A Government "In Drag"

Our government might be a drag, but a least they don't do drag:

Why Did Burma's Leader Appear on TV in Women's Clothes?

General Than Shwe of Burma, the dour and taciturn leader of one of the world's most repressive military regimes, isn't known for his feminine side. His contempt for pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi is rooted in part, most Burma analysts say, to the fact that she is a woman.

And so many Burmese were baffled earlier this month when Than Shwe and other top generals, appearing at a nationally televised ceremony, shed their dress uniforms for the Burmese equivalent of women's dresses. "I don't understand why the generals were wearing women's [sarongs] but they looked very weird," said a Rangoon mechanic, Myint Oo. Others put a more sinister spin on the generals' sartorial selection. "It's yadaya," said a Rangoon-based astrologer who asked not to be named, referring to Burma's particular brand of black magic.

Burma has had three rulers during the past half-century and all have been devotees of yadaya. Gen. Ne Win, who ruled from 1962 to 1988 reportedly shot his own reflection in a mirror, on the advice of a fortune teller, to foil a foretold assassination attempt. His obsession with numerology led him to demonetize all bank notes in 1987 so new notes could be printed - all divisible by his lucky number nine. The move wiped out the savings of most Burmese and contributed to an uprising one year later. His successor, Gen. Saw Muang, was replaced after erratic behavior that included a rambling, semi-coherent nationally televised speech brimming with references to magic and astrology. The man who replaced him, Than Shwe, is reported to have seven personal astrologers, several of whom are tasked with focusing solely on Aung San Suu Kyi, according to his biographer Ben Rogers.

[...]

According to Wai Moe, a journalist with the Irrawaddy, an online magazine run by Burmese exiles, two interpretations of the the general sporting a ladies' sarong have gained the most currency. The first is that astrologers have predicted a woman will rule Burma, and so by donning women's clothes, Than Shwe and the other generals are attempting to fulfill the prophecy through some superstitious sleight of hand. The second, fuzzier interpretation, is that by dressing in women's clothing, the generals are somehow trying to neutralize Suu Kyi's power. After Than Shwe brutally suppressed an uprising led by Burmese monks in 2007, anti-regime activists launched a campaign asking people to send women's underwear to the leader because they said the generals believe that contact with women's underwear will sap their power. By wearing sarongs, they may believe they are cancelling out Suu Kyi's ability to sap what they view as the virile male power that underpins their leadership. [...]

Gosh. No matter how fed up I get with our government, it's good to be reminded that you don't have to to look very far to find something worse. Even if it's superstitious men in drag:



Than Shwe Skirts the Issue

The sight of junta supremo Snr-Gen Than Shwe and his close aides on national TV dressed in women's longyis at a state dinner in Naypyidaw has become the talk of the town in Burma and the brunt of many an unkind joke.

Marking the 64th anniversary of Union Day on Feb. 12 in Naypyidaw, 78-year-old Than Shwe appeared at the event accompanied by other top military brass, including: junta No.2 Vice Snr-Gen Maung Aye; No.3, the new Lower House speaker ex-Gen Shwe Mann; Prime Minister and President-in-waiting ex Gen Thein Sein; No. 4 ex-Gen Tin Aung Myint Oo who is vice-president-in-waiting; and No. 5 ex Lt-Gen Tin Aye.

All appeared on state TV on Feb. 12 wearing gongbong (traditional Burman headscarves), and acheik (colorful sarongs worn by women at weddings and formal occasions).

“When I saw the ruling generals in acheik on the news and in the papers, I was somewhat intrigued as to why they were dressed as women,” said a 22-year-old female engineering student in Rangoon. “I have one—the same style and colors as the longyi worn by Than Shwe.”

In footage of the ceremony, Than Shwe greeted women members of parliament. All the officials in the scene wore the same ceremonial dress, although in a variety of colors. However, a general staff officer from the War Office, Brig-Gen Soe Shein, several male MPs and the retinue's bodyguards are shown in traditional male attire.

