Hillary on VA

For John, BLUF:  This is a tricky game being played, because it is, in the end, people's lives.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From the computer of Reporter Bradford Richardson, of The Hill, "Clinton:  Veterans Affairs scandal not a ‘widespread’ problem".

Here is the lede plus 4:

Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton says the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) scandal is not as “widespread” of a problem as coverage would indicate.

She said the problem is real, but cautioned that “it’s not been as widespread as it has been made out to be” on MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show” on Friday.

The former first lady blamed Republicans for using the issue as part of an “ideological agenda” and said they want the VA to “fail.”

“Now nobody would believe that from the coverage you see, and the constant berating of the VA that comes from the Republicans, in – in part in pursuit of this ideological agenda that they have,” Clinton said.

“They try to create a downward spiral, don’t fund it to the extent that it needs to be funded, because they want it to fail, so then we can argue for privatization.”

Well, there is the narrative that it is all the fault of the Republicans.  Even Senate Minority Leader Reid is on it, and helping it along.

Senate Democrats blocked a bill to fund the VA earlier this month in order to negotiate a larger budget deal.

Funnily enough, Senator Reid was dismissive of the vote to close debate on the Committee Bill by the whole Senate, saying that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell knew he didn't have the votes, so why bother.  For those who don't understand, it was to put the Democrats on record.

Like the President's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the Democrat Minority vote to not end debate on the VA Bill was to crack open sequestration, the President's plan from a few years ago to control spending.  At the time the Administration thought the Republicans would eventually crack over the constriction of defense spending, and when they didn't it held down all spending.♠

As for the VA, it is truly a mixed bag.  Some get great service, and some don't.  And it isn't based on retired rank.  Rather, it is location.  Some VA offices are better than others.♥

The problem is, if there is not good service Veterans (and their families) suffer, people die prematurely and sometimes the Veterans are on the street, homeless, suffering from PTSD or TBI or other problems picked up while serving our nation.  None of this is good.

Hat tip to Memeorandum.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  But not enough.  Our National Debt is at $18.414 Trillion and growing.
♥  I would like to see the "secret map" to see if it breaks down along the lines of Blue States vs Red States.

New Yorker Sees GOP in Big Trouble

For John, BLUF:  Republicans becoming the incredible shrinking party, or so they say.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Over at The New Yorker, Commentator Steve Coll goes after the Tea Parties, again.  The EMail version of The New Yorker teases this with "The Crackpots Boil Over".  Somewhere in the article Mr Coll writes:

The Tea Party’s anti-intellectualism reflects a longer, deeper decline in the Republican Party’s ability to tolerate a diversity of ideas and public-policy strategies, and to adapt to American multiculturalism.

Ouch!  That really hurts.  On the other hand, I did try to counter this with a blog post back on 17 October.

In summary, this is another article saying the Republican Party is through.  Sort of like Kad Barma's views.  If the GOP is to go away, then it reflects the changes in the electorate and a new party will rise up to take its place.  What will not happen is the Democratic Party dominating American Politics for the next 50 years.  Heck, even back in the 1930s and 40s the Democrats couldn't hold Congress for twenty years.

Here is the penultimate paragraph:

As recently as 2007, when the Bush Administration almost passed a similar bill, it still seemed possible that a modernizing Republican Party might build a formidable political coalition of Latinos, evangelicals, disaffected Catholic Democrats, high-tech entrepreneurs, libertarians, social and educational reformers, and eclectic independents. Instead, as Geoffrey Kabaservice puts it in his history of the Republican decline, “Rule and Ruin,” movement conservatives have “succeeded in silencing, co-opting, repelling, or expelling nearly every competing strain of Republicanism from the party.” Political purges have no logical end point; each newly drawn inner circle of orthodoxy leaves a former respected acolyte suddenly on the outside. That a Tea Party-influenced purification drive now threatens such a loyal opportunist and boardroom favorite as Mitch McConnell seems a marker of the times.

Remember me likening these so called Tea Party Republicans to the Bolsheviks in October of 1917.  If that analogy holds true, now we have the terror.  All real revolutions have a terror phase.

So what is a boy to do?

