indicated their beliefs that disaster relief should come with a high price!  Despite the fact that Federal Deficit Spending has been cut in half for fiscal year  2013, some politicians insist that any disaster relief spending be offset by a dollar for dollar cut in other budgeted spending.  In other words, in the event Americans become victims of a natural disaster and need emergency relief, no money can be provided for said relief unless it comes at the cost of another budgeted cost item.  
         You may recall that when tornadoes struck Arkansas last year, GOP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (VA) suggested this "quid pro quo" exchange before emergency disaster funds be provided to the victims.  When Hurricane Sandy ripped through Virginia, New Jersey and New York, Mr. Cantor suddenly got quiet about his demands that money be offset before being provided to disaster victims.  Was it brought back up for discussion when West, Texas fell victim to the local fertilizer plant explosion?  Nah, that might inflame Tea Party Texas Governor Rick Perry, who wasted no time requesting Federal Emergency Disaster relief.  So did this political attitude ever go away?  Nope, Senator Tom Coburn from OKLAHOMA has now demanded that any money set aside for Federal Emergency Disaster Relief be first set off against other Federal spending.  From Oklahoma?  Really?  Give Coburn credit, he sure is being consistent in his beliefs, but how do the folks of Oklahoma feel about Coburn's principled sentiment that no Federal money become available unless cut from somewhere else in the Federal budget? 
        In the event fellow members of his Conference in the Senate agree with his position, perhaps Coburn should find easy sources for "set-off" so that emergency relief can be given.  One area that can provide an easy target to free money for Oklahoma relief would be to reduce the number of Abrams A-1 tanks some in Congress demand we need (regardless of the fact the Pentagon says they are neither needed nor wanted by the Military).  What does a single Abram A-1 Tank cost? $8 Million each!  Would Senator Coburn be willing to swap the cost of a handful of tanks in order to provide needed relief to fellow Oklahomans?  If not, why not?  Does Coburn also believe that all the costs associated with FEMA should also be "set off" against other expenses in the Federal Budget? 
       With the country experiencing a spate of "historic" natural disasters, where do Coburn and Cantor stand on Climate Change?  We know the frequency and severity of warming affects Hurricanes.  And although Climate Change may not directly affect the severity of tornadoes, they do impact their non-traditional frequency and locations which do follow the patterns previously outlined by climate scientists.  Would it not make some sense to begin to take Climate Change more seriously in Washington?  How many natural disasters will we have to sustain for our leaders in Washington to accept the fact that climate related disasters will continue to wreak havoc across the Nation and the costs associated with them will continue to dramatically increase?  If the effort is to save money, perhaps Coburn, Cantor and others should invest in ways to better predict such weather events and towards measures to reduce their severity.  As President John F. Kennedy once said, "Change is the law of life.  And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future."

     Wow, I thought I had a crazy week, between the Advanced Placement Government and Politics testing for my students and watching our Venice High Baseball team win a rare Back to Back Baseball State Championship (Venice's third overall, 2007, 2012 & 2013).  Yet in reality, not nearly as nutty as the one in Washington.  With the stories about Benghazi, the IRS and the AP Subpoenas from the Justice Department, the Media is going crazy trying to sensationalize them into becoming the worst scandals in history.  In fact, Pew Research found that 44% of all Republicans believe these scandals are the worst in "American History."  And where might they even get such an idea?  What knowledge of American history do they actually have?  Apparently, very little.  GOP Senator James Inhofe (of "Friends of Hamas" fame) has even gone to the extent to suggest Obama might be "impeached" for these scandals.  But are they really scandals?  Are they directly tied to the President?  Even Former GOP Vice President Dick Cheney and former  GOP Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld have criticized Obama for "covering up the truth" about Benghazi.  Does anyone really want the truth on any of these matters?  Really?  Seems the truth is as far an objective as possible for the GOP and the Media.  So allow me to get to my point.
         It turns out that the Benghazi matter was not really a scandal at all.  Congress voted well before the tragedy to cut embassy security budgets which caused a ripple effect for all embassies, consulates and missions.  Who in Congress pushed for these cuts?  The GOP-led House.  So as the anniversary of 9-11 was approaching, the military offered additional security to Libyan Ambassador Christopher Stevens for the embassy and consulate.  In fact, according to a variety of news sources, including ABC News, Stevens turned the offer for additional security down TWICE.  So much for the GOP created notion the Obama Administration arbitrarily left the Benghazi consulate without adequate security on the anniversary of 9-11!  Does this FACT sink in for partisan politicians?  Of course not.  Does the partisan base accept them as fact?  Of course not, it deflates political rhetoric.  Does the Media use this fact to tamp down its news reporting?  Of course not, it would mean turning their backs on sensationalized news, and every customer of the Media loves a "hot scandal."  It drives their audience. 
