Call me crazy, but my experience in business, football, and marriage has taught me that the first step towards fixing a problem is actually addressing the problem. If your business is dealing with customer service issues, you might begin by looking for inefficiencies in operations, or addressing the training and staffing standards in your firm. If your team can’t run the ball, you might address your run scheme or work on blocking technique. If you are fighting with your wife, you would probably start by agreeing with her.
The point is, isolate the actual problem. At the moment, the Washington media, in concert with big finance (and big financial media) is working hard to convince Americans that their Congress needs to fix a very different problem from the actual problem facing our nation. And they are doing it for a very simple, very easy to understand reason; if they succeed, they will make billions.
I have argued for some months now that the erstwhile Governor of Alaska and candidate for Vice President was beyond relevance, rendering moot any need to comment on her nonsense. I must admit I was wrong; when more than 3.25 million people “like” a short note rehashing conservative talking points on Facebook, Palin’s relevance is evident. In a nation where perhaps two million people have formally asked to be ex-citizens, popular rants by the wife of an Alaska secessionist have real meaning.
It is, after all, the simple notion that many in America have regressed to Sarah Palin’s level that makes her relevant, rather than any improvement in her own feeble and misdirected talents. Formally patriotic citizens who fought the dishonor of flag burning are now all too willing to abuse its code by flying it upside down, before removing some of the stars from its field of blue. The notion is as disgusting, cowardly, and primitive as Sarah Palin proved herself to be during her own national campaign; apparently, it spreads like a virus.
The mainstream media (it is supposedly liberal, remember) spent last week overdosing on sweets without first eating dinner. We have been told, repeatedly, that burdensome union contracts led to the (allegedly) untimely death of Hostess. Throughout America, decent and hard working non-union folks shook their heads at the foolishness of those greedy bakers who refused the new contract unilaterally shoved down their throats by a bankruptcy court.
They were greedy, they were inflexible, they have paid with their jobs. And now we Americans, the hard-working non-union types at least, are denied the Ding Dongs that are rightly ours. It is a dark day America, and exactly what many were expecting when President Obama was reelected. They don’t, after all, have Twinkies in Marxist Kenya.
Sure. In other news, Donald Trump has bankrupted three firms, but is still a good businessman.
For some period after every election we like to hear about, talk about, read about, and write about that wondrous notion, bipartisanship. Of course, not long after the dust settles (and the last loser gives up the last recount lawsuit), bipartisanship becomes a lost, lamentable notion of a better time. The hue and cry for cooperation has gone up again this year, and all of the usual suspects have embraced the challenge. But what happened last time?
President Obama spent his entire first term in search of bipartisanship, the liberal blogosphere spent his entire first term criticizing his search for bipartisanship, and conservatives spent his entire first term accusing the President of walking away from bipartisanship. There are some who say there is a fundamental disagreement on what bipartisanship is, and the disagreement isn’t ending soon. If it is fundamental, it is a one-sided disagreement. With one exception, every piece of legislation passed in the last 20 years that featured any partisan conflict has been resolved and passed with Democrats making all of the concessions.