	Stick with the Party, as presented by the Mass GOP.
	Stick with the Party, but agitate from within for change.
	Join some third party, hoping to grow it into the second party in the Commonwealth, and then the first.
	Join some internal Republican Agitation group (e.g., MARA).
	Dress like a Native American for Halloween and party like it is 1773.
	Just walk away and count on the Independent Voters to keep the Democrats Honest.
	Other, explained in the Comments.
pollcode.com free polls

By the way, the article states the Republicans got nothing for their efforts.  I am not sure that is quite true.  The Sequestration is still there.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Yes, I am taking liberties here.  In the previous post I suggested that they wished to sweep aside the Democrats.  They failed.  Now they are dealing with the clutter of "soft" Republicans.  The real question is, if the Republicans become more like the Democrats, why would anyone vote for them?  The Democrats already have the Democrats, and an invincible ignorance of any alternatives.  Republicans who abhor the Democrats aren't likely to vote Democrat light.  What is a City Committee Chairman to do?

For John, BLUF:  .  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Lawrence Korb,♠ writing , claims "Fox exaggerates".

No, not that Fox, but Ms Christine Fox, the recently departed director of the Pentagon’s office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation.

Christine Fox, the recently departed director of the Pentagon’s office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, is correct that there are no easy ways to identify savings in the defense budget [“Sequester Facts of Life: Stop Pretending Enforced Cuts Won’t Be Harmful,” Commentary, Sept. 16], but her conclusion that the cumulative effect of the Budget Control Act [Sequestration] will be “some combination of a military that is much smaller, much less technologically advanced and much less ready than we have been accustomed to over the last 30 years” is an exaggeration for six reasons.

Mr Korb things she is wrong.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Mr Lawrence Korb is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, Washington, and an Assistant Secretary of Defense from 1981 to 1985.

A View From The Upper Midwest

For John, BLUF:  Congress has to look at more than just going after Syria for use of chemical weapons.  This brings up many more issues for their consideration.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

At the STrib♠ we have an OpEd on President Obama's proposal to dope slap President Assad (around 150 Sea Launched Cruise Missiles) for the apparent use of chemical weapons, which are being characterized as Weapons of Mass Destruction.♥  The author, Mr Andrew Borne, is an accomplished student of military and national security affairs.♦

With so much on the line, President Obama made a wise decision to consult with Congress before launching punitive missile strikes on President Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria. Congressional support for the president’s request to meet limited foreign policy goals of deterrence and disruption of Syria’s WMD capabilities would give important legitimacy to multilateral and legally justified action.

Political leaders have a responsibility to protect the human rights of their people — and the international community acts when individual governments break inviolable standards of conduct.  The civilized world has a strategic interest in enforcing the rules against chemical weapons use.

Yet, even as that debate happens, more global diplomatic and legal action can be taken against Assad, while Congress and the nation can resolve a serious foreign policy resources crisis.

The next right thing for Congress to debate is not only authorization for the use of force, but also resources for what comes next.  In more than a vote of authorization on Syria, Congress should also decide to eliminate the sequester, and to make a commitment to funding U.S.-led diplomatic, development and intelligence operations around the world.

The author makes a nice move to drag Sequestration into the discussion, and not without reason.  While the Administration is trying to pivot our foreign policy toward the Western Pacific, the Levant just keeps dragging us back in.  And, not only is this current crisis pretty open ended, there is likely to be another one just down the road.  While people like Michael Cohen argue that we are safer now, humans have a tendency to up their view of the threat, even as the threat recedes.

But, it all demands we get our financial house in order.

Here is Mr Borene's last paragraph:

The true decision of historic importance Congress needs to make now is not whether to authorize force this month.  It is whether it chooses to begin another military operation on the cheap or to support investment in America’s future foreign policy independence and global leadership.

Let us avoid the "it seemed like a good deal at the time" mentality.  This may seem to be about chemical weapons, but once we move it will also be about "securing the weapons", the Syrian refugees (some 2 million), Israel and the Palestinians and the direction the Middle East will be taking.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  The Star Tribune of Minneapolis-Saint Paul.
♥  When we call chemical weapons "Weapons of Mass Destruction" we are diluting the meaning of the term WMD and we are also confusing categories of weapons.  Used in mass and with skill chemical weapons can kill thousands of unprepared people over time.  On the other hand, even small nuclear weapons can kill ninety thousand people, in a flash.  Biological weapon are their own thing.
♦  Mr Andrew Borene is a former U.S. Marine officer with experience in Iraq.  He is now an attorney, a high-tech executive and an adjunct professor of national security policy at Macalester College, St Paul, Minnesota.  He also serves on the Defense Council of the Truman National Security Project.♣
♣  Not to be confused with the Truman Show.

