There is supposed to be one of those set-piece Washington things tonight. The theme is one with historic precedent, and is given every year by the Chief Executive to let us know how things are going. We anticipate some of the usual misdirection shaped by misinformation, a bi-partisan tradition in which we take no sides. Splash is our in-house comedian, and he summed it up this way: “Remember when Speaker Pelosi ripped up her copy of the State of the Union address while the President was giving it?”

We all nodded. It had been a remarkable demonstration of dysfunction which we all enjoyed. It resembles an onion, layer upon layer subject to completely subjective interpretation. Splash continued solemnly. “My suggestion is that we embark on a new era of civility. New Speaker McCarthy should take his copy of the President’s remarks and attach a helium balloon to it and see how far across the Chamber it will fly. It would mark a change in tone.”

We looked around the Writer’s Section. Blankly. Melissa is not subject to the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which apparently means all sorts of new things of which the veterans were blissfully unaware. She decided to exercise what she considers “protected speech.” We were also unaware of that provision meaning we had surrendered the rights specified in the Constitution under the provision of a Code passed in 1951 by Congress.

“We talked about the Grammies thing yesterday. I know you guys didn’t see it, but it was actually kind of artistic. I liked the part depicting the Rest Room scene. I have never seen anything like that- all those presumably biologic males dressed up like biological females and those strange liquid arcs. We have achieved some real progress in what we seem determined to show our kids.”

“Were there any balloons in the show?”

“Didn’t see any. But they probably wrote the script before they were detected. Apparently it goes on all the time, but we just didn’t notice.”

We decided to just nod, since there is no known provision in US Code regarding that motion of neck and cranial appendages. Buck is our Economist, and likewise not subject to obscure provisions of US Code. “It really should not come as a surprise. There is a bunch of stuff flying around that used to be sort of secret, like getting ride of Chief Executives who might do things the permanent and unelected Government doesn’t like.”

We decided to shake our heads from side to side, which we believe conveys the opposite of nodding up and down. There may be a provision or Article in the Code that specifies the accepted meaning, but the Legal Department gets to come in late on days the State of the Union address is presented. So we don’t precisely know. We think a motion of the shoulders in a sort of shrug is permissible, so long as it conveys either ‘unconcern’ or ‘we donno.’

Melissa smiled. “Remember when Tucker Carlson was a sort of funny young man who wore bow ties?”

We felt it was safe to nod, although there was a mixture of ups, downs and sideways movement. Splash actually spoke, daring the full might of the United States Government. “Yeah. He seems kind of angry these days. Is that permitted?”

“Apparently not. According to civilian news sources unconnected to any veteran or representing any faction of partisan advocacy, Tucker claimed some strange stuff has gone on for at least two and possibly five recent changes in national leadership.”

“Nope. The Chairman told us to knock it off. No references to “three tramps,” or “grassy knolls” or who was paying the people who broke into that office building downtown. Or that strange conversation Mr. Nixon had with Director of central whatever before he was forced to resign.”

“Was that Nixon or DCI Helms who had to go? I get lost in the layers of the onion.”

“It is on one of those taped conversations that were such a controversy fifty years ago.”

“We can talk about the Grammies, though, right?”

“Possibly. The Chairman wrote a memo reminded us we are just independent contractors, not employees, and the Legal Section is under no obligation to provide legal advice in case we irritate someone. Or, at least not accurate legal advice. it is a complicated sort of thing, sort or like an onion with lots of layers.”

The Writer’s Section either nodded, shook or shrugged, depending on their interpretation of the UCMJ Article they liked best or seemed relevant to the rights we thought we signed up to defend. Melissa and Buck just laughed under their civilian interpretation of one of the Amendments to a document that used to be more accurate, or at least was considered relevant. Before we all became independent contractors and we actually knew who we worked for.

Copyright 2023 Vic Socotra
www.vicsocotra.com