[...]

“They [the generals] know and must know that these acheik were designed for women,” said a senior journalist in Rangoon. “But they wore them nevertheless. We all know this is yadaya to counter the influence of The Lady [Aung San Suu Kyi] and to reverse her karma.”

Many fortunetellers have predicted that a woman will rule Burma one day, and so the generals’ fortune-tellers have advised them to dress as women, he added.

Or ironically, perhaps the people of Burma will now choose a woman ruler, 'cause they figure if they have to look at a leader in a dress, they may as well have a leader that looks good in one.
     

Today's Neosocialists, and their methods

Marx Would Be Impressed

[...] Today's neosocialists are smarter than their ancestors. Instead of outright takeovers, they are achieving much the same goal through rigid regulations. ObamaCare is a prime example. Health insurers will eventually be private in name only, as the details of their policies will be dictated by governmental decrees. About the only thing companies will have any autonomy over--perhaps--will be their corporate logo.

Entitlements go hand in hand with sweeping, overbearing regulations. President Obama wants higher education in this country to be free of charge, which is why his Administration is pushing for a government takeover of student lending. With such powers it will be but a wee stretch to intrude even further into the governance of the nation's colleges and universities--including, ultimately, admissions.

Senator Chris Dodd's (D--Conn.) recently unveiled package of financial regulatory reforms is a neosocialist's dream. It is also destructively stupid. The bill doesn't address the key causes of the recent economic crisis: the Fed's too loose monetary policy, the behavior of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in buying or guaranteeing almost $1.5 trillion in junk mortgages and the failure to properly regulate credit default swaps and other derivatives.

Dodd's punting on swaps is astonishing. Years ago Washington should have mandated that such instruments go through clearinghouses so there'd be full transparency and proper margin requirements. After all, classic derivatives such as soybeans and currency futures have had margin requirements and clearing mechanisms.

In the name of fighting Washington's too-big-to-fail doctrine for major financial institutions, Dodd's bill is a de facto institutionalization of them. Financial outfits that are deemed a threat to financial stability will actually be protected by the government. The bill establishes a $50 billion fund to deal with big failures, but the fact that such a fund exists tells the market that when trouble comes big banks will be saved. Thus these biggies, like Fannie and Freddie, will have lower costs of borrowing--debt is by far the biggest component of their capital--which will put their smaller competition at a crippling disadvantage. [...]

In a recent post I addressed how Fannie and Freddie are being protected while their competitors, who have already paid back money, are being unfairly penalized.

And where is this all leading us? The Big get Bigger, the small disappear:

Moreover, the bill doesn't address the problem small businesses have with the current credit system. Bank examiners are applying a mark-to-market mentality in evaluating bank loans. This is an unfair bias toward bigger-sized borrowers and, of course, the debt-hungry U.S. government. Thus the paradox of today: bargain-basement rates of interest for larger firms and higher costs--or no credit at all--for smaller borrowers.

With favored access to low-cost debt the big will get bigger--and they will be beholden to Washington.

Dodd's scheme would create a new regulatory bureaucracy, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), with sweeping powers for itself (and the Fed). Chief among its tasks would be assessing risk of banks and their products and activities, yet Washington has demonstrated that it is incapable of judging risk. Washington would have vast sway over the operations of the U.S. financial system. In this new world banks would have to get permission from Washington for any innovation. If an institution incurred Washington's displeasure, bureaucrats could order divestitures of businesses or could even put a firm out of business. [...]

Read the whole thing for more details. Government is creating the problems, not solving them.
     