       It also turns out that then CIA Director David Patraeus, was actively engaged in the development of the "talking points"  for release by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice that is now driving the "Scandal" probe by the GOP-led House Oversight Committee.  CIA Director and Former General Patraeus objected when the final talking points did not include more information about the actual attack itself.  According to NBC News, it can be seen clearly from the 99 emails released by the White House that the "tug of war" on the talking points were exclusively between the CIA and the State Department.  The emails never reveal any involvement by the White House or the President in shaping the publicly released report presented on the News Shows by Ambassador Rice.  The emails also reveal that State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland expressed concern that the talking points favored by Patraeus might prejudice an ongoing investigation into the tragedy by the FBI.   Gee, since the emails reflect actions taken in "real time" and not within the scope of 20-20 hindsight, they actually might make legitimate sense.  Does this make the GOP leadership wary of continuing their loud claims of a White House cover-up?  Does this dampen the GOP demands that include some suggesting Impeachment?  Does this sway the Media to stop pushing heated sensationalized rhetoric?  Of course not!  Even though the evidence suggests there has been no coverup and no measurable "wrongdoing" by the White House or the Administration, Republicans believe it is the worst scandal in American history!  Forget about Slavery, Trail of Tears and the Indian Agent scandals, Credit Mobilier, The Red Scare and the Palmer Raids, the Veterans Bureau thefts, Tea Pot Dome, the internment of Japanese Americans, McCarthyism, Bay of Pigs, Gulf of Tonkin and Watergate...If Obama is involved, Benghazi is the WORST in our history!  How shallow can these people be?  As shallow as the irresponsible Media and GOP leads them!
        As I have mentioned, the IRS matter is despicable.  Does anyone in America like the IRS?  Has the Media ignored the fact that Democratic leaders have also been in front of this matter to investigate who was engaged in this matter in the Cincinnati office of the IRS?  Yes, they have.  But have they informed the public that the IRS is a quasi-independent federal agency in which only two people out of at least 93,337 employees are political appointees?  The Inspector General J. Russell George is a political appointee.  So is the Commissioner of the IRS, who during the improper targeting of all groups seeking 504(c) exemptions, was Doug Shulman.  BOTH were political appointees of President George W. Bush (See timeline published by The Wall Street Journal at http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/05/17/irs-timeline-what-we-know-so-far/).  All other employees, all 93,000 plus are career bureaucrats hired and protected by Civil Service.  Since it happened under Obama's watch, he must shoulder some blame, but not to the extent that the Media claims as "White House Scandal".   According to law, the IRS is vested with the authority under guidelines created by Congress to scrutinize political groups applying for tax exempt status.  In order to qualify under the Tax Code for the status they sought, groups are required to focus on "Social Welfare" issues.   Do "Social Welfare" issues include elections and political fundraising?  Since this is a real problem, will Congress ever get around to reforming the Tax Code?   Does the American Public understand that according to the Constitution (Article I, Section 7), the GOP-led House has the sole authority to initiate changes to the Tax Code and in the almost three years they have had the power in the House, they have done nothing?  Will the GOP ever get around to reforming the Tax Code?  Of course not, their plan is to continue to use it as political rhetoric against Democrats and Obama, and they will hit that chord over and over in preparation for the 2014 and 2016 election cycles.  Will the Media call them out on it?  Of course not!  The Media loves political squabbles!  Where else do they get the big money for advertising if they don't suck it in during election cycles?  You think they make more money advertising cars, beer and "As Seen On TV" products?  How much of the $8 Billion spent on the last election cycle was taken in by the Media for political advertising?  As I mentioned in my book, is the Media a watchdog or a lapdog when it comes to the modern political landscape?  I'll let you decide.  Bottom line, the IRS went too far.  We all know it.  According to GOP Speaker Boehner, some should go to jail!   Instead of demanding "heads roll" in the IRS (see http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/15/stalag-america-boehner-wants-someone-jailed-despite-no-evidence-of-an-actual-crime/), and before he embarks on his publicly stated goal of making Benghazi his top priority, perhaps Boehner should be directing his caucus to begin work on revising the Tax Code!?  Nah, that would require real work and attacking Obama is now seen as some sort of Republican centered "ritual!" 
