Category Archives: 2012 Election

You Know You Live In A Country Run By Idiots…

Hey if you are an R don’t be standing there patting yourself on the back. There are a whole bunch of R idiots…

You know you live in a country run by idiots…

When smoking Pot is legal and widely accepted

But smoking Tobacco is treated like a criminal offense.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if….

You can get arrested for expired tags on your car but not for being in the country illegally.

You know you live in a country run by idiots if…

Your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more of our money.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

A seven year old boy can be thrown out of school for calling his Teacher “cute”
but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable.

You know you live in a country run by idiots if…

The Supreme Court of the United States can rule that lower courts cannot display the 10 Commandments in their courtroom, while
Sitting in front of a display of the 10 Commandments.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Children are forcibly removed from parents who appropriately discipline them
while children of “underprivileged” drug addicts re left to rot in filth infested cesspools.

You  know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Working class Americans  pay for their own health care (and the  Health care of everyone else) while  unmarried women are free to  Have child after child on the “State’s” dime  while never being held  Responsible for their own choices. —

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Hard work and success are rewarded with higher taxes and Government intrusion, while slothful, lazy behavior is rewarded With EBT cards, WIC checks, Medicaid and subsidized housing, And free cell phones.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

The government’s plan for getting people back to work is to Provide 99 weeks of unemployment checks (to not work).

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Being self-sufficient is considered a threat to the government.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Politicians think that stripping away the amendments to the Constitution is really protecting the rights of the people.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

The rights of the Government come before the rights of the Individual.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Parents believe the State is responsible for providing for their Children.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you “safe”.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if….

You have to have your parents signature to go on a school field Trip but not to get an abortion.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

An 80 year old woman can be stripped searched by the TSA but a Muslim woman in a burka is only subject to having her neck and Head searched.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if…

Using the “N” word is considered “hate speech” but writing and Singing songs about raping women and killing cops is considered “art”.

You know you live in a Country run by idiots  if…

You can write a post like this just by reading the news headlines.

Tread Carefully…Ever So Gently We Eased Our Way Into A Nightmare!

Bob Owens has been on fire lately…read the whole thing. Is it getting this bad, well a lot of people are arming themselves and it ain’t because they are scared of Obama grabbing their guns. Take a look at this other story Bob Owens did on the troubles…

The Second Amendment of the United States was never written to protect hunting or target shooting. It was written by men who had just fought a successful armed revolution against the most advanced military of their day, and who wanted to ensure that future generations would be armed with weapons of contemporary military utility in order to stand against the day that once more, tyrants would attempt to consolidate power and lord over the people as their betters.

Our AR-15s, MAC-90s, SKSs, M1 Garands, Mosin-Nagants, Glocks, Colts, and Springfields are implicitly the kind of firearms our Founders want us to have, along with their standard-capacity magazines of 20-30 rounds.

Jerrold Nadler and his fellow would-be tyrants in federal, state, and local governments fear nothing but an armed citizenry, which is why the Founding Fathers wanted us armed against such men, who would establish a “monopoly on legitimate violence” to enslave us.

Any attempt to take the contemporary arms of military utility our Founders wanted us to have, which includes the standard magazines and clips used in these firearms, is an act of tyranny that the Founders would recognize as an event justifying the use of force to retain our freedoms.

Tread carefully.   via Of tyrants and dangerous old men « Bob Owens.

“I prefer peace. But if trouble must come, let it come in my time, so that my children can live in peace.”

Thomas Paine

What If Our Freedom Is Already An Illusion? Do You Need A Red Pill…Alexis de Tocqueville Wonders!

A chilling prediction from 1835 by Alexis de Tocqueville that we must admit has largely come to pass…our chains are invisible but tighter and more unbreakable than any that might have been dreamed of by any Roman Emperor.  I will ask my children to read this bit in order they might begin the steps back from the cage we have built around ourselves.

