The Time For Debate is Over!

The battle has raged back and forth for years. Advocates for each side digging in their heals at the line of demarcation, each calling the other uneducated, one side elitist, the other side backwoods. But now we know, and the time for debate is over.

The GIF image format has been with us now since 1987, and remains to this day the most common graphical element in the Internet age. In 1996, this disturbing little gem made the big time:


Yet as innovative as the technology has been, professionals and amateurs alike have come to blows over the simplest of issues: how do you pronounce GIF? Is it hard-G (as in "get"), or soft-G (as in "Gemini")?

Now we know, and the facts are indisputable. By the authority invested in the creator of the GIF format (emphasis mine):

Since retiring in 2001, Mr. Wilhite has led a quieter existence than his creation. He goes on RV trips. He built a house in the country with a lot of lawn to mow. He dabbles in color photography and Java programming. He uses e-mail and Facebook to keep up with family.

He is proud of the GIF, but remains annoyed that there is still any debate over the pronunciation of the format.

“The Oxford English Dictionary accepts both pronunciations,” Mr. Wilhite said. “They are wrong. It is a soft ‘G,’ pronounced ‘jif.’ End of story.”

And that's the way it should be.

Comic Relief: The Government Can

For today, how about a little levity on an all-too-serious subject. I know some of you few don't like my preoccupation with socio-politics, but it is what it is.

So here's a Tim Hawkins special from 2009 that I somehow missed. Tim Hawkins is quite funny, and I suggest you peruse YouTube for more of his comedic routines. Enjoy!

Berries on a Weed

Oh, where to begin? Scandal mania has hit Washington, and if the people elect to turn a blind eye now, then such is their folly. What's happening in our government to allow Benghazi debacle, the IRS targeting conservatives, the seizing of personal communications from the Associated Press, and the selective waiving of fees by the EPA based on political persuasion? Incompetence? If so, then why haven't people been fired or forced to resign? No one is being held accountable, no one is accepting responsibility - all are pointing fingers, obfuscating, and hoping it will all just go away before anyone really starts to pay attention. You thought trust in government was low before. What happens to America when all trust breaks down between the government and its citizens? Nothing good.

Benghazi: I've talked about this one a lot. This one comes closest to touching the White House, and at least the State Department. But don't worry, "there's no there, there."

EPA: You probably haven't heard of this one, but it's out there. Apparently the EPA is playing favorites when it comes to who has to pay for requests for information. Perhaps not a major scandal, but the appearance of selective or disparate treatment is worth investigating further.

DOJ and Associated Press: This one is just strange. On the surface, the fact that DOJ may have been trying to identify sources of leaks of classified information isn't inherently bad, but the manner in which they "seized" this information from a press very friendly to this administration is just bizarre. One thing for sure, the press didn't like it, and ticking off the press cannot be a positive development for this administration. The DOJ has been over-politicized, and gives the appearance of being just that - an enforcer for partisan politics rather than just law and order.

>> Daily Mail: Eric Holder points finger at his DEPUTY who secretly obtained journalist's phone records

>> NPR: Holder Isn't Sure How Often Reporters' Records Are Seized

IRS: This is the big one, or at least, the one that will suck all the oxygen from the room, because the IRS is everyone's favorite whipping boy. Bottom line, the IRS has admitted to targeting conservative groups purely on the basis of their political persuasion. IRS officials have been caught in lies, but so far, no heads have rolled. The administration is rushing to blame it on incompetence and mismanagement, but in my view the problem is too far reaching and too systemic, for too many years to be anything but intentional. We might be talking Nixon-level stuff here. If not authorized by the administration or its handlers, this activity certainly wasn't frowned upon, and was likely encouraged. Oh, and just to make you feel better, the IRS is in charge of enforcing Obamacare. We can all expect to be answering a lot of IRS questions in the next few years. Don't skip these links. You need to know what's going on.

>> Politico: The IRS wants YOU — to share everything

>> Washington Post: Inspector general says ineffective management at IRS allowed agents to target tea party groups

>> USA Today>: IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo

>> Daily Mail: Document: IRS ordered conservative educational group to turn over a list of high school and college students it trained

Remember which branch of government is responsible for running the State Department, the EPA, the IRS and the Department of Justice. It's the executive branch. All of this, ALL of this, the president has to answer for, because it is under his purview, his appointees. It is a reflection on his executive abilities. The bureaucracy has its own culture, to be sure, but you have to ask what kind of culture is being encouraged under this administration? I don't like asking such questions, and I don't like pointing out such things, but it is becoming painfully obvious that the so-called "politics of personal destruction" has been taken to a whole new level. If your right to freedom of expression and association falls victim to the heavy hand of government, your freedom is abridged, and the seeds of tyranny are sowed.

All of these stories, individually, are just berries on a weed. Each terrible and frightening in their own right, but not surprising. Why? Because the real scandal here is the accelerating unhinging of our political culture from any established norms required to maintain America's traditional social compact between the citizens and their government. When rules are optional to those in power, when accountability isn't even in the vocabulary, systemic abuses will follow.

Ingest too many of these berries, and you're bound to get a stomach ache. Indeed, it will poison your outlook, and leave you increasingly cynical. The ideal of America is not at fault - its practitioners are, and for that, we are all responsible.

The oligarchy of the bureaucracy, the press and the government are all fighting each other now. This may yet blow over and get swept under the rug again. Such to our peril. But I don't know. Maybe eyes will open this time, and people will see what we have created, and change course.

In the mean time, however, the feudal lords are fighting. Peasants beware.

Benghazi Breakthrough?

Well, maybe. I have made no secret on this blog of my feelings about Benghazi. What happened last September 11, the weeks and months leading up to that day, the months and months of obfuscation by all the major players, is nothing but a despicable travesty of the truth, of right and wrong.

I had all but given up on the story. The vaunted press, whose cause célèbre to shine the light on government has so clearly taken a backseat to an almost propagandizing patronage, has undeniably turned its back - for now - on its cherished Watergate heritage. Whereas then the press successfully exposed a government cover up, its modern progeny is working feverishly to assist in the effort to make Benghazi "go away." Today, however, there are signs, albeit small ones, that maybe - just maybe - the country might actually hear actual news reports and testimony about that horrible night. And maybe, they'll start asking questions.

This week, high level State Department whistleblowers testified at a House Committee hearing. These aren't some low-level lackeys, either. One is Mr. Greg Hicks - the deputy to the late Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who was killed that night in the attack. Another is Mr. Mark Thompson, in charge of the Foreign Emergency Support Team who had direct knowledge of the alleged orders to "stand down" and not deploy a rescue force. Finally, there is Eric Nordstrom, assigned to head up Benghazi security, whose requests for enhanced security support for the consulate was repeatedly denied in the months leading to the attack.

If you go looking for balance in the American newspapers, you're not likely to find anything but an effort to paint these hearings as a Republican effort to beat a dead horse in the faint hopes of damaging Hilary Clinton's presidential prospects. The bile just drips from their words, dismissive and derogatory. Politics always matters, yes. But so does the truth, at least in the world I want to believe in. You'll have better luck gleaning information from UK papers, if you can believe that. But what is more interesting is that the big three networks - ABC, CBS and NBC - may be showing small signs of actually covering the story if not objectively, more objectively than their newsprint counterparts. Consider:

CBS: Diplomat: U.S. Special Forces told "you can't go" to Benghazi during attacks

NBC: NBC's Lisa Meyers: Benghazi Hearing "Reopens" Case Against Hillary Clinton See also: Democrats Actively Working to Undermine Testimony of Benghazi Whistleblower

ABC: Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference

Go to the ABC link. Read the article, watch the video at the top of the page. Get informed. Will these questions lead to investigations, in turn leading to revelation of the truth? That remains to be seen. Careers should end over this, but unfortunately, the audacity of our present oligarchy and their loyal subjects in the press will do everything possible to avoid that outcome, honor and rightful shame be damned. But for the moment, kudos to ABC for the actual practice of investigative journalism.

Finally, though normally I wouldn't point to a political ad like this, this is just politically brutal, but it would have resonated if it had aired (which it did not).

Truth matters. And if an "objective" news source ever says a story "doesn't matter", question their objectivity. As the Wall Street Journal says, let the chips fall.

Update: I finally get a blog post out on this, and suddenly there's new and interesting developments. Not that we get to hear about it of course. Why? Because the White House decided to hold an off-the-record meeting with select journalists to provide "deep background" on the latest Benghazi developments. Why off the record? Probably because they don't want any names recorded with their quotes. More stories with anonymous sources to come. So, either the adminstration is providing the press a new set of talking points to push, or somebody's about to get thrown under the bus. Either way, it reeks of collusion. (Pardon me while I adjust my tin foil hat). Maybe it's nothing big, but one thing for sure - it sure is strange.

Channeling Joseph Heller

One of the most entertaining books I read in high school was Joseph Heller's Catch-22. In fact, I need to make time to re-read it, as it is a veritable quote machine. I find myself in the need to channel Mr. Heller now, if what follows proves to be true.

According to this report by Breitbart.com, DoD is clamping down on the free exercise of religious faith in the military (emphasis mine):

The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: "Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense...Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis...”. The statement, released to Fox News, follows a Breitbart News report on Obama administration Pentagon appointees meeting with anti-Christian extremist Mikey Weinstein to develop court-martial procedures to punish Christians in the military who express or share their faith.

Of course, it depends somewhat on what they mean by "proselytization," as pointed out by retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin in this Foxnews.com video. But one has to wonder about Chaplains, and others who offer support of a religious nature.

I'll wait and see what form this takes, but the Pentagon statement that Fox News says was released to them seems to undermine the idea that this is just some imprecise wording of an inconsequential policy adjustment. I wish I could see the whole statement without the ellipses, but I haven't been able to find it yet.

All I can do now is channel Joseph Heller: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you." Indeed, "insanity is contagious."

Heaven help us.

More, submitted without comment.