So I took a bit of a break this past month, and I figured by the time I came back y'all would have things sorted out: people would be surely by flying around with jet packs by now, God would have sent fires and floods to smite the unrighteous, and, if I really got lucky, Barack Obama would have "grown a pair".
And now that I'm back, debt negotiations are about to commence between that same Barack Obama and the Republican Congressional Leadership, things like Social Security and Medicare cuts are apparently on the table in order to protect tax cuts for the rich, and certain quarters of the Republican Party aren't even trying anymore to hide their racism.
All of which suggests that I shouldn't be looking for a jet pack anytime soon.
But there is some good news: God is apparently working hard, and states like Oklahoma and Arizona and Florida and Georgia and Texas have been alternately aflame or aflood, apparently as a result of their unrepentant behavior...and on the economic front, New York City's Stonewall Inn is going to make a ton of money this summer hosting weddings.
That gives us a lot to talk about...so let's get right to it.
There's been a great deal of concern around here about the effort to prepare the US military for the full repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT), and I've had a few words of my own regarding how long the process might take.
There was a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee last Thursday that had all four Services represented; with one exception these were the same Service Chiefs that were testifying last December when the bill to set the repeal process in motion was still a piece of prospective legislation.
At that time there was concern that the "combat arms" of the Marines and the Army were going to be impacted in a negative way by the transition to "open service"; the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Army's Chief of Staff were the most outspoken in confirming that such concerns exist within the Pentagon as well.
We now have more information to report-including the increasing desperation of some of our Republican friends-and if you ask me, I think things might be better than we thought.
Mr. Rogers was in full bloviation mode this week, pontificating about the "failure" of the Obama administration to have prevented the Times Square bomber before he acted.
If Mr. Rogers ever bothered to talk to people in his district (other than the ones who pay for the privilege), I would love to ask him a few questions:
1.) Apparently, the 53 hours and 20 minutes that elapsed from incident to arrest in this case was not good enough for FBI Guy Mike Rogers. Remind me, Mr. Rogers, where Osama bin Laden is being held in custody? Oh, wait -- he still hasn't been captured, nearly a decade after 9/11. Hmm... you've been serving on the House Intel Committee since you first went to Washington a decade ago. Coincidence?
2.) In that MSNBC interview, you referred to a "pattern" of "successful" bombing attempts by Faizal Shahzad (Times Square Bomber) and Umar Abdulmutallab (Underwear Bomber). Why would you define as "successful" two bombers who failed to set off their bombs? No deaths or injuries resulted from their failed attempts; both men were apprehended, taken into custody and provided significant amounts of actionable intelligence after interrogation. I personally think this is outstanding; it's not clear why you are so critical of the efforts of professional law enforcement personnel.
<blockquote>Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda. Terrorists are not 100 feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America's counter-terrorism professionals and America's system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.</blockquote>
"There is no evidence that Detroit was targeted," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, who was in a classified briefing on the House Intelligence Committee.
"It was just one of several options the bomber suspect had," Rogers added.
Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Holland, the ranking Republican on the committee, confirmed Detroit wasn't targeted.
Well alrighty then, if Detroit wasn't targeted I guess that makes it all okay!
Both Rogers and Hoekstra have spent quite a bit of time jumping in front of every reporter they can find to thunder about the awfulness of Scary Underpants Bomber GuyAbdulmutallab's arraignment in civilian court.
It would have been great if the Detroit News reporter had asked Mike & Pete what exactly was the significance of Detroit not being the bomber's target. Was that really the most salient point of the "closed door" House Intel session?
We all know how Rogers and Hoekstra love to talk about their intel cred... hey, Hoekstra even Twitters about it!
They need to stop the grandstanding and actually do some work to keep our country -- not just Michigan -- safe.
Remember all the hysteria over the possibility of moving some Guantanamo detainees to Standish, MI?
Well, Pete Hoekstra & Mike Rogers can breathe a sigh of relief -- no more than 100 detainees will be transferred to the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, IL. Located about 150 miles from Chicago, the 1,600 cell maximum security facility currently houses 200 minimum-security inmates.
[skip] in Thomson many have welcomed the prospect as a potential economic engine. Thomson Village President Jerry Hebeler, was asleep when the word came that Thomson had been chosen.
