WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT: BRITISH EDITION

Reason #1,576,984 on why I'm happy to be an American:  The UK is proposing that all gross paychecks now go directly to the government first, so that they can take out whatever taxes are necessary before direct depositing the money in the bank account of the worker who earned it. 

The interesting thing about the CNBC article reporting on this latest intervention by the state is not the reaction of the populace to such a proposal, nor the invasion of privacy by the state that is involved, because neither are mentioned.  The real issue seems to be the logistics of the proposal, and whether or not it is fiscally and logistically attainable.  This is stunning.  Heaven knows we americans wouldn't stand for such a suggestion.  Will the english people really allow this unprecidented grab of power?

Public sentiment aside, the bigger question right now seems to be if the central government can impliment a plan like this.  According to the reportage I've seen on the subject, the accumulation of data will be problematic, as well as security issues and timeliness.  They attempted an overhaul of the national health system that would have brought all of the county rolls into a centralized system, and ended up having to scrap the plan:

And the chance of widespread mistakes could be high, according to Bull. HMRC does not have a good track record of handling large computer systems and has suffered high-profile errors with data, he said.

The system would be massive in terms of data management, larger than a recent attempt to centralize the National Health Service's data, which was later scrapped, Bull said.

Nothing like high profile errors that directly affect not just your weekly paycheck, but also your bank account in general.  I don't know about you, but the thought of the IRS with weekly access to my accounts is the stuff of nightmares. 

The CNBC article also mentions issues of security -  a program like that would be like catnip to thieves and hackers.   It also states that the current computer system and infrastructure would have to be completely overhauled, at an exorbitant cost to taxpayers.  There is a potential savings of hundreds of millions for businesses down the road, but that number is by far overshadowed by the cost of implimentation and upkeep. 

I still keep going back to what the english people think of all of this.  Are they so used to the central government intruding in their lives that this program, while an utter outrage to americans, is just par for the course over there?  Or will they rise up in protest to something like this? 

Perhaps another chapter of the International Tea Party movement is about to be born.  Welcome aboard, mates!

WASHINGTON UPDATE

Between the committee meetings and the Tea Party rally, DC is a hive of activity today.  The Tea Party turnout is impressive, as always.  Rep. Bachmann (R-MN) has officially invited the tea partyers in to the Capitol to speak to their representatives.  It will be interesting to see how the democrats react.  They are under a lot of pressure from all quarters today.

As for the House Rules committee, it has been rather chaotic.  In a surprising turn of events, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) stated (via the Washington Examiner):

“We’re not going to ‘deem’ the bill passed. We’re going to pass the Senate bill…I would be against the idea of ‘deeming’ something — we either pass it or we don’t.”

Sounds like soneone on the democrat side finally realized how unconstitutional the move is.  Perhaps the sheer number of lawsuits waiting to be filed against it tipped them off....Word has just come out that the Senate bill will be voted on directly - demon pass is dead.  

Now the big question is - does Pelosi have to votes to pass the unpopular Senate bill?

Let's not forget - the reason demon pass was spawned in the first place was because she couldn't whip up the votes for the Senate bill as it was passed.

The whip count varies so wildly that it is hard to keep track of how many votes they have.  Dick Morris explained the way he is keeping track - as of last night, 5 no votes had flipped to yes.  But, on the other hand, 4 yes votes flipped to no.  Which means that, although the dems are touting the five they gained, in reality the net gain is only one.  That was the count last night, however, and today has been an incredibly fluid day.  It was thought that Bart Stupak had negotiated a deal with Pelosi, but after he cancelled his 11am presser, word leaked out that he is "done with Pelosi" and his vote stands at no. 

Let's hope the Tea Partyers have some luck persuading their reps to vote no. I have to admit that there is a little tiny part of me that is hoping that the no votes that flipped to yes did so only to get Pelosi off their backs, and that they are still planning to vote no (well, except Kucinich, who is voting yes because he's been assured that single payer is just a few bills down the road).  I know it's silly and unrealistic, but I really am an optimist - I just can't help myself.  Besides, I know I'd say almost anything to get Pelosi out of my hair, and I'd just figure that the promise I made to her is just as binding as the promises she and Obama have made to the country.  Which is to say, not binding at all.

Uh-oh.  The One has decided to descend upon the Hill to persuade his party to do the right thing and save his  presidency.  It's all about the O, after all.  So here's the big question - is this speech by Obama to rally the troops, or is it a convenient way to get them out of their offices while the Tea Party people are roaming the halls?  It's not beyond the realm of possibility that they would do something like this to keep their caucus from speaking to their constituents - that's why they keep trying to pass this mess before major holiday recesses, after all.

The long and short of it is, tomorrow is going to be a very long, tense day. 

CAPTIAN (UN)AMERICA

I have been a fan of Marvel Comics since I was a kid.  My personal favorites were the Silver Surfer and the X-Men of the early 1990's, with Psylocke and Gambit.  I was thrilled with the idea of some of my favorites becoming major movies with great special effects and compelling stories, and I always look forward to new ones.  I have been happy to see the resurgence of comic books and their blockbuster success.

But I have to say that I have been unhappy with some of the themes besieging our comicbook heroes and their movie incarnations.  In issue #602 of Captain America, the new villain seems to be, of all things, the American people.  More specifically, the crazy, extremist, right-wing, white-supremacist Tea Partiers (I highly recommend you read the whole article). 

Predictably enough, Captain America is joined in this issue by The Falcon, his black superhero sidekick.  After all, it isn't a Tea Party bashing without racist overtones, right?

