« Will You Answer What Congress Won't? The Top 20 Questions pt 14 | Main | Spitzer changes his mind about giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens »

YCMTSU

There's an saying that "truth is stranger than fiction," and I've heard that explained as "fiction, unlike truth, has the burden of having to be believable." And events in this world have gotten to the point where I feel the need to introduce a new category of postings here at Wizbang -- "WTF?" (Feel free to Google the acronym if you don't know it.)

The title is from a phrase I used recently in a story that really, really deserved the new category, when John Kerry announced that he ready to answer the attacks the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth had made. Unfortunately for the Bay State's junior senator, his announcement came almost three years to the day after he lost the presidency, and the Swift Boat Veterans' efforts played a part in that defeat. At that point, I had to say "You Can't Make This Shit Up."

Well, as Kevin posted earlier, there's now a story that puts Senator Waffles Gigolo to shame (or, at least, ought to, if the man was capable of feeling shame): a 37-year-old waitress and illegal alien from Lebanon has been convicted of stealing government secrets from the FBI and the CIA, where she worked, and has ties to Hezbollah -- the Syrian puppet terrorist group that holds a stranglehold in Lebanon and killed 241 American servicemen in 1983.

When I read Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders," I found it highly implausible that an Iran could get not one, but two sleeper assassins on to presidential security details -- first Iraq's, then America's. But had any author tried to sell me on anything resembling the apparently true story of Nada Nadim Prouty, I'd have hurled the book across the room in disgust. That was an insult to my intelligence.

The next time I visit Washington, DC, I think I'm going to steal a line from Jack Nicholson from the movie "Batman:" "This town needs an enema!" It's long past time to purge a huge hunk of the established structure that is running our government right down the toilet. We can start with the FBI and the CIA, who let Ms. Prouty work for so long against our nation's interests and didn't do the most basic checks on her. Then we can move on to the State Department and get the whining gits out of the Foreign Service. And this one will take some work, but I have come to the conclusion that if we simply kicked 75% of the members out of Congress -- chosen at random, or weighted by seniority -- we'd end up with a vastly better legislature.

Hell, I think that would work across the board. In pretty much every bureaucracy, fire 75% of them at random, then tell the survivors to hire some new people and DO THEIR JOBS, or we'll axe them and half of the new hires.

We are the owners of this government, and our employees are not only failing to do their jobs, they're willfully doing whatever the hell they like -- and doing it TO us. That has GOT to end.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/25393.

Comments (22)

The only thing I can hope f... (Below threshold)
Son Of The Godfather:

The only thing I can hope for is that somebody, ANYBODY was aware of this plant, and her moves were being monitored for our own intel.

It's wishful thinking, but it keeps me sane.

HELL YEA!!!!...What he said... (Below threshold)
DoninFla:

HELL YEA!!!!...What he said...

I live in Dearbornistan, Mi... (Below threshold)
Bruce:

I live in Dearbornistan, Michigan (all my life) and I can tell you from first-hand experience with muslims and Islam: They hold deep allegiance to the "stateless" state of Islam. Remember, Islam mixes with religion with politics (and every other aspect of life), there is no separation between church(mosque) and state.

As for Dearbornistan, Hezbollah is here and in numbers. It's the immigration, stupid!!

YK? or YC?... (Below threshold)

YK? or YC?

It's long past time to p... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

It's long past time to purge a huge hunk of the established structure that is running our government right down the toilet.
Jay Tea

So impeachment is back on the table?

So impeachment is back o... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

So impeachment is back on the table?

Hereby nominated for stupidest statement of the day.

Here's a hint, sean nyc/aa, she joined the FBI in 1999.

From the context, it seems ... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

From the context, it seems clear that the "established structure that is running our government" Jay Tea refers to isn't so much elected officials in general, but the middle management bureaucrats infesting most federal offices.

John Irving said : ... (Below threshold)
doubled:


John Irving said : :...Jay Tea refers to isn't so much elected officials in general, but the middle management bureaucrats infesting most federal offices.

Joe Wilson and Val Plame come imediately to mind.

Let's take it a step furthe... (Below threshold)
Maggie:

Let's take it a step further, hold accountable
those who got these cretins appointed/hired to
their bureaucratic positions.

From the context, it see... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

From the context, it seems clear that the "established structure that is running our government" Jay Tea refers to isn't so much elected officials in general, but the middle management bureaucrats infesting most federal offices.
John Irving

Wrong.

And this one will take some work, but I have come to the conclusion that if we simply kicked 75% of the members out of Congress -- chosen at random, or weighted by seniority -- we'd end up with a vastly better legislature.
Jay Tea

sean nyc/aa,What, ... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

sean nyc/aa,

What, your first comment wasn't stupid enough, so you try to top it?

John Irving is correct. You...not so much.

JT made several statements about clearing out entrenched bureaucrats. Then he concluded the thought by saying we should also throw out 75% of Congress.

Reading comprehension: you should try it some time.