"It's news to me, but then I'm always the last to know anything," Hebeler said Monday night of the news affecting his town of 450 residents. "It'll be good for the village and the surrounding area, especially with all the jobs that have been lost here."
The AIG Bonus Scandal having been disposed of for the moment, Congress is all a-flitter, all of a sudden, about the new “Greatest Threat To The American Way Of Life In All Of World History Of The Week”...and this week the threat is The Mexican Drug War.
The Mexican Drug Cartels, Senator Joe Lieberman told us in a March 25th hearing, are the number one organized crime threat we face in America today.
The violence, we are told, is beginning to affect America’s National Security...and unless I’m mistaken, Congress is looking to spin up for some sort of action that might range from sending thousands of troops to the US Southwest—and beyond—to going after users in the US “by any means necessary” to perhaps even getting all “Jack Bauer” on some Mexicans who would, presumably, have some useful information.
Although no one’s discussed it yet, we will probably hear someone even propose sending cartel leaders to Guantanamo (Michelle Bachman...I’m thinking of you...).
However, there is another way to disarm these dangerous cartels...and history tells us it works.
So Congress, before you go passing some “warrantless wiretapping for drugs” 4th Amendment exception, allow me to suggest that instead of a drug war, what we really need...is a drug peace.
("Clear Skies," "Healthy Forests" and Pete Hoekstra as the ranking member of the "Intelligence" Committee... - promoted by PerfectStormer)
CQ Politics is reporting that Michigan's own West Coaster Pete Hoekstra (intel guy!) Twittered details of a supposed-to-be-secret Congressional visit to Iraq.
"Just landed in Baghdad," messaged Hoekstra, a former chairman of the Intelligence panel and now the ranking member, who is routinely entrusted to keep some of the nation's most closely guarded secrets.
Before the delegation left Washington, they were advised to keep the trip to themselves for security reasons. A few media outlets, including Congressional Quarterly, learned about it, but agreed not to disclose anything until the delegation had left Iraq.
Nobody expected, though, that a lawmaker with such an extensive national security background would be the first to break the silence. And in such a big way.
Apparently, Mr. Hoekstra not only Twittered about trip itself, but he also provided real-time updates on the delegation's itinerary.
I somehow doubt that Hoekstra will get a chewing-out from his fellow Intel Guy Mike Rogers (MI-08)for this display of idiocy... much less face any penalties for a pretty severe security breach. So far, the delegation is safe -- guess this means that al-Qaeda in Iraq isn't follwing Hoekstra on Twitter...
When last we met we had a conversation about the challenges the Air Force faces in providing a capable bomber force. We discussed the age of the existing bomber fleet’s backbone, the B-52, the limitations of the B-1, and the fact that the B-2s is limited by the age of the aircraft’s electronics from participating in the “network-centric warfare” model most appropriate for the 21st Century military.
We also examined the probability that future air-defense systems will likely soon raise the threat level to a point where existing US aircraft will no longer be able to operate safely in the highest threat environments.
So what are we to do?
Today we’ll consider several options, including some that change the nature of the heavy bomber fleet in very fundamental ways.
I come today with a message many of you will not want to hear, particularly in a time when we are looking forward to ending a war...and in a time where we are already struggling to provide enough money for military funding, the last thing you want to hear from me is that we need to send a couple hundred billion more to the Air Force—and that we need to do it soon.
Nonetheless, we have a problem we need to fix.
Of course, I hate to present a problem without a solution...and today I have two ideas that can help with the problem—and maybe save the taxpayer a mess of money in the process.
There is no way to save us from our dependence on oil, we are told, except to drill for more oil wherever it can be found-and some will even tell us it's possible that there's so much oil not yet discovered off the coast that all our problems will be over once we poke a few holes in the ground and git 'er done.
Of course, it's also possible there are monkeys to be found in certain of my body cavities...and I'm hoping most fervently that no one proposes drilling in my ANWAR in an effort to find out.
But what if there was another way?
What if we could afford to convert our gas-powered cars to something else...something that could reduce our national gasoline consumption by 70%?
Something we could put into place just as quickly as offshore wells could be drilled-and maybe even faster.
A "Manhattan Project" of fleet conversion, if you will.
Well, Gentle Reader, I think we can-and today we examine a way it might be done.