Let's not forget the obnoxious pornographic slurs, too - check off another box on the how-to bash list.  (Marvel will be removing it in future printings, but the damage is done)

This latest lefty foray into ruining much-loved characters is incredibly disturbing to me, especially since I myself have attended a Tea Party or two, and have never seen any dangerous white-supremacist lunatics.  All I've seen is middle class people of all shapes, sizes, colors and political leanings peacefully coming together to protest a government gone wild.  They were safe enough for me to bring my children, who had fun singing, dancing, and reading the clever signs.  True, there are a few Obama=Hitler people, but those are the LaRuchies - democrats. 

It never ceases to amaze me that the left are so terrified of the movement.  I don't recall such fear and hysteria during the violent Bush era protests.  So far, the only violence (shouting at elected officials doesn't count as violence, no matter how much the left insists it does) has been perpetrated by SEIU members against protesters.

And now our superheroes are turning against us.  Captain America is afraid of common run-of-the-mill Americans.  Their belief in low taxes, smaller government and liberty are apparently the things nightmares are made of for him and the people at Marvel.

But then, why not?  They have been systematically destroying our heroes for decades.  From the mortal death of the immortal Superman to the most recent Superman movie in which he is depicted as, basically, a deadbeat dad who ditches his babymama and has feet of clay. 

All of our superheroes are flawed these days.  Why?

Has the liberal victim mentality finally invaded the cartoon world?  Or perhaps having such perfect, patriotic beings to look up to and attempt to emulate was perceived as too much of a challenge by our liberal nannies and so they had to be made more human.  The patriotic theme definitely had to go - after all, patriotism keeps us from joining the liberal utopian socialist global commune, so it's bad, bad, bad!

Think about it.  Batman should be in intense therapy.  The man is a mess.   It's hard to tell who's crazier and more tortured, him or his arch-villains.  The Watchmen was a mess of angst and human failings.  Even Spiderman explores and revels in his dark side for a while, and one of the most poignant scenes in the series is when he is in the subway car, unconscious and unmasked.  He's just a kid, he's one of us....

Only Iron Man (the movie) seems to buck this trend, and to me he is the best current incarnation of American hero out there today.  Tony Stark is a greedy capitalist pig/warmonger who only redeems himself with his superhero antics. I love that Stark's capitalist pig wealth and warmongering background in weaponry is what makes him so great.  In true American spirit, Tony adapts and excels and creates something fantastic.  He is an entrepeneur who has met the enemy and understands the game.  He was not broken by his time in the cave, he was made stronger. 

Sure, the main villain is another greedy capitalist-pig, but it is more about the man than the system, so that's okay.  To be fair, the comic, over the years, has seen Stark battle alcoholism as well as villains and other personal demons, but so far, the movies have been free of such human flaws.  Let's hope it stays that way. 

I like my heroes to act like heroes.  I live in reality, and it is filled with flawed people, myself included.  I don't need or want to identify my superheroes as being just like me; I don't want them flawed.  Their appeal is that they are better than me, a more perfect vision that I can look up to and try to emulate.  Noble, honest protectors of all Americans, not just those who share their political views.  I use them as an escape - a better world where there are brave people willing to fight for life, liberty and the American Way.

The creators of Captian America should be ashamed.  One would think that a character with a fanclub called the "Sentinels of Liberty" would be more sympathetic to the Tea Party cause.  Add in that his girlfriend was named Betsy Ross (aka Golden Girl) and he was created to fight nazis and communism, and you really have to wonder what the current creators were thinking.

Our brave, noble, anti-communist, pro-America superheroes have become sighing, fearful angst-ridden socialists in the making. 

I want my Superheroes back!!!

UNINVOLVED AND UNAWARE

I saw a quote today from a White House senior official in regards to a letter that was sent to Gov. Paterson of NY that urged him to not run for re-election. The official stated that, "President Obama is not involved in any way. There are officials in the White House that share the concerns that are widely held in NY about the very challenging political environment confronting Gov. Paterson. Nobody asked him to get out of the race. It is Governor Paterson's decision to make. We're confident he'll make the decision based on the best interests of the state."


Why did this quote stand out? Aside from the bully overtones - 'We're confident he'll make the decision based on the best interests of the state', what really drew my attention was the 'President Obama is not involved in any way.'


On reflection, we hear that line a lot these days, in some version or other - he also was 'not involved' in the Blagojevich scandal or the CIA interrogation probes. More often than not, though, he us just simply 'not aware'.


Take, for example, his comments on ACORN:

" You know, if -- frankly, it's not really something I've followed closely. I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money."


Or former IL Gov. Rod Blagojevich:

"I had no contact with the governor or his office so I was not aware of what was happening. As I said it is a sad day for Illinois. Beyond that I don't think it's appropriate for me to comment"


The Tea Party protests:

""The White House says the president is unaware of the tea parties and will hold his own event today," "


If you think about it, this is not a new thing. He had similar problems with obliviousness on the campaign trail.


His Aunt Zeituni and her illegal status:

""Senator Obama has no knowledge of her status but obviously believes that any and all appropriate laws be followed"".


William Ayers:

"On Monday, Obama chief strategist David Axelrod said Obama was not aware of Ayers' terrorist background when he attended a political coffee at Ayers Hyde Park home at the beginning of his state senate race sometime in the fall of 1995."


And, of course, Rev. Wright:

"Obama has said he was unaware Wright had said “goddamn America,” blamed the government for infecting the black population with AIDS or made other controversial statements in his sermons in a highly billed speech on race and religion and in other appearances. "


There is also the:


Air Force One Flyover


Stock conflicts


Town Hall 9/12 protest in Washington D.C.


AIG bonuses


Is it just me or is the obliviousness of this administration breathtaking? It just seems that lately the only things they are aware of is what they are not involved in.