Tag Archive: Politics


by Ryan McMaken

Recently by Ryan McMaken: Edward Snowden: Master of Realpolitik

Pat Buchanan is again sounding the alarm about how immigration to the United States is leading to “balkanization” and will result in the United States being split into “two countries.”

In an interview with talk radio host Andrea Tantaros, Buchanan complained that new immigrants are not being sufficiently assimilated, and Buchanan and Tantaros agreed that people aren’t being taught the right kind of American history:

“If you indoctrinate or teach kids different views about their country and how it began,” Buchanan said, “what you get is a growing disintegration of the country, a fragmentation into different parts.”

Apparently, Buchanan’s position is that we need to “indoctrinate or teach” kids all the same views about the country and how it began. This should be done in the name of unity.

Buchanan received some support in this thesis of his from Barack Obama last week when Obama complained that different groups in Irish society send their children to different schools:

“If towns remain divided – if Catholics have their schools and buildings, and Protestants have theirs – if we can’t see ourselves in one another, if fear and resentment are allowed to harden, that encourages division.”

In other words, if we’re not all culturally united and believing the same thing. That’s a bad thing.

It’s hard to see a significant difference between Buchanan’s lament about too much variety in instruction producing disunity, and Obama’s condemnation of diverse schooling for encouraging “division.”

This should not surprise us. Pat Buchanan, while he often has many insightful observations about the state of political affairs in the country, is nonetheless a lifelong beltway political operative, politician, and a Nixon acolyte.

This is a man who believes that the modern nation-state should micromanage demographics and cultural affairs, invade foreign countries that don’t do what The U.S. government says, and that the nation-state itself serves a hugely beneficial role in human society. In his 2001 book The Death of the West (which I reviewed here), Buchanan approvingly quotes Jacque Barzun’s claim that the nation-state is “the greatest political creation of the west,” and that most of cultural crises in the Western world today stem from insufficient loyalty to states. Buchanan then goes on to criticize secession and various kinds of political decentralization.

Buchanan points to the 1960s as his benchmark for the high point of American “unity.” Buchanan notes that the 1960s came as a high point for the legitimacy of the American state. Following the New Deal, years of WWII propaganda, and the Cold War, Americans were primed by 1960 to provide the American state with virtually unquestioning allegiance and loyalty. The White Anglo-Saxon Protestant version of history was the only version of history being taught in public schools, and even in most private schools. For middle-class white people, like Pat Buchanan growing up in northern Virginia in the 1950s, it probably did seem like the United States was culturally united.

But even in the 1960s, Americans were not quite as unified as Buchanan imagines. It was during 1960 after all, that Americans were openly debating if a Catholic should be elected president, lest he enthrone the Pope on Capitol Hill. Where was that “one religion in common” Buchanan likes to refer to?

This cultural unity, to the extent that that it did exist in the 1960s, and which Buchanan so fondly remembers, was an aberration in America history, and depended on relentless pro-government propaganda through media, schools, and even religious institutions during the mid-twentieth century. The central government, through the FCC, essentially controlled broadcasting, and through its funding and regulation of educational institutions, created a uniform political ideology among formally-educated people which outlined the acceptable parameters of political debate and ideology.

In the 19th century, before mass media and widespread public schooling and public universities, one’s ideology was shaped by one’s wealth, race, ethnicity, religion and private formal instruction. Regional experiences and local institutions could produce wide variations in what ideologies dominated locally from place to place.

Political institutions by necessity were varied and local in the face of deep ethnic, economic and ideological divisions.

The Golden Age came at last (for people like Buchanan and Obama), when the federal government became skilled at using nation-wide media and public schooling as a means to “teach” the citizenry to be loyal to the local nation-state and to accept its laws, edicts, abuses, and lies. What the people learned in school was then reinforced in the evening news.

Thus Americans began to think that loyalty to the American state was better than loyalty to one’s local government, or community, or family, or religious group. The old divisions were downplayed, eliminated, and ridiculed.

There was no way to fight it, as there was no other easy means of obtaining information outside of the approved channels. Knowledge was controlled by the regulated media and by the approved educational institutions. Everything else was firmly within crackpot territory, according to those with respectable opinions.