Future Size Of US Military Forces

For John, BLUF:  Hard decisions need to be taken by Congress regarding the Federal Budget, including the Defense Budget.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

At the web site Breaking Defense we have Mr Colin Clark writing "Fear, Changing Threats Drive SCMR, OpPlans Rewrite; Cut Readiness Dough, Analysts Say".  SCMR, you ask?  Yes, it is pronounced as "scammer", but it stands for Strategic Choices and Management Review, and is an internal Department of Defense Exercise.

An interesting part of the article is this chart, laying out the differences between the inputs of several "Think Tanks" and the current SCMR visions.

Missing from the chart are the current numbers, but it appears real estate was limited.

As for the difference between capacity and capability, we have Secretary of Defense Hagel's words"

between “capacity—measured in the number of Army brigades, Navy ships, Air Force squadrons and Marine battalions—and capability—our ability to modernize weapons systems to maintain our military’s technological edge”

It is the old quality vs quantity argument, with folks often trotting out the quote "Quantity has a quality all of its own", which is attributed to the late Vladimir Lenin.  The flip side of that is Israel against the world, where quality has a quantity all of its own.

If you read the article originally linked to you would not there is the suggestion that when cutting the Department of Defense consideration might be given to cutting back civilian employees of DoD.  There are about 800,000 DoD Civilians and in addition about 775,000 contract workers providing direct services for DoD (as opposed to contractors working in the civilian world on contracts for delivery of products).  These are approximations.  Hard numbers on overall civilian personnel are not that easy to winkle out of DoD using one's web crawler.

We are facing some hard choices in the months ahead.  The US Congress is going to have to make some hard decisions on the Federal Budget and on how we preserve our national defense capabilities.  The Congress is divided on this and so are the civilian pundits.  If you read someone like Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman you might conclude that increasing the Defense Budget and buy more stuff would be the way out of our creeping recession.  On the other hand, others fell we need to get our National Debt under control in order to break back into prosperity.  I don't really see much of a compromise solution that will break the impasse and lead us into the promised land, flowing with milk and honey.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sequestration Beginning to Bite

For John, BLUF:  What Casey Stengel said—"Can't anybody here play this game?"  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Sequestration is starting to hit and, as usual, it is hitting the little folks hardest.  There are reports of low ranking Federal Employees taking out bank loans to cover the pay gap.  And there is the question of getting a second job.

On a recent shuttle run between the Building and the Capitol the driver told me how he had been offered non-government tourism-bus-driving employment during his furlough days, but that he had been told he was not allowed to engage in additional employment on those days.

In a time of legalization of illegal immigration, why would anyone care of the person was moonlighting?

There are impacts elsewhere.  A friend of mine told me that with Sequestration the Department of State Bureau responsible for granting export licenses has extended the wait period from 30 days to 90.  This is going to have an adverse impact on US exports, which impacts other workers, outside of Government.  That impacts the economy.

The question is, is there some compromise between those who wish to run a deficit, to get people back to work, and those who fear big deficits will send us the way of Greece.

I wonder what our delegation on Capitol Hill thinks?  Our two Senators probably say spend.  What about Rep Tsongas?

Regards  —  Cliff

Sequestration Update

For John, BLUF:  While Federal money is being sequestered, the Federal Government is hiring folks.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

One would think the DoD News Clipping Service, The Early Bird,♠ would provide URLs with its articles, but apparently not.  And, now the article itself is behind the paywall of The Washington Times.  I should have acted more quickly when my Brother John forwarded this to me on 28 May.  The subject and subject matter are interesting—"In Time Of Sequesters, Uncle Sam Is Trying To Hire 27,000".

The story sub-heading is "200 openings at bowling alleys".  Actually, I wonder if the bowling alley openings are for non-appropriated funds (NAF) activities.  The pay of NAF employees is governed by Federal Law (Title 10 USC § 1587).  Basically, the bowling alley pin setter is paid from money generated by the bowling alley, plus the commissary and the base exchange.  So, out in Minot, North Dakota, where most of you gentle readers don't wish to spend the next three years,♥ those who are out there pay for the pin setter out of the money they spend around Minot AFB.

The reporter, Mr Luke Rosiak, does give us some examples.  Some hirings make sense, such as:

In Omaha, Neb., alone, Veterans Affairs is looking for 12 nurse anesthetists who would make between $126,000 and $198,000 - an annual salary not out of line in that in-demand field.

Some not so much:

In February, Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, wrote to the Office of Management and Budget to point out that "at the same time the administration is warning sequestration could force laying off or furloughing U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents, Defense civilian employees, or food safety inspectors, the federal government is also soliciting applicants for numerous lower priority jobs."

Mr. Coburn pointed to positions including "a counsel for the Morris K. Udall Scholarship Foundation, salary range from $130,000 to $155,000 per year," as examples of what could be eliminated to allow the required cuts to be as painless as possible.

The interesting thing is that Sequestration is now a fact of life, except for the "balloon payments" at the end of the fiscal year,♦ when bad planning and wishful thinking collide with reality.  How long will that be in the news?  Perhaps not very long.  It may be smothered by other stories or it may become part of a larger meme about the failure of this or that.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  When the Air Force ran the operation the paper, printing on 8 x 10.5 inch paper (which at some point changed to 8.5 x 11 inch paper) was known as "The Yellow Bird", in that the top sheet of the stapled dozen pages, take or give, was yellow.  Then that became environmentally unfriendly.  Do we still worry about yellow paper and recycling?
♥  While the Summers are mild, the mean January Low Temperature is -3.2 degrees fahrenheit.  That is 3 below zero.  If it is the average, there is a suggestion that some days are colder.
♦  The Federal Fiscal Year, which within my lifetime used to end on the last day of June, now ends on the last day of September.  This move was done to make it easier to get out a Federal Budget on Time.  No impact at this end.

Budget Deal Postponed

For John, BLUF:  There is little agreement on Capitol Hill.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

The Washington Post had an article a couple of days ago, by Reporters Lori Montgomery and Zachary A. Goldfarb, which tells us that Federal revenues are up and expenditures are down.  Before you jump up and shout hurrah, there is a downside to this.  The "crisis" has abated and there is likely to be no progress on long term solutions this summer:

That might seem like good news, but it is unraveling Republican plans to force a budget deal before Congress takes its August break.  Instead, the fiscal fight appears certain to bleed into the fall, when policymakers will face another multi-pronged crisis that pairs the need for a higher debt limit and the fresh risk of default with the threat of a full-scale government shutdown, which is also looming Oct. 1.

Ah, the drama of it all.  I would expect that it will be a rerun of the story we read from Reporter Robert Woodward in his book the Price of Politics.

Hat tip to Ann Althouse.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sequestration A Fact of Life?

For John, BLUF:  Sequestration may be around for a while.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

Ezra Klein, over at The Washington Post has this column, "The Democrats have lost on sequestration".  In sum:

It is worth noting how different the Democrats’ approach to sequestration has been to the GOP’s approach to, well, everything.  Over the past five years, Republicans have repeatedly accepted short-term political pain to win the leverage necessary for long-term policy gain.  That’s the governing political principle behind their threats to shut down the government, breach the debt ceiling, and, for that matter, accept sequestration.  Today, Democrats showed they’re not willing to accept even a bit of short-term pain for leverage on sequestration.  They played a game of chicken with the Republicans, and they lost.  Badly.

At this point, it probably makes sense for the White House to push for and accept an expanded version of the Inhofe-Toomey bill giving them some discretion over how the cuts are distributed.  So far, they’ve resisted bills giving them the ability to choose, within sequestration’s broad parameters, how to allocate the cuts.  But that refusal was based on the theory that making sequestration less painful would make it more permanent.  If sequestration is permanent, however, they might as well make it a bit less painful.

Regards  —  Cliff

CNX of NAVY WEEK

For John, BLUF:  Sequestration is about eliminating the fun stuff.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

No point in going to Providence, RI, this year

Navy Office of Community Outreach
News Release
On the web: www.navyoutreach.org
Contact: (901) 874-5800 or navco@navy.mil
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
No. 1-13
April 10, 2013
Navy cancels 2013 Navy Week season
MILLINGTON, Tenn. -- The Navy announced today the cancellation of the 2013 Navy Week season, a decision made necessary by the budget reductions levied by sequestration. 

The 2013 Navy Week season was to include 18 cities:  Savannah, Ga.; Tampa, Fla.; San Antonio; Bossier-Shreveport, La.; Jackson, Miss.; Little Rock, Ark; Rockford, Ill; Indianapolis; Providence, R.I.; Pittsburgh; Minneapolis; Fargo, N.D.; Kansas City, Mo.; Salt Lake City; Oklahoma City; Albuquerque, N.M.; Dallas; and Raleigh, N.C. 