        What about the Justice Department scandal?  No one likes having the "free" press hindered in their effort to inform the public.  Yet, the GOP has routinely supported any efforts to stop leaks relating to National Security, and maintained that position throughout the Bush Presidency.  The Supreme Court has continuously rejected  "Shield Laws" that protect confidential news sources from being compelled to reveal their source of  leaks.  Regardless, Obama has proposed that Congress enact some form of Shield Law in order to insulate the Media from Subpoenas demanding the source of leaks.  Will the GOP-led House actually take up this initiative?  Of course not, they will continue to focus in on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP stories until they ride into the 2014 Mid-Term Elections.  Want proof of this phenomena?  GOP Representative Michele Bachmann publicly attempted to tie the IRS matter into the enforcement of Obamacare provisions!  According to Bachmann, "Under Obamacare, the average American will pay more, they'll get less, and now they have to worry that their government may punish them because of their beliefs!"  Thank you Ms. Bachmann for your keen observation.  And Republicans wonder why most folks can't take them seriously!  According to the Associated Press, "IRS agents will not be setting up health insurance markets, and they will not have a say in which health plans people get to pick or what doctor they see."
      With the GOP-led House leading a third of Congressional Committees to investigate Obama, former GOP Senator and Tea Party Favorite Jim DeMint's Heritage Foundation's letter to GOP leadership makes it clear what the real Republican agenda should be in Congress. "It would be imprudent to do anything that shifts the focus from the Obama Administration...we urge you to avoid bringing any legislation to the House floor that could expose or highlight major schisms within the (GOP) conference."  So what does the GOP-led House do when they are not conducting their "Investigations?"  They hold a vote again to repeal Obamacare!   As The Washington Post's Dana Milbank wrote, "Republicans have already begun overreaching, turning legitimate areas of inquiry into just some more partisan food fights." 
      So where do we go from here?  Unfortunately, nowhere.  We are stuck in partisan fed quick sand.  Instead of offering America the insight needed to pull ourselves out from the current quagmire known as Washington, the Media instead continues to capitalize on sensationalized political scandal designed solely to inflame passionate partisans in both parties.  Will Americans  learn that politics is a game, played by established rules that emphasize holding onto power when it has been obtained, and/or doing everything possible to regain power if it has been lost?  Will America  learn it is up to US to change the rules of the game by changing our leadership in Washington?  Will Americans ever learn that the following of political leadership and the Ideologically Oriented For-Profit Media is at their own risk and peril?  As President Abraham Lincoln once said; "I am a firm believer in the people.  If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis.  The great point is to bring them the real facts!"  Real facts, indeed!

      Some in the media have announced this week to be the perfect "Trifecta" for the GOP.  Between Benghazi, the IRS and the Justice Department, one would think Obama's presidency is cooked!  But perhaps Carl Bernstein, of the former "Woodward and Bernstein duo" put it best when he said the current matters in Washington are more "Political Spin than Criminal."  Perhaps, but before some folks slam me for ignoring the obvious, let's examine what we do know.
      According to the GOP, the Obama Administration directly or indirectly edited selective facts about the Benghazi attack in order to avoid having them appear as "Red Meat" or talking points for the Republicans.  Their claim is that by eliminating the language identifying the terrorists and their reasons behind the attack, the Democrats attempted to "soften" it so Republicans could not use it as a sign that terrorism has not been curtailed as Obama had boasted on the campaign trail.  You might recall the effort by Mitt Romney to paint Obama into a corner on Benghazi in the last Presidential debate before the Election.  By selectively editing the memos/emails, did the folks in the State Department know the culprits behind the Benghazi tragedy would not be immediately disclosed and Obama could effectively diffuse the GOP attacks against his re-election bid? If so, then on a political level, Obama scored huge points by deferring the Benghazi discussion until after his re-election.  Do Republicans actually think Obama had our consulate attacked in Benghazi?  Certainly not.  Do they really want to get into why the security was cut at the consulate when security budgets were slashed in the GOP-led House?  Certainly not.  But they sure are irate with the notion that Obama got away from dealing with Benghazi and was able to get re-elected so easily as a result.  So naturally, they want to use it anyway they can against Obama.  Why else are they making such a big deal about it?