Today, however, with the proliferation of homeschooling in all its forms, the web, and the rise of alternative media, the days of “unity” are thankfully coming to an end.

While I’m not one who believes that the internet will by itself cause libertarianism to sweep the globe, it does appear that the variety of information offered by the web and by the home education movement will lead to division and dissent and variety where it has not existed in decades.

Buchanan looks upon this with horror. For the nationalists, widespread unity, uniformity and obedience are to be desired for that is what allows a vast nation-state like the United States to function. The suppression of cultural minorities by the cultural majority, along lines desired by the cultural elites, made the American leviathan state of the 20th and 21st century possible.

The conservative culture warriors who now complain about secularist left-wing control of schools and other cultural institutions are only suffering at the hands of a beast they created. The forces of conservatism created the public schools to teach watered-down American Protestantism, to beat the foreign languages out of students, and to above all, “assimilate.” They got their assimilation machine, but now the shoe is on the other foot, and when we look at the speech codes, and the P.C. wars and propaganda coming out of the public schools, we should all thank the right-wing guardians of American culture who made it all possible.

That age of assimilation, however, whether to right-wing or left wing ideals, is coming to an end. The future is likely to look much different. The future will bring cultural division, and with it, political division, just as Buchanan predicts.

It had always been unnatural for the American central government to hammer into one polity the people of New Mexico and the people of Massachusetts, for example. To tell 300 million people of such diverse origin that they’re all part of one giant nation-state, was always nonsensical except in only the loosest confederation. Centralization made assimilation to a centrally-determined ideal necessary, and by 1960, we got it. And it made Pat Buchanan happy.

The future divisions that come, on the other hand, will simply be a matter of recognizing the cultural, economic, and ideological divisions which had always been there, but had been covered over by state “education.” Immigration will contribute to this, but that factor is by no means the only one.

Unfortunately, there is a great downside to this as well. In the wake of political disintegration, the American nation-state will leave behind a huge government apparatus: the remnants of a federally-funded and militarized police forces, its subsidized agricultural systems, its military bases, and a political culture devoted to seizing power and control whenever possible. The destruction of the family as a central economic institution, and the hobbling of the market itself will all lead to impoverishment and a desire by different and disgruntled groups to control the machinery of power that the centralized nation-state will leave as it recedes.

With this will come conflict, unrest, and violence along economic, ethnic and racial lines. It will just be part of the legacy of the American nation-state which the nationalists still trumpet as our savior.

Buchanan thinks the best thing to do is to keep up the façade; to paper over the deep divisions with flag-waving American history classes for the indoctrination of the young into embracing “unity.”

That’s an idea for an age long past, and the time has come to abandon that failed experiment that is the centralized American state. But, as usual, we’ll be left with cleaning up the messes the state will leave behind.

June 27, 2013

Ryan McMaken [send him mail] is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.

Copyright © 2013 by LewRockwell.com.

The Best of Ryan McMaken


***Please  do not  proceed if  you are  easily  offended  by  political  humor ***



Barack Milhous Obama



Mark Levin Eviscerates The RINO Establishment



Candidate Obama debates President Obama on Government Surveillance

SaveTheFourth Amendment SaveTheFourth Amendment


Republicans On Legitimate Rape – Todd Akin, Paul Ryan (TJDS)

townsquare townsquare


Republican Rep: Todd Akin Was ‘Partly Right’ About ‘Legitimate Rape’!


Published on Jan 11, 2013

Georgia Congressman Phil Gingrey has come out to “half – endorsed” Tod Akin’s rape theory. Making matters somewhat more disturbing is he’s an OB-GYN. Sam responds and plays a classic Gingrey bit from the Break Room Live days with Marc Maron…


Mayor Embarrasses Himself In Interview (Oh My God!)

townsquare townsquare

Mayor Embarrasses Himself In Interview (Oh My God!)
townsquare townsquare

Dumb Elitist Liberal.mpg

StryperTheCat StryperTheCat


Dennis Miller Reflects Upon The ‘Geniuses’ on the Left

welovesarahpalin welovesarahpalin


Dennis Miller: Why Criticizing Obama is Not Racist

Kyle Becker Kyle Becker



Little guidance from Washington and a flood of new nonprofits left the Cincinnati office overwhelmed.