Monday Funnies: 23 Quotes About Government

These are from a recent email:

Wise Sayings: Government

1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one
useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more
is a Congress. -- John Adams

2. If you don't read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if
you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. -- Mark Twain

3. Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member
of Congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain

4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into
prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to
lift himself up by the handle. -- Winston Churchill

5. A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always
depend on the support of Paul. -- George Bernard Shaw

6. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow
man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money.
-- G. Gordon Liddy

7. Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a
sheep voting on what to have for dinner. -- James Bovard

8. Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from
poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.
-- Douglas Casey

9. Giving money and power to government is like giving
whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. -- P.J. O'Rourke

10. Government is the great fiction, through which everybody
endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.
--Frederic Bastiat

11. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a
few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving,
regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. -- Ronald Reagan

12. I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and
report the facts. -- Will Rogers

13. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until
you see what it costs when it's free. -- P.J. O'Rourke

14. In general, the art of government consists of taking as
much money as possible from one party of the citizens to
give to the other. -- Voltaire

15. Just because you do not take an interest in politics
doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.
--Pericles (430 B.C.)

16. No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the
legislature is in session. -- Mark Twain

17. Talk is cheap... except when Congress does it. --Anonymous

18. The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a
happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.
-- Ronald Reagan

19. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing
of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the
equal sharing of misery.-- Winston Churchill

20. The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist
is that the taxidermist leaves the skin. -- Mark Twain

21. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of
folly is to fill the world with fools. -- Herbert Spencer

22. There is no distinctly native American criminal class...
save Congress. -- Mark Twain

23. A government big enough to give you everything you want,
is strong enough to take everything you have. -- Gerald Ford

With some of these, I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
     

"Reality Check" for USA is long overdue

Whether it's passing failing students through the education system and letting them graduate, uneducated and unemployable, or bailing out failing auto industries instead of letting them be replaced with non-failing ones, it's the same thing. Postponing reality only makes your reality check much harsher when it finally, unavoidably arrives.

Postponing Reality

Some of us were raised to believe that reality is inescapable. But that just shows how far behind the times we are. Today, reality is optional. At the very least, it can be postponed.

Kids in school are not learning? Not a problem. Just promote them on to the next grade anyway. Call it "compassion," so as not to hurt their "self-esteem."

Can't meet college admissions standards after they graduate from high school? Denounce those standards as just arbitrary barriers to favor the privileged, and demand that exceptions be made.

Can't do math or science after they are in college? Denounce those courses for their rigidity and insensitivity, and create softer courses that the students can pass to get their degrees.

Once they are out in the real world, people with diplomas and degrees-- but with no real education-- can hit a wall. But by then the day of reckoning has been postponed for 15 or more years. Of course, the reckoning itself can last the rest of their lives.

The current bailout extravaganza is applying the postponement of reality democratically-- to the rich as well as the poor, to the irresponsible as well as to the responsible, to the inefficient as well as to the efficient. It is a triumph of the non-judgmental philosophy that we have heard so much about in high-toned circles.

[...]

Detroit and Michigan have followed classic liberal policies of treating businesses as prey, rather than as assets. They have helped kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. So have the unions. So have managements that have gone along to get along.

Toyota, Honda and other foreign automakers are not heading for Detroit, even though there are lots of experienced automobile workers there. They are avoiding the rust belts and the policies that have made those places rust belts. [...]

It's worth reading the whole thing. Thomas makes an interesting comparison with the horse and buggy industry, and the businesses supporting horses and horse-transportation, that were displaced by the automobile. There were no bail-outs or stimulus packages for them. Somehow, everyone adapted without a diaper-changing government spending tax dollars to keep dying industries going.

People have no respect for "easy" money that they don't earn. Government has no respect for our money, because they don't earn it. The government doesn't need to reform the auto industry (the free market is doing that), the Government itself needs to be reformed. From the WSJ:

Let's 'Restructure' Washington While We're at It
Congress is at least as unresponsive to consumer demand as Detroit.

Congress has been suitably tough in its advice to Detroit, calling for "a complete restructuring" of our failing auto makers. But how about restructuring Washington? The federal government is a giant Rube Goldberg machine that not only wastes hundreds of billions of dollars each year but also burdens local governments and the private sector with legal requirements that no longer serve the public good. Congress should take its own advice and retool Washington. Here's how:

[...]