      Yes, I understand the Obama Administration lied to us about who and why they attacked our consulate in Libya.  Did they ignore the attack completely?  Did they try to hide the tragedy from us? Did it make any difference in the murder of four Americans?  The GOP notion that the Administration rejected the consulate's request for immediate military assistance has been labeled "ludicrous" by the Pentagon considering we had no military assets  geographically nearby.  Regardless of GOP claims the military "rejected Benghazi calls for help", the terrorists were confronted by the CIA, who were called upon to immediately respond from their secret operations center nearby.  At least the location was secret until it was revealed by GOP Representative Jason Chaffetz (Utah).  So much for keeping classified information classified. 
     My point is that I agree with Carl Bernstein.  Benghazi was a tragedy described to the American public in a way to avoid having it used as a weapon by Obama's political opponents.   The Republicans are only really mad not because of any coverup, but because Obama was able to get away with the "messaged" talking points until  only recently, long after his re-election.  As far as a coverup?  The very emails being used by Darrell Issa (R-CA) to prove language in the communiques were "edited" have come from where?  The Obama Administration!  So how can one accuse someone of covering up something after they get their information from the person they claim is wrongfully keeping it from them?  Only a gullible public would believe such a claim.  In fact, the Obama Administration turned over all documents to Congress as early as March, but only now the GOP is using them to further their political "spin."  All such efforts are keenly designed to de-legitimize Obama and use it against Hillary Clinton should she run for the presidency in 2016.   Like Bernstein, I see plenty of political spin on both sides of the aisle here, but no criminality.
      The I.R.S. matter is something all together different.  The Internal Revenue Service is required to operate solely in a non-partisan manner.  Yet, history has shown that I.R.S. Commissioners, appointed by presidents have been used in an abusive effort to investigate and/or punish political opponents.  FDR did it,  so did Richard Nixon.  But did Obama?  The commissioner involved while the I.R.S. targeted Conservative groups' applications for 501(C)(4) non-profit status was appointed by President George W. Bush, not Obama.  Back in 2010, the I.R.S. received thousands of applications claiming to be non-profit groups dedicated solely to working on "social welfare" issues.  Instead, many were immediately used as fronts for political action committees, or PACs.  Isn't it the job of the I.R.S. to ensure applicants meet the tax code requirements before they are certified as "exempt" from taxation?  But I have to admit, if the I.R.S. and their extremely harsh investigation capabilities are used to harass and intimidate legitimate groups because an Administration opposes their existence, then criminal activity has been undertaken.  But where was the outrage in 2004 when the I.R.S. investigated the NAACP?  Where were members of the GOP demanding an explanation from the Bush Administration?  Seriously, I am NOT attempting to use some form of "moral equivalence" in this matter.  I am simply pointing out that when it comes to political outrage, it is certainly tainted by a heavy dose of "Selective Perception."  I personally believe the I.R.S. is a royal pain in the butt and should always consider the rights of citizens first and the government second.  But just as I write this, someone will send me a nasty comment that all I am doing is covering for Obama.  I am not.  It's just that simple.  But hypocrisy is heightened by our now famous "Hyper-Partisanship."  Does anyone really expect it to get any better with all the bickering go on now over these matters?  Despite the fact that Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered a criminal investigation into the I.R.S. matter, Conservatives will claim he will "cover up" the entire affair and again attempt to paint him as criminally incompetent, worthy of impeachment.  After they failed to run him out of office after Operation Fast and Furious, you can bet they will be beating the impeachment drums long and hard on this matter.  Ever wonder why Holder has not already resigned from his position as Attorney General?  Because there is a reasonable fear in the Obama Camp that no matter who he might nominate, Republican Senators will use the "Nuclear Option" or filibuster to block them, leaving the Justice Department impotent.  Based upon the realities in Washington, the Republicans are stuck with Holder because of circumstances they themselves have created.  But I hope folks get the hint.  No matter who is in charge of the I.R.S., the agency should never be used to intimidate or oppress any citizen or citizens group, unless they can be clearly be shown to be acting in willful violation of  law.  Period! 