IRS scandal

Ousted IRS acting Commissioner Steven Miller knew trouble was brewing as early as March 2012. Election season was well underway when tea party groups started to complain of IRS harassment over their requests for tax-exempt status. (Andrew Harrer, Bloomberg / May 17, 2013)




WASHINGTON — Steven Miller, the top enforcement official at the Internal Revenue Service, thought he might have trouble on his hands.

Election season was well underway in March 2012 when tea party organizations started to complain angrily of IRS harassment over their requests for tax-exempt status. The media was looking into it. Congress had picked up the scent.

Miller dispatched an advisor to Cincinnati, where a field office handles applications from nonprofits, to figure out what was up. What he learned would blow up into a crisis that would damage the agency’s reputation and lead to his ouster last week.

With little oversight from Washington, agents in Ohio had been singling out some conservative groups for extra scrutiny, seeking to make sure they were not too heavily involved in politics to qualify as tax-exempt.

Worse yet, the agents had sent the organizations letters with numerous intrusive questions, including the groups’ positions on political issues and the names of their donors.

Miller failed to tell Congress what he knew for more than a year, despite repeated queries from House committees. On Friday, at times chagrined and combative as he spoke to House members, Miller called the IRS’ focus on conservative groups “obnoxious” and described what happened as “horrible customer service.”

No evidence yet suggests that the IRS agents in Cincinnati had a political agenda. But ample evidence has emerged in congressional testimony and in an inspector general’s report that they were overwhelmed by an influx of applications from new politically oriented nonprofits. At the same time, they were left to fend for themselves, unsupervised by Washington managers who never created rules on how to evaluate the new groups.

“Cincinnati basically became an island of its own out there,” said Paul Streckfus, a former IRS attorney. He suggested the missteps and clumsy response stemmed from a “hidebound” and insular culture at the IRS. “They don’t trust outsiders,” he said. “They know they’re always under attack, and they have a bunker mentality: ‘If we keep our heads down long enough, we will survive the latest onslaught.'”

The scandal, which appears to have started with one specialist in Cincinnati, was slow-building, born of a dysfunctional bureaucracy and a fateful reorganization years ago that placed more authority in the hands of accountants and lawyers 500 miles from headquarters in Washington.

“In my view, there was a failure of management in D.C. to get their hands around this early enough,” said Marvin Friedlander, who retired in 2009 after 41 years with the IRS. “Cincinnati should have reached out to Washington headquarters people, and Washington should have gotten ahead of the curve.”

The inquiry has put a spotlight on an obscure branch of the IRS, the Tax Exempt/Government Entities Division, which is largely housed in an office building in downtown Cincinnati.

Former employees describe staff in the Cincinnati office as well-intentioned but overworked, struggling to keep up with more than 60,000 applications a year from groups that want to be classified as tax-exempt, such as churches, chambers of commerce, PTAs and advocacy groups.

The applications are reviewed by about 200 people in a “determinations unit,” about 140 of those in Cincinnati. To keep ahead of the flood, former employees say, the staff frequently resorts to shortcuts.

“That office is given direction to move as quickly as possible, but also be accurate,” said Philip Hackney, an assistant law professor at Louisiana State University who worked in the IRS chief counsel’s office from 2006 to 2011. “It’s impossible. They miss a lot of stuff.”

The agency has had to work with a smaller staff — overall, the exempt division has about 860 people, Miller told Congress last year, down nearly 10% from its peak. Once, lawyers from national headquarters regularly compiled briefings on emerging issues and conducted weeklong training sessions in Cincinnati. But those were scrapped in 2004.

In years past, the office had spent little time worrying about so-called social welfare organizations formed under section 501(c)4 of the tax code, instead focusing more attention on charity groups.

But that changed in 2010, after the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United. Political operatives stepped up their use of social welfare groups as vehicles to spend hundreds of millions to shape the outcome of elections — all of it from hidden sources. Social welfare organizations are not required to reveal their donors, unlike political committees.

To qualify, however, such groups cannot have politics as their “primary purpose.” But the rules don’t say how much political activity is too much. That fraught issue was left in the hands of agents with mostly accounting backgrounds who were ill-suited to deal with questions of politics and the 1st Amendment.

In the past, former employees said, similarly tricky situations would have been kicked up to IRS lawyers in Washington. That changed after an IRS reorganization a decade ago.

“The concern was that the lawyers in D.C. had other work to do, and Cincinnati should be able to handle most or all of the cases,” said Friedlander, a former branch chief in the exempt organizations division.


Read Full Article Here




Documents: IRS letters harassing conservative groups came from Washington, DC headquarters and from California offices, despite Inspector General’s focus on Cincinnati employees

  • Tax agency has admitted targeting tea party groups and other conservative organizations for special, politically motivated scrutiny
  • IRS inspector general focused on wrongdoing in Cincinnati, Ohio office and ignored abusive letters coming from other cities
  • MailOnline found letters from IRS’s Washington, D.C. headquarters, and from IRS offices in two southern California cities
  • The American Center on Law and Justice is threatening to sue the IRS if 27 tea party groups aren’t granted tax-exempt statuses by Friday

By David Martosko In Washington

PUBLISHED: 18:27 EST, 15 May 2013 | UPDATED: 18:31 EST, 15 May 2013


Letters from the IRS to tea party-related organizations in Oklahoma City and Albuquerque, New Mexico show that IRS headquarters in Washington, D.C., and two satellite offices in California, were directly involved with sending harassing letters to conservative organizations that sought tax-exempt status.

The IRS has acknowledged only the involvement of its Exempt Organizations office in Cincinnati, Ohio, which typically makes most decisions about granting or denying tax-exempt status to non-profit organizations.

And Wednesday afternoon, CNN cited a congressional source in reporting that the acting IRS Commissioner – whom President Obama fired later in the day – had identified two ‘rogue’ employees, both in Cincinnati, whom he thought were responsible for targeting right-wing organizations with tactics that were not applied to left-wing or non-political groups.

This letterhead from the IRS headquarters in Washington, DC, accompanied a probing letter directed at a tea party group. The IRS Inspector General investigated only similar communications from the agency's Cincinnati officeThis letterhead from the IRS headquarters in Washington, DC, accompanied a probing letter directed at a tea party group. The IRS Inspector General investigated only similar communications from the agency’s Cincinnati office


Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel, American Center for Law and Justice, says his group will sue the IRS if it doesn't grant tax-exempt status to 27 tea party groups by Friday
Lois Lerner

Jay Sekulow (L) says his American Center for Law and Justice will sue the IRS if it doesn’t grant tax-exempt status to 27 tea party groups by Friday. Lois Lerner (R) is a civil servant, not a political appointee, heads the IRS office the handles tax-exempt groups

Steven Miller then the acting IRS Commissioner, described the two employees as being ‘off the reservation,’ according to the CNN source.

Miller, added CNN, had emphasized that the problem was not confined to just two staffers.

Tuesday’s report from the IRS Office of Inspector General, however, focused exclusively on the Cincinnati office.

This IG’s review, according to the report ‘was performed at the EO [Exempt Organizations] function Headquarters office in Washington, D.C., and the Determinations Unit in Cincinnati, Ohio.’

The Washington staffers involved, the IG report continues, were in charge of reviewing materials prepared in Cincinnati. ‘As part of this effort, EO function Headquarters office employees reviewed the additional information request letters prepared by the team of [Cincinnati] specialists,’ the report reads.

IRS El Monte, Calif. office
IRS Laguna Niguel office

IRS offices in the California towns of El Monte and Laguna Niguel sent politically motivated letters to tea party groups, suggesting that the problem reached beyond the Cincinnati office where the IG report focused

One letter, sent to a northern California organization, demanded to know about its links with the Redding (Calif.) Tea Party Patriots. 'Tea party' was one phrase that reportedly triggered a 'Be On The Lookout' noticeOne letter, sent to a northern California organization, demanded to know about its links with the Redding (Calif.) Tea Party Patriots. ‘Tea party’ was one phrase that reportedly triggered a ‘Be On The Lookout’ notice among IRS employees looking for politically conservative applicants for tax-exempt statuses

Nothing in the report describes letters sent by IRS employees in California or the District of Columbia.

Yet an April 21, 2010 letter to the Albuquerque Tea Party organization, containing a preliminary list of 10 questions, came from the IRS’s Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division in Washington, D.C. The group responded on June 10.

Seventeen months passed before the IRS responded on November 16, 2011. That letter, similar in scope and tone to other intrusive IRS letters that have drawn national attention, also came from the Washington, D.C. IRS office. It included an additional 28 questions.

A separate letter came to Patriots Educating Concerned Americans Now (PECAN), a Redding, California conservative group, from an IRS office in the Orange County, California town of Laguna Niguel.

That letter, dated January 31, 2012, asked 55 questions, including a demand for ‘complete copies of the organization’s website that is accessible to members only.’

It also asked a series of pointed questions about PECAN’s relationship to the Redding Tea Party Patriots, an overtly political organization.

Under mounting pressure, President Barack Obama announced Wednesday in the East ROom of the White House that acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller would be stepping downUnder mounting pressure, President Barack Obama announced Wednesday in the East ROom of the White House that acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller would be stepping down

Steven Miller, shown here in a CBS report, is the highest-profile official to resign under pressure from the Obama administrationSteven Miller, shown here in a CBS report, is the highest-profile official to resign under pressure from the Obama administration. Miller informed IRS employees in a face-saving email that he would be leaving weeks from now, ‘as my acting assignment ends in early June’

A third IRS letter to a group called Oklahoma City Patriots In Action, or the OKC PIA Association, came from an IRS office in El Monte, California, an eastern suburb of Los Angeles, on February 9, 2012.

It included 59 questions, including a demand for a list showing the time, date, place and ‘content schedule’ for every ‘public rally or exhibition’ the group had ever conducted.’for or against any public policies, legislations [sic], public officers, political candidates, or like kinds.’

‘Please state whether you provide any advocacy training to your members and to the general public,’ another question read. ‘If yes, describe in detail your advocacy training and provide copies of any publications concerning such training.’

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which represents all three groups, provided MailOnline with a letter from the IRS in Washington, D.C. in which the agency said it still had not decided whether to award the Albuquerque Tea Party tax-exempt status.

That letter was dated April 16, 2013, more than three years since the group filed its initial application.

Jay Sekulow, the ACLJ’s chief counsel, scoffed at the idea of the IRS scapegoating a pair of its Cincinnati employees, given the letters he has seen from offices three time zones apart.

The Tea Party Patriots and other right-wing groups provided a powerful rallying force during the 2010 midterm elections, but were targeted the same year by the IRSThe Tea Party Patriots and other conservative groups provided a powerful rallying force during the 2010 midterm elections. It was around the same time that the Obama administration’s IRS began targeting such groups that applied for tax-exempt nonprofit status


Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. George Russell (L) will testify alongside the now-former acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller before the House Ways and Means Committee on May 17Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. George Russell (L) will testify alongside the now-former acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller before the House Ways and Means Committee on May 17. Also shown is IRS Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement Linda Stiff


Meet Zbigniew Brzezinski, Conspiracy Theorist

James Corbett
The Corbett Report
via  Sott.net
Thu, 07 Feb 2013 15:16 CST

They believe that false flag terror events are used to justify wars of aggression on political enemies. They believe that humanitarian rhetoric is used to mask military aggression, as in Syria. In short, they are realistic observers of world politics, just like Zbigniew Brzezinski. Join us today on The Corbett Report as we hear all about the conspiratorial view of history straight from the horse’s mouth.

Comment: This is the same Zbigniew Brzezinski who personally saw to it that the information contained in Political Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil, Adjusted for Political Purposes, would not see the light of day for another 20 years:


Once the book was completed in 1984 and a suitable translation made into English, he was unable to get it published. The psychology editors told him it was “too political”, and the political editors told him it was “too psychological”. He enlisted the help of his compatriot, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had just previously served as President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser and who initially praised the book and promised to help get the book published. Unfortunately, after some time spent corresponding Brzezinski became silent, responding only to the effect that it was a pity it hadn’t worked out. In Łobaczewski’s words, “he strangled the matter, treacherously”.18

‘Ponerology 101: Lobaczewski and the origins of Political Ponerology’

A particularly useful chink in the conspirators’ armor is knowledge about how they think.