While reading this I was, for some reason I don’t understand, struck by the memory of that moment in Matrix when Neo is offered the choice of either the blue pill or the red pill. Is our freedom an illusion?  Hat Tip Chicago Boyz

WHAT SORT OF DESPOTISM DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE TO FEAR

I HAD remarked during my stay in the United States that a democratic state of society, similar to that of the Americans, might offer singular facilities for the establishment of despotism; and I perceived, upon my return to Europe, how much use had already been made, by most of our rulers, of the notions, the sentiments, and the wants created by this same social condition, for the purpose of extending the circle of their power. This led me to think that the nations of Christendom would perhaps eventually undergo some oppression like that which hung over several of the nations of the ancient world. .

A more accurate examination of the subject, and five years of further meditation, have not diminished my fears, but have changed their object.No sovereign ever lived in former ages so absolute or so powerful as to undertake to administer by his own agency, and without the assistance of intermediate powers, all the parts of a great empire; none ever attempted to subject all his subjects indiscriminately to strict uniformity of regulation and personally to tutor and direct every member of the community. The notion of such an undertaking never occurred to the human mind; and if any man had conceived it, the want of information, the imperfection of the administrative system, and, above all, the natural obstacles caused by the inequality of conditions would speedily have checked the execution of so vast a design.

When the Roman emperors were at the height of their power, the different nations of the empire still preserved usages and customs of great diversity; although they were subject to the same monarch, most of the provinces were separately administered; they abounded in powerful and active municipalities; and although the whole government of the empire was centered in the hands of the Emperor alone and he always remained, in case of need, the supreme arbiter in all matters, yet the details of social life and private occupations lay for the most part beyond his control. The emperors possessed, it is true, an immense and unchecked power, which allowed them to gratify all their whimsical tastes and to employ for that purpose the whole strength of the state. They frequently abused that power arbitrarily to deprive their subjects of property or of life; their tyranny was extremely onerous to the few, but it did not reach the many; it was confined to some few main objects and neglected the rest; it was violent, but its range was limited.

It would seem that if despotism were to be established among the democratic nations of our days, it might assume a different character; it would be more extensive and more mild; it would degrade men without tormenting them. I do not question that, in an age of instruction and equality like our own, sovereigns might more easily succeed in collecting all political power into their own hands and might interfere more habitually and decidedly with the circle of private interests than any sovereign of antiquity could ever do. But this same principle of equality which facilitates despotism tempers its rigor. We have seen how the customs of society become more humane and gentle in proportion as men become more equal and alike. When no member of the community has much power or much wealth, tyranny is, as it were, without opportunities and a field of action. As all fortunes are scanty, the passions of men are naturally circumscribed, their imagination limited, their pleasures simple. This universal moderation moderates the sovereign himself and checks within certain limits the inordinate stretch of his desires.

Independently of these reasons, drawn from the nature of the state of society itself, I might add many others arising from causes beyond my subject; but I shall keep within the limits I have laid down.

Democratic governments may become violent and even cruel at certain periods of extreme effervescence or of great danger, but these crises will be rare and brief. When I consider the petty passions of our contemporaries, the mildness of their manners, the extent of their education, the purity of their religion, the gentleness of their morality, their regular and industrious habits, and the restraint which they almost all observe in their vices no less than in their virtues, I have no fear that they will meet with tyrants in their rulers, but rather with guardians.1

I think, then, that the species of oppression by which democratic nations are menaced is unlike anything that ever before existed in the world; our contemporaries will find no prototype of it in their memories. I seek in vain for an expression that will accurately convey the whole of the idea I have formed of it; the old words despotism and tyranny are inappropriate: the thing itself is new, and since I cannot name, I must attempt to define it.

I seek to trace the novel features under which despotism may appear in the world. The first thing that strikes the observation is an innumerable multitude of men, all equal and alike, incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives. Each of them, living apart, is as a stranger to the fate of all the rest; his children and his private friends constitute to him the whole of mankind. As for the rest of his fellow citizens, he is close to them, but he does not see them; he touches them, but he does not feel them; he exists only in himself and for himself alone; and if his kindred still remain to him, he may be said at any rate to have lost his country.

Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living?

Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things;it has predisposed men to endure them and often to look on them as benefits.

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

I have always thought that servitude of the regular, quiet, and gentle kind which I have just described might be combined more easily than is commonly believed with some of the outward forms of freedom, and that it might even establish itself under the wing of the sovereignty of the people.

This bolded bit is striking,,,

Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led, and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain.

By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again. A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience. I do not deny, however, that a constitution of this kind appears to me to be infinitely preferable to one which, after having concentrated all the powers of government, should vest them in the hands of an irresponsible person or body of persons. Of all the forms that democratic despotism could assume, the latter would assuredly be the worst.

When the sovereign is elective, or narrowly watched by a legislature which is really elective and independent, the oppression that he exercises over individuals is sometimes greater, but it is always less degrading; because every man, when he is oppressed and disarmed, may still imagine that, while he yields obedience, it is to himself he yields it, and that it is to one of his own inclinations that all the rest give way. In like manner, I can understand that when the sovereign represents the nation and is dependent upon the people, the rights and the power of which every citizen is deprived serve not only the head of the state, but the state itself; and that private persons derive some return from the sacrifice of their independence which they have made to the public. To create a representation of the people in every centralized country is, therefore, to diminish the evil that extreme centralization may produce, but not to get rid of it.

I admit that, by this means, room is left for the intervention of individuals in the more important affairs; but it is not the less suppressed in the smaller and more privates ones. It must not be forgotten that it is especially dangerous to enslave men in the minor details of life. For my own part, I should be inclined to think freedom less necessary in great things than in little ones, if it were possible to be secure of the one without possessing the other.

No one knows how many regulations there are in the United States. Here is an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal Of dozens of federal agencies contacted by The Wall Street Journal, none could say how many of their regulations were connected to criminal statutes. Legal experts have put this number at anywhere between 10,000 and 300,000. In that WSJ article linked above it describes the nightmare that is enveloping our nation. This bolded bit stands out as being an incredible prophecy of what was to come in the land of the free.

Subjection in minor affairs breaks out every day and is felt by the whole community indiscriminately. It does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to surrender the exercise of their own will. Thus their spirit is gradually broken and their character enervated; whereas that obedience which is exacted on a few important but rare occasions only exhibits servitude at certain intervals and throws the burden of it upon a small number of men. It is in vain to summon a people who have been rendered so dependent on the central power to choose from time to time the representatives of that power; this rare and brief exercise of their free choice, however important it may be, will not prevent them from gradually losing the faculties of thinking, feeling, and acting for themselves, and thus gradually falling below the level of humanity.

I add that they will soon become incapable of exercising the great and only privilege which remains to them. The democratic nations that have introduced freedom into their political constitution at the very time when they were augmenting the despotism of their administrative constitution have been led into strange paradoxes. To manage those minor affairs in which good sense is all that is wanted, the people are held to be unequal to the task; but when the government of the country is at stake, the people are invested with immense powers; they are alternately made the play things of their ruler, and his masters, more than kings and less than men. After having exhausted all the different modes of election without finding one to suit their purpose, they are still amazed and still bent on seeking further; as if the evil they notice did not originate in the constitution of the country far more than in that of the electoral body.

It is indeed difficult to conceive how men who have entirely given up the habit of self-government should succeed in making a proper choice of those by whom they are to be governed; and no one will ever believe that a liberal, wise, and energetic government can spring from the suffrages of a subservient people.2

A constitution republican in its head and ultra-monarchical in all its other parts has always appeared to me to be a short-lived monster. The vices of rulers and the ineptitude of the people would speedily bring about its ruin; and the nation, weary of its representatives and of itself, would create freer institutions or soon return to stretch itself at the feet of a single master.

via Tocqueville: Book I Chapter 1.

The Panetta Doctrine “The Dumbest Shit I Ever Heard!” Sez Delta Operator…But What Does He Know Eh?

Can we choose door number 3!?! Penetta is both a dumbass and a liar…

Leon Penetta is Either a Dumbass or a Liar

The Secretary of Defense, in his most determined way, continues to try to protect the President from the fiasco in Benghazi. So desperate to shield the President he announced what will be forever remembered as the Penetta Doctrine:

“(The) basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on; without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta told Pentagon reporters. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, Gen. Ham, Gen. Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

Of course, in the circles that I ran with, it will be forever labeled “The Dumbest Shit I Ever Heard Doctrine”.

To be fair to Leon, however, his audience for this ridiculous statement was not members of the military and especially not for those in the Special Operations arena who immediately recognized that the entire statement is not a doctrine at all. It is horseshit, nothing more.

via BLACKFIVE: Former Delta Operator on “The Panetta Doctrine” or also known as “The Dumbest Shit I Ever Heard!”.

Three Times Help Was Requested Three Times Help Was Denied…Why Did Obama Want Ambassador Stevens To Die?

Bringing this back to the top because we have more information that is relevent. Take it away Ann Barnhardt:

Posted by Ann Barnhardt – October 26, AD 2012 7:23 PM MST  Let’s quit the chickenshit dancing around here.

The Obama regime has been running guns and BIGTIME armaments and munitions, including MANPADS, which are shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles designed to shoot down commercial jetliners, to the Muslim Brotherhood. This is just Fast-and-Furious except that the people being armed are musloids tasked with reforming the Islamic Caliphate instead of the drug cartels. But it is exactly the same thing. Ghadaffi was overthrown because the Obama regime wanted to use a chaotic, destabilized “wild west” Libya as the doorway to the Caliphate to get the arms in for distribution to Syria, Yemen, Jordan, Egypt and eventually Saudi Arabia. Egypt would have been too risky.

Ambassador Chris Stevens and the CIA were somehow, some way running or heavily involved this armament pipeline.

The Obama regime wanted and “needed” Chris Stevens dead, probably to cover the gun and armament running, so they killed him. Word was sent to the Muslim Brotherhood to attack the Benghazi facility. The Obama regime promised that there would be no retaliation and that a cover story about “slandering the prophet” would be provided. The Muslim Brotherhood wins all around. They get to keep all of the arms and MANPADS supplied by Obama with no whistleblowers AND they get their bullshit sharia law agenda advanced and explicitly ratified by the government of the United States.

Get used to this business of the Oligarch class using the Muslim Brotherhood to do their dirty work for them. This has been the plan all along, and it will only escalate from here.

As I have been saying since 2008, Barack Obama is the explicit enemy of what used to be the First American Republic, and of Western Civilization in general. EXPLICIT ENEMY. As in traitor. As in treason. As in murderer. As in should be arrested as a non-state, non-uniformed enemy belligerent, tried in a military tribunal, and upon conviction be put against a wall and shot by a firing squad, and then have his dead body publicly displayed so that there will be no future doubt or bullshit conspiracy theory crap that the son of a bitch wasn’t executed. No shit.

This Rush Limbaugh audio is chilling…listen to the frustration in this Special Operations caller’s voice.

Shocking to ask why Obama wanted Ambassador Stevens to die, sure but what other conclusion can there be with all the revelations so far? Did Stevens know something that Obama wanted to hide?

Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. Consulate and subsequent attack several hours later was denied by U.S. officials — who also told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11.

Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. Consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.”

Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the Consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The quick reaction force from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the Consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at%

via EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say | Fox News.

FLAMING SKULL AT ACE OF SPADES CIA ORDERED TO STAND DOWN DURING BENGHAZI ATTACK; US SEALs KILLED IN ATTACK DISOBEYED ORDERS IN HEROIC EFFORT TO SAVE STEVENS & SMITH 

Bombshell: Clinton Ordered More Security, Obama Denied Request

Left the title as is because hell how do you improve on that?!?! If this is true the election is over. How can Hillary be arguing against this? If true she will be a very strong runner in 2016 because she got the 3AM call and was prepared to deal with it.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered additional security for the U.S. mission in Benghazi ahead of the terrorist attack but the orders were never carried out, according to “legal counsel” to Clinton who spoke to best-selling author Ed Klein. Those same sources also say former President Bill Clinton has been “urging” his wife to release official State Department documents that prove she called for additional security at the compound in Libya, which would almost certainly result in President Obama losing the election.

Appearing on TheBlazeTV’s “Wilkow!” on Wednesday night, Klein told host Andrew Wilkow that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been having “big fights” for “two or three weeks” about the issue, according to his two sources on Clinton’s legal counsel. While Bill Clinton wishes his wife would “exonerate” herself by releasing the documents that show she wasn’t at fault for the tragic security failure in Libya, the secretary of state refuses to do so because she doesn’t want to be viewed as a traitor to the Democratic party. via Bombshell: Clinton Ordered More Security, Obama Denied Request | World of Newsninja2012.