I gotta disagree with you o... (Below threshold)
Veeshir:

I gotta disagree with you on that one Sheik.
It's pretty obvious from seanyc/aa's selective quoting, he knew exactly what Jay had written.

Sheik Yur Booty and Veeshir... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

Sheik Yur Booty and Veeshir,

I will concede I was overly curt in my 1:35 post and John was not entirely wrong in his 1:08 post.

What I was trying to say was Jay does not limit it to only "clearing out entrenched bureaucrats", but then goes on to include members of Congress, as Sheik rightly notes.

So what I'm asking is: why stop there? If we can all agree that "running our government right down the toilet" is a bad thing, which I hope we can, then why not consider all those parties which might be contributing to that?

BTW, this is not meant to b... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

BTW, this is not meant to be focused on just impeachment. What about the groupthink DC media, the corporate and special interest lobbyists, the "activist judges"? If we're going to truly overhaul the place, we can't just pick and choose (excepting elections obviously) otherwise the other entrenced entities will corrupt and corrode the new system we put in place.

Basically, what's required is another revolution, but I don't think that's what Jay Tea had in mind (but I'm not a psychic).

Good answer. On To... (Below threshold)
Veeshir:

Good answer.
On Topic
A lot of times lately I will add a comment to emails among my friends.
The comment being, "If some fiction writer had written this (whatever I'm writing about V) in the 80s, I would have been angry at him for insulting my intelligence."

Actually, Sean, we can't th... (Below threshold)

Actually, Sean, we can't throw out the Congresscritters until next November, which is the same time as we'll be choosing the Bush administration's successors. So why the hell bother impeaching someone who's gonna be out of office in less than a year, anyway?

The only pluses I can see is that 1) it'll keep Congress out of real mischief while they're engaging in this public masturbation, and 2) the leaders of the impeachment movement will most likely make themselves look like the partisan hack idiots they are, and will increase the odds of them being kicked out of office.

But I have too much respect for the Constitution to want to see impeachment used as such a flagrantly partisan power play.

On the other hand, I kinda like the sound of "President Cheney," even for just a few months or a year...

J.

YKMTSUYou k... (Below threshold)
Brian:

YKMTSU

You kan't?

My personal opinion: fire ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

My personal opinion: fire 90% of State Department, and about 70% of CIA, and start all over.

Love the President Cheney i... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Love the President Cheney idea. Great idea, J.

Then liberal heads will literally explode. Since there's not much in those heads, not so much to clean up, so that's a plus.

"If we can all agree tha... (Below threshold)

"If we can all agree that "running our government right down the toilet" is a bad thing, which I hope we can, then why not consider all those parties which might be contributing to that?"

Um....Jay did.

Jay:we can't th... (Below threshold)
sean nyc/aa:

Jay:

we can't throw out the Congresscritters until next November,

Well, you weren't that specific in your post. You said, "if we simply kicked 75% of the members out of Congress -- chosen at random, or weighted by seniority". I took that to me we got rid of them through processes other than elections because you're talking about "choosing them at random", in which case how would you convince either the Congressmen to not run or their electorate to not vote for them if their name were chosen out of a hat?

next November, which is the same time as we'll be choosing the Bush administration's successors. So why the hell bother impeaching someone who's gonna be out of office in less than a year, anyway?

I didn't say I favor impeachment, I just asked if it was back on the table. After all, we've been told by conservatives that we can't take anything off the table when it comes military strikes on Iran, right? So why limit our options with respect to impeachment? But as to why bother, maybe so we can get some straight answers on the issues of torture policy, wiretapping, politicization of the justice dept, the millions of "lost" emails, the signing statements, and what's in Cheney's man-size safe (sarc). As you said, "We are the owners of this government, and our employees are not only failing to do their jobs, they're willfully doing whatever the hell they like -- and doing it TO us. That has GOT to end."

1) it'll keep Congress out of real mischief while they're engaging in this public masturbation,

Agreed, but that's politics, neither party is innocent of this. If you don't like it, do your best to ignore it, otherwise you'll just give yourself an ulcer.

2) the leaders of the impeachment movement will most likely make themselves look like the partisan hack idiots they are, and will increase the odds of them being kicked out of office. But I have too much respect for the Constitution to want to see impeachment used as such a flagrantly partisan power play.

I'd glad you recapped the arguments against the 1998 impeachment. Not that it would be much different now, but there are a host of issues (listed above) which rightfully deserve more scrutiny than Clinton's indiscretions, whether you believe them to be partisan or not.

On the other hand, I kinda like the sound of "President Cheney," even for just a few months or a year...

I have a feeling if impeachment hearings did take place, Cheney would quickly be tied up in everything being investigated.

JOHN KERRY is a charalent a... (Below threshold)
Spurwing Plover:

JOHN KERRY is a charalent a fruad and a liar he tried to placate hunters and gun owners by posng to blaze orange but his recors is favoring the gun control wackos KERRY IS A FRAUD
depp=true




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy