Patriotism And Citizenship Check Coming For Democrats As The “Golden Dancer” Presidency Nears Its Point Of No Return

almost_midnight_

I sense that time is running out.

This evening, around 8 PM, the New York Post released an exclusive story, citing a “reliable source,” claiming that the Census Bureau faked the September  2012 employment figures that gave a huge boost to President Obama’s campaign as the race against Mitt Romney was reaching its stretch run. The figures, which were challenged by conservative pundits as suspiciously and conveniently positive, finally put unemployment below the crucial 8% mark.

From the Post’s John Crudele:

“The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated. And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it. Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy. And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today. “He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked. The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

‘“It was a phone conversation — I forget the exact words — but it was, ‘Go ahead and fabricate it’ to make it what it was,” Buckmon told me.”

Crudele notes that falsifying jobs figures has more consequences than just misleading voters and giving the President a basis to claim that the economy is improving. He writes, “I hope the next stop will be Congress, since manipulation of data like this not only gives voters the wrong impression of the economy but also leads lawmakers, the Federal Reserve and companies to make uninformed decisions. To cite just one instance, the Fed is targeting the curtailment of its so-called quantitative easing money-printing/bond-buying fiasco to the unemployment rate for which Census provided the false information. So falsifying this would, in essence, have dire consequences for the country.” [UPDATE (11/19)—“A Republican aide told the Washington Examiner the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is digging into the claim, published in the New York Post on Tuesday….”]

That’s not my hope.

I don’t know if this story is accurate or not. The New York Post is hardly…well, let’s see how to best put this…it’s hardly a reliable, trusted news source like the New York Times or the Washington Post were before U.S. journalism lost all credibility, objectivity and trustworthiness. This story could prove false,  but whether it is or not, the Obama Administration will deny it, stonewall it, make sure its media allies keep it isolated to “conservative media” so it can be discredited, just as it did with Benghazi, the IRS efforts to handcuff conservative groups during the campaign, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, and the real source of the problems with the ACA website. Whether this scandal, which would show that the Obama Administration used its various agencies to illicitly, unethically and dishonestly deceive the public to influence the Presidential election, is real or not, there are real scandals, many of them, waiting to be discovered, and still more that are in the process of developing. There is no doubt in my mind about this, just as there was no doubt in my mind a year ago that this wave of dashed hopes, uncovered lies, and desperate survival maneuvers was inevitable. The Obama Presidency is dysfunctional, incompetent, corrupt and rotten to its core, like Golden Dancer, the apocryphal rocking horse that Henry Drummond, the fictional avatar of Clarence Darrow in “Inherit the Wind,”  describes in a famous scene:

“I was seven years old, and a very fine judge of rocking horses. Golden Dancer had a bright red mane, blue eyes, and she was gold all over, with purple spots. When the sun hit her stirrups, she was a dazzling sight to see. But she was a week’s wages for my father. So Golden Dancer and I always had a plate glass window between us. But—let’s see, it wasn’t Christmas; must’ve been my birthday—I woke up in the morning and there was Golden Dancer at the foot of my bed! Ma had skimped on the groceries, and my father’d worked nights for a month. I jumped into the saddle and started to rock— And it broke! It split in two! The wood was rotten, the whole thing was put together with spit and sealing wax! All shine, and no substance! Bert, whenever you see something bright, shining, perfect-seeming—all gold, with purple spots—look behind the paint! And if it’s a lie—show it up for what it really is!”

We may not know for a long time whether Barack Obama, like Presidents Grant and Harding, was a well-meaning, manipulated and deceived dupe, over his head in a big job and too concerned with maintaining appearances to address the chaos and corruption around him, or whether, like Richard Nixon, he was pulling the strings. Whatever the case—and I still lean toward the first scenario—the degree of dysfunction, political ruthlessness and reckless incompetence in this President’s administration is now dangerous. The economy, foreign relations, law enforcement, public trust and the integrity of the Constitution itself are all in a perilous state, and nobody is in charge. There is no management, there is no accountability, there is no transparency—except what is no longer possible to hide—and there is no plan. There are only tactics, attempts at blame-shifting, increasingly desperate race-baiting and hollow, ever-changing promises. This is a 757 flying through a storm with a student pilot—a blind student pilot, perhaps—at the controls. This is the storming  of Utah Beach being led by a Tenderfoot Boy Scout. This is the a team’s batting practice pitcher being sent to the mound in the 9th inning of the final game of the World Series.

The news media, still desperate to cover for the President, made a telling comparison. Its desperate analogy for the Obamacare crash was Bush’s Katrina fiasco, though it only was a valid comparison (recalling Ann Althouse’s  brilliant dismantling of it* ) as Bush’s credibility tipping point, as the ACA roll-out should be Obama’s. Bush, however, quickly fired FEMA’s head for the failure of the post-hurricane relief efforts. Nobody has been fired in the wake of the Obamacare fiasco. This President doesn’t acknowledge accountability, or any other staple of management. That is why, in the three years left of the Golden Dancer Presidency, things will get much, much worse….and I don’t think this country, great as it is, can take the kind of disasters that are likely to occur.

A country needs a leader, not a head huckster whose sole objective is to slide, fake, lie and evade his way to the next election. A nation needs serious, professional, dedicated public servants working under the President and supervised by him, who can be trusted to make their first priority the best interests of all Americans, and not merely holding on to power and genuflecting to core constituencies.

The Republicans can’t fix the Obama Administration in time to avert disaster, if at all. This is something only the Democrats can do, and they have an obligation to do it—as patriots, as public servants, and as Americans–  if they care about the nation as much as they care about winning elections. Mr. Obama needs to clean house, beginning with the White House, and his party needs to stage an intervention to explain it to him, because he is in denial. He needs to kick out the political hacks and hatchet men (and women), and get real, experienced government veterans on board who can provide the leadership and management acumen that he lacks. Bring back Leon Panetta, an honorable and able man. Swallow hard and let Bill Clinton stoke his ego by directing some changes. Heck, give Michelle something real to do.  Clear out the proven incompetents: Holder, Sibelius, Kerry, Hagel, and others who were chosen for dependability and loyalty rather than their ability to get the job done. Seek out bi-partisan help—there are competent, experienced Republicans who would assist, for the good of the country. Bring in Bloomberg, perhaps. Colin Powell.

As for the Republican Congress? Its job is to get out of the way and let this leadership void be addressed as soon as possible. There is no time to waste. The United States of America should not be left drifting in storm-swept seas because of pride, ego, politics or the fear of admitting that the party, the electorate and the nation made a terrible mistake by entrusting our future to the inexperienced and feckless captain with an inspiring personal story, a facile tongue, delusions of grandeur, and little else.

This is what I hope for: that the Democratic Party will accept responsibility for the tyro it inflicted upon us, and accept the painful task of admitting that he is not up to the job, in order to get the U.S. through the next three years. That would be a party I might trust again, some day, to lead the government. If they don’t do this, and I am not so naive as to think it is likely that they will, I fear that by 2016, this great experiment of a nation–“conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”-–will lie in  wreckage, sawdust and betrayed dreams…just like Golden Dancer.

*  Althouse:I can think of a whole bunch of non-parallels: 1. Bush’s political party didn’t design and enact Hurricane Katrina. 2. Bush didn’t have 5 years to craft his response to the hurricane. 3. Bush didn’t have the power to redesign the hurricane as he designed his response to it. 4. The Republican Bush believed he could not simply bully past the Democratic Mayor of New Orleans and the Democratic Governor of Louisiana and impose a federal solution, but the Democrat Obama and his party in Congress aggressively and voluntarily took over an area of policy that might have been left to the states. 5. The media were ready to slam Bush long and hard for everything — making big scandals out of things that, done by Obama, would have been forgotten a week later (what are the Valerie Plame-level screwups of Obama’s?) — but the media have bent over backwards for years to help make Obama look good and to bury or never even uncover all of his lies and misdeeds. 6. If Bush experienced a disaster like the rollout of Obamacare, the NYT wouldn’t use its front page to remind us of something Bill Clinton did that looked bad…..But think about it this way…What if Bush and the Republicans had created the hurricane, and the Democrats adamantly believed it would be better not to have a hurricane? Would the Democrats have been “occasionally cooperative” to Republicans who smugly announced that they won the election and they’ve been wanting this hurricane for 100 years and canceling the hurricane was not an option?

______________________________

Graphic: Drew Lee

39 thoughts on “Patriotism And Citizenship Check Coming For Democrats As The “Golden Dancer” Presidency Nears Its Point Of No Return

  1. Not “Republican Congress”, “Republican House”. As little as it has ever accomplished in the last 5 years, the Dems do still run the Senate.

    And frankly, the Republicans should nothing. Just sit there, vote yes to whatever bills come out of the Senate, and let Dems show how inept they are.

    Actually, I suggest the House pass two bills. The first should be a full repeal of the ACA – it has never had majority support, and I don’t even think it had more support than the opposition to the bill.

    When Reid refuses to vote on that bill, pass a bill forcing full implementation – individual mandate, employer mandate (speaking of which, by the end of next year we get to see a pule of cancelations for that group, too, as those policies become illegal), and the revokation of every. Single. Exemption from the law.

    Let’s see dems wiggle out of that – either this shitpile you had three years to get right and forced through Congress (against the rules, I would add) goes away, or it goes into full effect.

    I’m tired of playing around. Make them put up, or shut up and let adults run shit.

    • Actually, it does…

      The Current Population Survey (CPS), sponsored jointly by the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), is the primary source of labor force statistics for the population of the United States. The CPS is the source of numerous high-profile economic statistics, including the national unemployment rate, and provides data on a wide range of issues relating to employment and earnings. The CPS also collects extensive demographic data that complement and enhance our understanding of labor market conditions in the nation overall, among many different population groups, in the states and in substate areas.

      By manipulating the workforce numbers, you can vastly change the numbers that use workforce participation in their calculation…

      For example, if you use the historic average workforce participation rates (as opposed to the woeful rate we currently have), you end up with unemployment at over 11%…

      So yes, a Census employee could do very interesting things to the resulting BLS numbers…

    • It’s all Chicago machine style politics on the national scale. Corrupt to the core and with one objective in mind.

      Don’t count on the vast majority of Democrats to hold their leader accountable. They believe in what he is trying to achieve and they believe in his vision of America.

      • Except the Chicago machine could actually govern now and then. The smart Democrats know ineptitude, and that it endangers everything. It doesn’t matter what Obama is “trying to do” if he makes everything a mess. Not every Democrat is a Pelosi—that is, a fool.

        • You’re right. I’m amazed at the wave of denunciations by Democats willing to stand up to thier leaders, to put right the shameful performances. DC is full of ‘smart Democrats’ who are railing against the ineptitude and disasterous performance – thank goodness only Pelosi is a Pelosi..

          Sorry. Couldn’t do it.

          Any Dem who does is immediately tarred with the same ‘party of no’ nonsense the Republican party has been hit with again and again. I’m sorry, but you want the opposing party to ‘get out of the way and let this leadership void be addressed as soon as possible.’ There are NONE on the Democrat side willing to risk toppling the house of cards, yet you would have the Republicans stand down to let this imaginary person step forth? The current batch of Dems are way too invested in, if not the actual schemes, then in the quest for a Stepford Utopia

            • That’s because we elected politicians, not statesmen. There are very few true statesmen left in DC now, in fact there haven’t been many since, oh 1992, I’d say. Reagan was a statesman, and so were a lot of the congressional leaders at the time he was in office. Bush the elder was a statesman-lite, he could have done so much more with the fall of the USSR, and, as you correctly pointed out, he had no real plan for a second term. Clinton was no statesman initially, his first two years were an embarassment, and no sooner had he started to grow into the role than his earlier stupidity came back to haunt him and made him look like he was more concerned with chasing ass than governing. Bush the younger found his voice as a statesman with 9/11, but he overreached with Iraq and fumbled his second term. Obama is no statesman and never has been. He has been nothing but a hyper-partisan politician with nothing but contempt for those who disagree with him from the get-go. But, hey, he was slick, he had a good story, he promised hope and change, and he was BLACK, dammit. What could go wrong?

  2. I am somehow reminded of two jokes:-

    – From the 1950s, Roosevelt proved that you can be president for as long as you like, Truman proved that anyone can be president, and Eisenhower proved that you don’t need a president anyway.

    – From the 1970s, what have Washington, Lincoln and Carter got in common? None of them have done much for their country lately.

    • The only way that this country avoids a real crash before 2016 is if the President’s own party stops supporting him. As you corectly point out, Jack, not all Democrats are fools, but the ability to put the long-term interests of the entire country above holding onto power and the perks that come with it is in short supply among them, and the only leader capable of overshadowing Obama now, Clinton, has his own issues, not the least of which is that Obama doesn’t want him around. I’m afraid that your recommendation that he clear out the proven incompetents is nothing but wishful thinking, though it would be the right thing to do, and the idea that he bring Republicans in to help clean up this mess would sound like a foreign language to him (though Bloomberg is now an independent, and Colin Powell already has a reputation as a turncoat).

      Richard Nixon’s overreaching was only stopped because Congress took action when the corrupt and criminal activities could no longer be ignored, but, I would note, the three times presidents have been impeached or close to it (counting Nixon as close to it, since Congress didn’t actually impeach him before he resigned) it’s always been opposite party against opposite party (Andrew Johnson was a Democrat, you probably knew that, but other readers might not). I wonder, if the GOP had been in control of Congress in the early 1970s, would Nixon’s activities simply have been swept under the rug or ignored and he been allowed to finish his term? I have to say they probably would have and he would have, just like this damning litany of incompetence, corruption, and frankly criminal fraud is going to be ignored, because in the end party loyalty on both the political and personal level, and also racial pride on the personal level, trumps all.

      • The main factor is popularity. If Clinton’s poll numbers hadn’t held up, he would have been impeached and convicted, and the GOP was ready to vote Nixon out, as you know. Politically and practically, impeaching Obama is a cure far worse than the disease, even without taking into consideration the Veep. Impeaching the first black President would be a massive morale and reputation killer for the nation—its bad enough that the political Jackie Robinson turned out to be Pumpsie Green (no disrespect, Pumpsie), impeaching his is just too horrible, even more horrible than watching what the next three years will be like. He needs help, and a mature democracy should be able to navigate this problem. Right now, it’s like Woodrow Wilson incapacitated with a stroke, except teh malady is complete and utter leadership shutdown. The Clinton impeachment debacle convinced me that its only worth the trauma if you have a slam-dump crook, or an out-of-control whack job, like the Mayor of Toronto.

        • I’m not sure it would be, but I guess the discussion is academic, since it’s unlikely. That said, Obama’s poll numbers are collapsing like an ice jam in a spring thaw, and I think Clinton COULD set the dogs on him if he wanted. I had to look up Pumpsie Green, not being as well-versed in baseball. That’s what’s good about this blog, learn something new every day.

        • Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m reading this as ‘The president is a disaster at best, a traitor at worst, and we can’t impeach him because that would set a bad precident? It would be a shame if we had to impeach our first black president?’ Didn’t you post a thread just yesterday on the devastation this argument would cause when applied to a court?

          We have one means of correcting a mistake between elections. It’s a huge threat, a nightmare politically – but isn’t the alternative releasing all of DC from accountability?

          • 1. A traitor? I would never call him a traitor. A betrayor of trust is not a traitor, which in a government context is a term of art. I think he’s doing the best he can.
            2.I think impeachment for anything other than slam dunk crimes, like treason, sets a bad precedent, yes. I didn’t believe that once: what Clinton did would get him disbarred, and I think if you are too unethical to practice law, you should be President either. But it can’t be a purely political weapon, and if it isn’t a crime that there can be bipartisan agreement on, then that’s all it is. Since Clinton, there has been talk of impeachment for every President. That’s not healthy.
            3. I don’t think the false accusation issue is a parallel. The problem with impeachment is that there is no clear standard. That makes it ripe for abuse.
            4. The standards for impeachment should be this: If it is virtually certain that he will be convicted, then go ahead. Otherwise, it wastes time, exacerbates division, guarantees retribution, and weakens the office.
            5. Being incompetent should not be a reason for impeachment.
            6. Rigging the election has to be, I agree. If it could be shown that the IRS efforts and the alleged Census fakery was orchestrated with Obama’s knowldege, that’s Watergate. That’s a mandatory impeachment.

  3. If this story turns out to be true, I will have lost all hope and respect for government – not that I had much left. There are certain agencies that are supposed to be immune from politics.

    However, your tune that the liberal press is protecting Obama at all costs is getting more than a little old because it is simply not true – anyone can pick and choose among news stories (especially given the inane 24 hours news cycle) to create any type of bias or conspiracy that you want. For example, while reading this post, I was listening to MSNBC – and its lead story this morning is that Obama’s positive short-term job numbers are rather meaningless given that long term US unemployment numbers are up 213% since 2007. Certainly if they wanted to paint a rosy picture they wouldn’t be covering this story at all, or would be using an earlier date to protect their savior Obama.

    • It IS, true Beth, and MSNBC, the network of Rachel Madcow, aka Wil Wheaton, and the guy who said someone should defecate in Sarah Palin’s mouth, tops the list. If this were the previous President they’d have called for his head long ago. Stop fooling yourself and embarrassing yourself, or I’ll have to sic abblative on you.

      • Yes, Beth, seriously: Bashir says, on te air, in a prepared rant, that someone should shit in Sarah Palin’s mouth, and he gets off by apologizing. Do you think a similar statement about Hillary could be erased with an apology? What does this tell you?

        I’m getting really tired of the fact of liberal bias being dismissed as a paranoid fantasy. I wasn’t looking for it when I started seriously following all the news media and the stories themselves It even took me a while to realize how bad NPR was on that score. But there is no reasonable argument against the facts. The problem is that those on the left can’t see it, because to them leftward bias IS fact.

    • It’s not old if intelligent people keep denying it. If you are seriously arguing that MSNBC, of all places, where the head of the network has admitted that it is intentionally slanted to progressive audiences, then you are really beyond help. Even MSNBC can’t deny everything, but when a paper like the New York Times uses spin like “he mispoke” to explain the President’s IYLYHAPYCKYHCP—P statement, arguing that there’s no left-wing bias in the media is denial, and nothing more.

      The smoking gun was the 2008 election (before that, the media’s bolstering of Clinton during the Lewinsky mess). Slamming Sarah Palin for being “unqualified” when the opposing party’s Presidential candidate was even less experienced, and relentlessly painting her as a dolt when the opposing VP candidate had been an infamous clown act for more than a decade, was unconscionable and indefensible. She was unqualified ANd a dolt, of course, but a non-liberal biased media would have given equal attention to the deficits of the other ticket. The liberal media bias has been thoroughly researched by Pew and others. It may be old, but the extent of it is still not accepted, because–guess!!!

      • Yes. You can cherry pick and find assholes and insane stories on every network – and the assholes and the people who make disgusting comments shouldn’t be on the air. I don’t watch those people – regardless of political bias. Just like your post today criticizing the conservative media re gender stories and issues. I didn’t comment on that because I disagreed with your overall premise re networks and political groups. Individual PEOPLE have agendas. If you want to criticize individuals for agendas, then please do so, just don’t paint with too broad of a brush by including the entire political party or every single person that happens to work at that network. The story I wrote about here (long term unemployment) I mentioned for several reasons: 1) it was timely as I was reading your post on a related issue; 2) it was being aired on what you proclaim to be THE MOST LIBERAL news/opinion network on TV; and 3) even while wearing my progressive crunchy granola rose-colored-glasses, it’s hard to process that story as being anything but highly critical of the Administration and the economy in general. Networks have agendas too of course – and they all have the same one – making money. If I wanted to, I could spend all day just watching liberal TV and reading liberal blogs – pick dozens of stories highly critical of Obama – especially as related to the economy, constitutional rights, and foreign policy – and write a story condemning the liberal media for too harsh a treatment of Obama..

  4. Let’s come to terms with it: There is something seriously wrong with this President. Harding and Grant were over their heads as leaders of the Executive Branch: U.S. Grant was at the very least a great general. Harding for his general stupidity in tolerating corruption around him and gambling addiction was a proponent of civil rights for blacks and did what he could, given his limited intellect, to balance the budget.

    • USG was rated as a great captain (the highest rating) by the late Trevor Dupuy, author of the Encyclopedia of Military History. Unfortunately, the skills needed to lead an army in war are not the same as those needed to lead a nation in peace, and his particular skills didn’t translate well. Harding was elected in (partly justified) general anger over WWI and its aftermath because he promised a return to normalcy, just like Carter was elected in (unfortunately justfiable) anger over Watergate because he promised he’d never lie to the nation, and Obama was elected in (partially justified) anger over Katrina and 2 wars that had become unpopular, because he promised hope and change. It seems that every time this nation votes in anger it gets an incompetent.

        • Fair question, and I think I omitted the 1980 election because I do not remember it as and do not generally read of it being described as a bitter, angry, or attack-driven campaign on the challenger’s side. If anything, Carter tried to attack Reagan as a dangerous right -winger, and failed. We were coming out of the Iran Hostage Crisis, which was bad, but I would argue not as nation-shaking as WWI, Watergate, or the War on Terror. I think the nation knew, with no real need to whip it into anger, that it was headed in the wrong direction and that it had made a mistake in electing Carter who was simply not up to the job.

          • It is possible the nation voted in anger over lines at he gas pump, and the hostage crisis ended because Reagan won the election and was going to order the bombers to take off and head for Iran minutes after he got sworn in…

        • I don’t. The race was neck and neck until the debate, where Reagan came off not as nutty but as measured and in command, and most of all, when Carter, whose sole virtue was his honesty, embarrassed himself with a patently phony homily about asking little Amy about her position on nukes. It was a jaw dropping moment, a head-slapping moment. “No wonder we’re in a mess–this guy is out to lunch!”

          • Thanks Jack, I agree that Carter defeated himself largely with his consulting-Amy story about nukes. At the time, I thought that might have been Carter’s silky way of suggesting that Reagan was a sure bet to take the world to nuclear holocaust. But, I recall that many people around me, many of whom I thought had been avid Carter supporters in 1976, were feeling antsy about the economy. A few of them confided to me that they thought the economy and national security were both in a sad state, such that each was suffering because of the other, and…Carter’s fault. A few others were flat-out angry that more had not been done about the hostages in Iran. Overall, in 1980 I remember voter anger, unlike I had seen before and not again until “Perot’s” 1992.

  5. “Clear out the proven incompetents: Holder, Sibelius, Kerry, Hagel, and others who were chosen for dependability and loyalty rather than their ability to get the job done.”

    Don’t forget Susan Rice, whatever cushy job she has these days.

Leave a Reply to Steve-O-in-NJ Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.