The Navy Week program can best be described by its slogan:  Bringing America’s Navy Home.  With the Navy largely concentrated on both coasts, Navy Weeks are designed to show Americans living throughout the country the investment they have made in their Navy, and its role in preserving the nation’s security and prosperity. 

A typical Navy Week -- around 20 of which are conducted each year -- brings a wide array of sailors and equipment to an American city for one week. These may include the Blue Angels, the Navy Parachute Team (the Leap Frogs), Navy bands, divers, construction units (SEABEES), Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Teams, namesake ship crews, hometown sailors, Navy medical personnel, historical displays and artifacts, interactive displays and simulators, and senior Navy leaders.  Since 2005, 148 Navy Weeks have been conducted in 62 different cities nationwide. 

While the Navy Week season has been called off, the Navy Office of Community Outreach is still coordinating outreach across the country using local personnel and assets where they are available.  For more information, contact (901) 874-5800 ornavco@navy.mil.

Regards  —  Cliff

The Equality of the Law

For John, BLUF:  Anatole France, a French writer, is ironic and skeptical.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

Anatole France

Found in a Richard Cohen paragraph, quoted by Blogger Ann Althouse.

Regards  —  Cliff

Downfall Reconsidered

For John, BLUF:  How would you like to be parodied several times a month?

Please note that the German may not be safe for the office.

Someone sent along a YouTube video that takes a somewhat irreverent view of sequestration and the National War College—"Hitler gets bad news at the National War College".  It is mostly inside humor and is based on the famous "Bunker" clip from the movie Downfall.  This has been attributed to the National War College Class of 2013, who will be leaders in our military and Foreign Service in a few years.

The interesting thing I learned is that the actor who played Adolph Hitler, Mr Bruno Ganz, has done a YouTube video that finally reveals what he thinks of the Downfall parodies.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sequestration and Boots Blesse

For John, BLUF:  Another Great American moves on.

This Washington Post article is about Sequestration, and its impacts, but it mentions the late Frederick C "Boots" Blesse, author of No Guts, No Glory, a short booklet about being a fighter pilot.  The article is "Funeral flyovers squeezed by sequester, but fighter ace ‘Boots’ Blesse gets a final salute", by reporter Michael E. Ruane, and published on 22 March.

(National Museum of the Air Force) - Maj. General Frederick Corbin “Boots” Blesse

From the lede:

The shadows of the fighter jets streaked across Arlington National Cemetery on Friday as mourners laid to rest legendary Air Force general Frederick C. “Boots” Blesse.

Overhead, four gray F-15s roared across a cloudless blue sky, and one pulled out of formation and shot upward, signifying a departed pilot.

It was a majestic salute. But because of “sequestration” budget cuts, Blesse, who died in the fall at 91, might be one of the few getting such an honor this year.

The Air Force has decided that it will no longer do public flyovers at graduations, air shows, sporting events and funerals. That decision went into effect March 1. The Pentagon issued a similar decree for all services, effective April 1.

But the Air Force and the Pentagon allow special consideration for funerals. And Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Larry O. Spencer approved funeral flyovers Friday for Blesse and for Maj. Lucas Gruenther, who was killed in a training crash Jan. 28 and was being buried in Colorado.

Wendy Varhegyi, an Air Force spokeswoman, said the service normally would do flyovers at about 1,000 public events a year.

In addition, it would fly over 100 to 150 funerals a year.

It is worth noting that General Blesse died 31 October of last year and was just buried at Arlington.  This has nothing to do with the Sequestration and everything to do with the scheduling problem faced by the people running Arlington National Cemetery.  This delay is not unusual.  Note that the burial of Major Lucas Gruenther, in Colorado, was much quicker.

I met General Blesse, after he retired.  The then Commander-in-Chief♠ of United States Air Forces in Europe, the late General Charles L Donnelly, Jr, was bringing retired fighter pilots to Europe to talk with the young fighter pilots about how it was in the old days.  I had a short conversation with General Blesse.  He asked and I told him I had been in the 366th Tactical Fighter Wing at Da Nang Air Base in 1966.  He noted he was there in 1967.  He then noted that when he was the Director of Operations for the Wing he instituted the practice of carrying the SUU-16 gun pod in place of the 600 gallon centerline fuel tank on missions escorting bomb dropping aircraft over North Viet-nam, thus making the 366th "The Gunfighters".  The SUU-16 housed the M-61 Vulcan (20 mm "gatling gun" cannon) and 1200 rounds of ammunition, which was fired off at the rate of 6,000 rounds per minute, which was about 12 seconds of firing time.