For all his wishful thinking and unflinching self-belief, Brzezinski apparently realized this (well, maybe ‘sensed’ is a more appropriate term) …

They have already figured out what makes us tick. That’s why they deploy ‘shock therapy‘, ‘perception management‘ and ‘limbic warfare‘ against whole populations all the time. This is, after all, what ‘psychological operations’ are all about.

To stand a fighting chance of meeting them on the battlefield of ideas, it is crucial that we arm ourselves with knowledge of what psychopaths are and how psychopathy infects everything.

By Stephen C. Webster
The Raw Story

Doctors and nurses. Photo: Shutterstock.com.

The CEO of Whole Foods said in 2009 that the Affordable Care Act was tantamount to “socialism,” but now he’s changing his tune: It’s not socialism anymore. According to him, it’s “fascism.”

That’s what John Mackey told National Public Radio (NPR) on Wednesday, in an interview aired on “Morning Edition,” seeming not to mind that the two forms of government are largely incompatible and ill-suited for framing the U.S. health care laws.

Mackey had a different take in 2009, when he wrote in The Wall Street Journal that the Affordable Care Act is precisely the kind of “socialism” British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher warned about.

“Technically speaking, it’s more like fascism,” he told NPR on Wednesday. “Socialism is where the government owns the means of production. In fascism, the government doesn’t own the means of production, but they do control it — and that’s what’s happening with our health care programs and these reforms.”

On the flip-side, Mackey added that he’s supportive of the Obama administration’s efforts to reform American’s diets, saying that most in the country “are addicted to sugar, and to fat and to salt.”
Read Full ARticle Here

By Michael,

Many people enjoy debating and discussing personal and political issues. However, in some cases, a debate is less than friendly and can become a source of conflict and stress. Sometimes it seems like “giving in” to agree to disagree and walk away from an argument. However, it can be vital to do that in order to preserve your relationships and protect both your mental and physical health.

Unnecessary fighting and arguing can raise your blood pressure; over time, poor anger management and conflict resolution skills can cause you heart attacks and strokes. In addition, high stress levels can make you more prone to disease in general and can increase your risk of certain types of cancers. For all these reasons, you should learn some simple techniques to help you determine when it’s best to agree to disagree.

Check Your Priorities
If you start getting upset or frustrated during a discussion, take a step back and ask yourself how important the issue is to you. If the discussion is academic or is on a topic that doesn’t really impact your life, then it shouldn’t matter whether your friends or family agree with you or not.

If the topic is one that is important to you for personal reasons, such as the best way to raise children or a discussion about political issues that directly impact your life, ask yourself two additional questions:

1. How likely am I to change the other person’s mind?
2. How important is my relationship with this person?


Read Full Article Here

  Politics, Legislation and Economy


Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health   :  Environmental -Drilling -Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) – Pollution – Poisons in Our Foods – Bioethics -Complacency / Apathy- Depravity- Corruption- Banking/Financial Corruption- Government Overreach– Psy – Ops- Elitist   Privilege


Published on Aug 17, 2012 by

Film: Ethos, 2011
Full Length Documentary Directed By Pete McGain

Published on Aug 11, 2012 by

A British businessman poisoned in a Chinese city. The alleged killer: the wife of a man who was eyeing one of the nine seats at the highest level of political power, the Communist Party politburo. Was this killing connected in any way to political events, and could it, indeed, impact the election of a new generation of Chinese leaders?

SWAT team invades Occupy Seattle home


Published on Jul 12, 2012 by

On Tuesday morning, organizers involvedwith the Occupy Seattle movement woke up to the sounds of flash-bang grenades.The local SWAT team raided the apartment with guns drawn looking forevidence of anarchist material and allegedly were continuing an ongoing investigation of aMay Day riot. Phillip Neel, a political organizer, joins us with more on whathappened that morning.


Donald Trump Explains Obama Care – funny but true

Donald Trump

Here’s what Donald Trump had to say about Obama Care.

Let me get this straight . . . …
We’re going to be “gifted” with a health care Plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don’t,
Which purportedly covers at least ten million more people,
without adding a single new doctor,
but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,
written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it,
passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it,
and signed by a President who smokes,
with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes,
for which we’ll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect,
by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare,
all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese,
and financed by a country that’s broke!!!!!
What the hell could possibly go wrong?