         Which gets me to the recent disclosures the FBI was intercepting telephone conversations between Associated Press journalists and sources.  Oh, the outrage! But were the conversations on land lines or cell phones?  Were they authorized by a F.I.S.A. judge?  Will we ever know?  Now,  I do not support the warrantless searching or interception of telephone conversations of any kind.  I could cite you a long line of cases incorporating the right to privacy in our telephone conversations,  but the Supreme Court has, for some time now, been whittling away at expectations of privacy on the telephone.  In fact, currently there is NO right of privacy for conversations conducted over cell phones - none!  The extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ("FISA") even allows for all social media and electronic conversations to be eavesdropped and intercepted without a warrant.
          When the FBI goes into a suspected terrorist's telephone to eavesdrop, does the Media wonder if they have secured a warrant allowing such action?  Does the public expect suspected terrorists (even if U.S. Citizens) to have their individual First and Fourth Amendment rights upheld when a claim of National Security might be made?  Where was the Media to expose the devolution of our fundamental Freedoms of Speech and Privacy when the Patriot Act was enacted and then extended?  When FISA was enacted and then recently extended?  When the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protecting Act was enacted?  Where was the Media outcry then?
Does the Media think their First Amendment rights are somehow more fundamental than the individual's First Amendment Rights?  Moreover, the claim that the FBI was investigating "Confidential Sources" holds little to no water when the Supreme Court has already ruled that the Media can not legally shield the identity of their sources from authorities (see Shield Laws and Supreme Court).   Ironically, the many members of Congress that have routinely voted for FISA and CISPA now claim the FBI has engaged in criminal activity.  Really?   Those who make it legal to routinely snoop and pry into individuals electronic communications now raise a voice against the FBI when intercepting communications from the Media?  Now that's rich!
        The bottom line is that everything in Washington stinks to high heaven, and the only thing worse is the political gamesmanship being played by political parties in order to wreak havoc for their own political ends.  They no longer care about the negative impact it will have on America, they only care how they can use it to retain or regain political power.  Isn't it past time for Americans to get them all out of office and demand our mutual priorities take center stage instead of political strategies?  I know what Obama needs to do to rise above this mess, but I am not one of his advisers.  And I am not sure he would even listen to me anyway.  As far as the Republicans, "be careful for what you wish for."  Over reach is a bitch and this "Trifecta" could easily come back to haunt them!  Perhaps President Andrew Jackson said it best, "The great constitutional corrective in the hands of the people against usurpation of power, or corruption by their agents is the right of suffrage; and this when used with calmness and deliberation will prove strong enough!"

       With all that has been going on this week, it is extremely difficult to narrow down my thoughts to one posting.  I mean, we had the Benghazi hearings advertised to "blow the roof off of the Obama cover-up" and then we saw that Israel had successfully bombed installations in Syria only to have Syria and Hezbollah pledge a war to take back the Golan (not going to happen) only to see the GOP-House of Representatives pass a Bill outlining what debts will be paid in the event of a default by the government!  We also learned that CO2 Emissions have reached the feared "critical stage" of 400 parts per billion while no one in our Congress seemed to be paying attention while the military has pledged to crack down on sexual assault, battery and abuse.  Then we have Neo-Con pundits labeling Obama too weak to be Commander in Chief over his handling of the Syrian Civil War.  Wow, what a week!
        Where to begin?  Anyone who has walked the Golan knows the serious problems Israel would face if it was re-taken by Hezbollah backed Syrian rebels.  As a result, Israel will never allow such an event to ever happen.  Secretary of State John Kerry has made it plainly clear to the World that Israel has every right to defend itself, which includes the defense of the Golan.  Will it really happen?  Doubtful.  The threats are more rhetoric than reality designed instead to unify a war torn Assad-led Syria against a common "enemy."  With a Civil War being fought, taking on Israel is probably not a wise move.  
        How about the Republican efforts to protect bondholders of U.S. debt in the event of a federal default?  You see, Republicans have been using the threat of denying the extension of the of Debt Ceiling as a bargaining or obstruction tool against the Obama administration and nothing is going to stop them from doing so in the near future.  Republican leadership has made it public that they will continue to hold the debt ceiling extension hostage in order to get the economic terms they prefer, namely a slashing of tax rates and Social Security and Medicare along with the repeal of "Obamacare."  Does their Bill include paying debts associated with Social Security bonds?  Not until the interest on bonds held by foreign nations is paid first!  So what gives here?  Why  is the GOP actually preparing for the potential default by the federal government on its financial obligations instead of working on a package to shore up our economy and the budget mess?  Instead of proposing real budget bills designed to cut spending and the deficit while investing in America's future, they continue a strategy designed to ruin the American economy by pushing the government into default.  So they can blame Obama and the Democrats in order to regain power in the Congress and the White House!  But what about America's best interests?  And to what collective expense for America?