In my own tactless way I explained that actually that tactic had been developed by then Major Bob Dilger♥, a half a year earlier.  The reason the 366th stopped carrying the SUU-16, with the M-61, into the northern reaches of North Viet-nam was that one of our Aircraft Commanders jettisoned one into Haiphong Harbor when he thought he was running out of gas.  So much for that good idea.  As a bonus point, I said that Major Dilger did get a MiG Kill, scraping one off on the ground during some fancy aerial maneuvering.

And here is the "unofficial" patch for the 366th Wing while it was at Da Nang, flying as the "Gunfighters", which just means that until the arrival of the F-4E, Da Nang was the only F-4 PHANTOM outfit taking guns up into Route Packages V and VI of North Viet-nam.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Up until Donald Rumsfeld became Secretary of Defense we had theater commanders who were "Commanders-in-Chief" and their Service Component Commanders were also stylized as "Commanders-in-Chief".  However, Mr Rumsfeld felt that since the US Constitution designated the President as "Commander-in-Chief" no one else should have the title (in the US), notwithstanding common English usage.  Mr Rumsfeld erred.
♥  From an article in DoD Buzz, back in 2009:  "Col. Robert Dilger (USAF, ret.), an F-4 fighter tactician in Vietnam (187 missions) and then chief air-to-air instructor at the Fighter Weapons School, became A-10 Armament Director in charge of the 30mm cannon, the massive 30mm ammo war reserve production program (reducing its costs by a factor of 8), and the pioneering live fire effectiveness tests of the 30mm against loaded Soviet tanks in formation."

STEM Education and Sequestration

For John, BLUF:  People often use terms when they don't understand what the term means.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

In The [Lowell] Sun on Thursday was an article♠ titled "Mass. schools could take $13.9M hit".  The reporter was Jack Minch of Sentinel and Enterprise.  In the report Mr Glen Shor, Secretary of the Executive Office for Administration and Finance, was quoted as making the following comment:

Those include Title 1 grants for urban and less affluent districts; IDEA grants to help special-needs students; and grants to support STEM subjects such as science, technology, engineering and math, he said.

"STEM subjects such as"?  What other STEM subjects are there, given that STEM stands for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math?

It looks like Mr Shor was either trying to cook the books a little or just doesn't understand STEM.  The alternative theory is that he was handed a piece of paper to read, and thus was undermined by his friends and colleagues.♥

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Remember, articles in The [Lowell] Sun go away after a while, to a different place.  I will not be updating their links unless I am bedridden and have read every book in the house.

♥  Perhaps we could call Ambassador Susan Rice to testify about this sort of thing.

Future Adjectives

For John, BLUF:  First Day, but we have many more to come.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

This being the first day of Sequestration, it is time to look at how bad it will be.  On 23 February there was this article in The [Lowell] Sun, "Deep national-park cuts seen in budget standoff".♠  I blogged about it here.

One of the questions in my blog post was what adjective The Sun would use when the cuts moved past 5%, given that they were using "Deep" for the first traunch of cuts.

To help out the reporters and editors of The [Lowell] Sun I have put together this table from my computer thesaurus:

extending far down	cavernous	yawning
gaping	huge	big
great	extensive	profound
unplumbed	bottomless	immeasurable
fathomless	unfathomable	(rare) chasmic

No need to personally thank me.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Remember, articles in The [Lowell] Sun go away after a while, to a different place.  I will not be updating their links unless I am bedridden and have read every book in the house.

Good Sequestration Impact

For John, BLUF:  Saving Air Force flying hours.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, The Instanpundit, writes:

I WISH OBAMA WOULD DO SOME COST-CUTTING LIKE THIS: CODEL Cutbacks:  Boehner Tells Members They Have to Fly Commercial.  “House Speaker John A. Boehner announced on Wednesday that members will no longer be allowed to travel by military aircraft on Congressional delegation trips.  The Ohio Republican told members that because of the spending cuts mandated by sequestration, he will cut the costs of the taxpayer funded trips by suspending the standard military aircraft and making members fly commercial.”