Bookworm room has more

American Spectator Obama Knew By on hat tip to Steve Schippert over at Threats Watch.
Did ideological soft spot for Sharia keep U.S government from protecting Benghazi consulate?

FOXNEWS is on the story

Wondering About Obama Second Term Agenda? Well Here Is Part Of It – EPA Regulations Put on Hold Until After the Election –

Senator Inhofe just released a report on what will be part of Obama’s  second term agenda! 

New Senate Report Reveals Economic Pain of Obama-EPA Regulations Put on Hold Until After the Election

Puts Spotlight on an Agency that has “Earned a Reputation for Abuse”

Washington, D.C. – Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, today released a new EPW Minority Report entitled, “A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013: Numerous Obama EPA Rules Placed On Hold until after the Election Spell Doom for Jobs and Economic Growth.”

This report enumerates the slew of environmental regulations that the Obama-Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delayed or punted on before the election while President Obama is trying to earn votes; but the Obama-EPA plans to move full speed ahead to implement this agenda if President Obama wins a second term. As this report reveals, these rules taken together will inevitably result in the elimination of millions of American jobs, drive up the price of gas at the pump even more, impose construction bans on local communities, and essentially shut down American oil, natural gas, and coal production.

“President Obama has spent the past year punting on a slew of job-killing EPA regulations that will destroy millions of American jobs and cause energy pri

via .: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :..

Mark Levin Nails What This Election Is About…The Only Thing That Matters Is Defeating Obama!

This…

“This election is not about Mitt Romney, as much as I strongly, strongly support him in this election,” Levin said. “This election is about you. It’s about your children. It’s about the Constitution. It’s about your unalienable rights. We take this election personally. That’s what Charles [Krauthammer] doesn’t get. That’s what George [Will] doesn’t get. I’m not saying this to attack them or be critical of them. I’m saying open your eyes and look. It’s not the Nixon-Kennedy debates. Everything’s on the line, right now.”

via Mark Levin takes issue with George Will, Charles Krauthammer debate analyses | The Daily Caller.

Whatever furthers the goal of getting Obama out of office is good. Whatever doesn’t further the goal of getting Obama out of office is bad.

It Is Getting Sporty In Spain…Got Guns? Got Food? Got Go Bag? Get Ready It Is Coming Here! Looting Supermarkets In Spain

NoisyRoom’s Terresa Hamilton has a fantastic post, being linked by SurvivalBlog, on the looting of supermarkets in Spain. The assaults on the businesses are being led by activists and union members. Take a ride over to NoisyRoom for the videos!

NoisyRoom.net » Blog Archive » Supermarkets being looted in Spain.

Remember kids, be prepared cause what is happening in Spain will happen here eventually.

You Might Be Part Of The Extreme Right Wing If You…

Why is my government so damn sick? What happened to it? When did it go so goddamn dreadfully off the rails? This PDF file, Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970 to 2008 January 31, 2012 written by the Department of Homeland Security should be considered traitorous. Yes I know that is a radical thing to say about our once great government but when we start describing people as terrorists who are fiercely nationalist (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty we have gone seriously off the rails.

Extreme Right-Wing: groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent (for some the threat is from a specific ethnic, racial, or religious group), and believe in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism. Groups may also be fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty, and believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.

So this is where the Department of Homeland Security has gone? We created this monstrosity to defend ourselves from another terrorist attack…did we consider that maybe DHS is a bigger problem than the terrorists themselves? Thanks again President Bush. You gave a Marxist President the tools to enslave us all. We all warned against this very thing. Sure DHS sounded good right after 9/11, but even then very smart people warned us of the possible consequences of a Government entity with this much power. They never realized just how right they would be.

From now on before we agree to create a government bureaucracy the first question we should ask is what is the worst thing that Department could do. If we don’t like the answer then the bureaucracy isn’t the answer to whatever problem we think it will solve.