        I know many will criticize me for only attacking Republicans by claiming the Democrats want to tax and spend and have not proposed a budget in years.  But the House of Representatives is Constitutionally responsible to initiate all revenue bills, including the budget, not the Senate nor the Executive (see Article I, Section 7)!   So instead of dealing with proposals to fix our perceived "financial problems" the GOP leadership simply wants to inflict serious damage to the Federal government in an effort to attack Obama and the Democrats.  Instead of working on an objective that attempts to address our nation's problems, the GOP is hell-bent on destroying America's economy so they can step back and continue to blame Obama and the Democrats for political gain.  America, are you paying attention?  According to the 14th Amendment, the President is required to ensure that all legal debts of the United States are paid. The debt ceiling does not authorize spending, it merely authorizes the payment of monies already spent.  Perhaps President Obama will be the first president to invoke the provisions of the  14th Amendment which reads, "Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned...?" So much for the debt ceiling debate?   Such action by the President would certainly lead to a huge conflagration with the GOP and its supporting Media, but it might just force Americans to finally pay attention to the gamesmanship being played in Congress by both Parties at our collective expense!
      With CO2 emissions reaching levels not known in over 3 million years, why is Congress so eager to portray Benghazi and Syria as "Red Line" issues?  Isn't the present threat to Earth something that deserves the attention as a real "Red Line?" 
      Speaking of "Red Lines," with the Civil War raging in Syria, Right Wing critics of Obama have come out of the woodwork opining Obama is too weak to be Commander In Chief.  Leading the way is none other than Neo-Con Charles Krauthammer!  This week Krauthammer, in an article entitled "Pink Line over Damascus" hammered (pun intended)  Obama for ignoring the use of chemical weapons in Syria and that the proposed "Obama Red Line has somehow become a Pink Line instead."  Clever description Krauthammer, it evokes images of femininity with a heavy tinge of cowardice.  The basis for Krauthammer's criticism?  Obama has "fumbled" the opportunity to attack Syria and now is left "embarrassing America" in the eyes of the World.  Really?  His example of real leadership instead?  Israel's bold airstrikes against Syrian munitions intended for transfer to Hezbollah bases in Lebanon.  Does Krauthammer really want us all to believe Israel made these military strikes without telling the Obama Administration first?   To make matters worse, Krauthammer claims that Obama's efforts to determine who actually used chemical weapons is a cop out under the banner of "CSI: Damascus!"  But isn't it truly important that the U.S. know whether the chemicals were actually used by the Assad Regime and not by the rebels?  Should we really be supporting the rebel cause in Syria without knowing who is actually taking an active part in the rebel cause?  Did we not learn from Afghanistan that arming and training the Mujaheddin came back to hurt us?  To stand tall and strong and claim Obama should have committed military action earlier is an easy case of  Neo-Con War embracing hindsight.  Perhaps Krauthammer still does not understand that you get to play the War Card only so many times when American sons' and daughters' lives are put on the line?   Instead of complaining about not getting "into" the Syrian conflict, Krauthammer should know that the political capital needed to do so was spent wastefully by him and his like-minded supporters when they advocated getting us into the war with Iraq and Afghanistan.  It really does not matter how "strong" you claim your cards are if you have no chips to put down, and when it comes to supporting an immediate war with Syria, Krauthammer and his ilk are bankrupt!
       So a short reminder to the GOP war machine along with Mr Krauthammer and his Right Wing supporters of war...  a powerful U.S. General once said, "In most communities it is illegal to cry "fire" in a crowded assembly.  Should it not be considered serious international misconduct to manufacture a general war scare in an effort to achieve local political aims?"  Who said this?  None other than President Dwight David Eisenhower.   Doesn't this apply to all the games being played by the Political Parties at our collective expense?  
     Happy Mothers Day to each and every mother we all love!

       Due to my schedule this afternoon and evening, I will be unable to post anything of substance.  I will first be attending a meeting of the Sarasota County Teach American History Cohort and then will be heading out to root for our Venice Indian's baseball team as they play in the Regional Finals tonight with a trip to the 7A State Championships in Fort Myers, Florida on the line.  Have a great and safe weekend and check back here on Sunday for a new posting!  Thank you for your loyal and continued support!