- Streamline management. The federal government employs about 2.5 million civilians (including the Post Office), about 10 times the number directly employed in the U.S. by Detroit. The bloat is legendary. In his study on "thickening government," NYU Prof. Paul Light found that some government agencies have 32 layers of management, compared to five layers in most well-run companies.

Civil-service rules make hiring an ordeal and firing practically impossible. Rigid job classifications are far more onerous than UAW work rules, guaranteeing massive inefficiency. At many federal agencies, people shuffle back and forth, passing paper from one level to the next, doing nothing useful. Civil service needs to be overhauled.

- Make products that the public wants. Congress is in the business of making and revising laws. But it almost never goes back and reviews unintended consequences. Pick up any volume of the U.S. Code and ask yourself whether the detailed provisions of that law make sense today.

Take something relatively innocuous, like the requirement in the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act to maintain the privacy of patient information. One effect is lots of forms -- over $1 billion worth annually. Compliance also stifles important activity: For example, research on heart-attack recovery at the University of Michigan slowed to a crawl when only one-third of the sample bothered to complete the necessary HIPAA paperwork.

- Enhance competitiveness. Washington's failures are far more significant to the economy than Detroit's. The federal government not only is over seven times larger than Detroit in annual expenditures but it also establishes the legal platform on which the entire U.S. economy operates. The legal infrastructure that Congress has provided is a huge, internally inconsistent mess, requiring businesses, hospitals and schools to negotiate a maze of legal detours. Day-to-day, teachers, doctors, business managers and government officials are unable to make sense of ordinary choices. Law has effectively removed the freedom needed to take responsibility. [...]

There's more suggestions, with examples, it's worth reading the whole thing. One thing they mentioned that I didn't excerpt was farm subsidies. They may well be worth reforming, but I'd be VERY careful about cutting or reforming funding to something as essential as our food supply. But the rest is an excellent comparison of our government to the failing automakers. They suffer from the same problems. Both are strangling from bureaucrats, unions and needless paperwork. In both cases, major reforms are needed.
     

Here it comes; The Cow Fart Tax

Proposed fee on smelly cows, hogs angers farmers

MONTGOMERY, Ala. – For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start costing them money if a federal proposal to charge fees for air-polluting animals becomes law.

Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which is one of several put forward by the Environmental Protection Agency after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases emitted by belching and flatulence amounts to air pollution.

"This is one of the most ridiculous things the federal government has tried to do," said Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, an outspoken opponent of the proposal.

It would require farms or ranches with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle or 200 hogs to pay an annual fee of about $175 for each dairy cow, $87.50 per head of beef cattle and $20 for each hog.

The executive vice president of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Ken Hamilton, estimated the fee would cost owners of a modest-sized cattle ranch $30,000 to $40,000 a year. He said he has talked to a number of livestock owners about the proposals, and "all have said if the fees were carried out, it would bankrupt them."

Sparks said Wednesday he's worried the fee could be extended to chickens and other farm animals and cause more meat to be imported.

"We'll let other countries put food on our tables like they are putting gas in our cars. Other countries don't have the health standards we have," Sparks said. [...]

With continuing rising food prices, do we really need to be adding food taxes and driving farmers out of business? The government won't allow us to drill our own oil, now they want to limit our food production. Are we supposed to depend on foreigners for everything? Whatever happened to American self-sufficiency?

President-elect Obama wants to spend billions to rebuild our nations roads and bridges. I can support him in that, because it needs to be done, and it's a traditional function of government. But should regulating cow farts become a function of government?



It's essentially a meat tax, and while vegetarians may be pleased by it, I think few others will. Big government will always think of endless new ways to raise new taxes and control people by limiting the things they depend on for life and freedom. But only if we let them. We should draw a line here.


Related Links:

A Tax on Cow Farts to fight Global Warming


Cow Farts Collected For Global Warming Study