I’m liking this sequester-thing more and more . . .

Makes sense to me.

Regards  —  Cliff

Woodward to Davis to ...

For John, BLUF:  Pulling back the curtain on Washington press relationships.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

We have all heard about Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward being warned off by the White House.

Now we have former President Bill Clinton Special Counsel Lanny Davis telling WMAL♠ the White House threatened The Washington Times that it would suffer limited access to White House officials and might have its White House credentials revoked.  Clinton Special Counsel?  Must be some DLC thing.

Frankly, when it was just Woodward whinging. others could say that it is just Woodward whinging.  With Lanny Davis coming out, while talking to Breitbart News editor Larry O'Connor, this is in danger of cascading in a bad way.

Hat tip to the Instapundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  WMAL is the Washington Area radio station that wanted to buy the WCAP call sign when Morris Cohen sold the station.

Not Every Problem is from Sequestration

For John, BLUF:  Sometimes the Bureaucracy gets it wrong.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

This is a claim that the Office and Management and Budget (Obama Administration) has listed as a Sequestration impact the National Drug Intelligence Center.♠

The National Drug Intelligence Center went away in 2012, with the loss of 180 jobs.  It was a Congressional vote to save $34 million.  Another sign that Representative John Murtha is gone.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  That would be the old Penn Traffic, where my Father's Step-Father worked as the Credit Manager.

Sequestration Impact

For John, BLUF:  next week is talk.  The week after is action, but the type and magnitude is yet to be determined.

Writing in The Washington Post, Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane, ask, "The big sequester gamble:  How badly will the cuts hurt?"

The sub-headline is "With the ax set to fall on federal spending in five days, the question in Washington is not whether the sequester will hit, but how much it will hurt."

The Wash Post writers have a mythical Ms Emily Holubowich, a Washington health-care lobbyist, state:

The worst-case scenario for us is the sequester hits and nothing bad really happens.  And Republicans say:  See, that wasn’t so bad.

We just don't know what will happen.  It could be like the mine tip collapse at Aberfan—a sudden collapse that engulfs us all.♠  Or, it could be just a small ripple in the economy—big to those directly impacted, but unnoticed by others.

It would appear we are like Admiral Christopher Columbus, sailing into unchartered waters.

On the other hand, the US Congress could pull a rabbit out of the hat and kick this can down the road for another month or so.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Aberfan is just outside Merthyr Tydvil, from where some of my forefathers came.

Deep Concern

For John, BLUF:  If we escalate the rhetoric too fast we will have nothing left to describe what comes next.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

The headline in Saturday's edition of The [Lowell] Sun was "Deep national-park cuts seen in budget standoff". And, of course, the reason we care is, here in Lowell, we have a National Park within the City itself.  People come here for the Museum.  Someone I know from the Florida Keys wrote me this AM, saying:

I've visited Lowell and toured the National Park, which is a meaningful tour and really helps in understanding a number of aspects of the industrial revolution.

There is value in our National Park, as in all our National Parks.

The reality of the cut is 5%.

National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis has asked park superintendents to detail how they'd absorb the 5 percent budgets cuts that could become necessary.

What would The [Lowell] Sun have used for an adjective for a 10% cut, or a 15% cut?  This isn't to downplay the impact of a 5% cut here in Lowell.  People working fewer hours and less money spend on operations and maintenace budgets.  Perhaps hours cut back, or interprutations reduced.  This impacts the viewing public, here to learn about American History.  It also has a ripple effect.  If you workers find their hours reduced they will have less take-home pay and thus they will go out to eat less, or elect not to hire someone to fix this or that in their home.  They may put off buying a new car, which means the man in the showroom will have a thinner wallet.  Maybe one family will cancel their subscription to The Boston Globe and that will be the cancellation that will cause the New York Times Corporation to just shut down the whole operation.  You know, like the butterfly in Jakarta causing a thunder storm in Texas.

There will be consequences.  Further down in the article ...

Most of the Park Service's $2.9 billion budget is for permanent spending such as staff salaries, fuel, utilities and rent payments. Superintendents can use about 10 percent of their budgets on discretionary spending for things ranging from interpretive programs to historic-artifact maintenance to trail repair, and they would lose half of that to the 5 percent cuts.

Is the vocabulary in the newsroom sufficient to run the escalation ladder as cuts continue to come, or have they shot their wad?

Regards  —  Cliff