Abolish the Internal Revenue Service? IRS Commissioner John Koskinen has said the government must have an IRS to collect the taxes to fund the government.

Mr. Koskinen is right that no matter what kind of tax system we have, there needs to be a tax collection bureau. But those in favor of abolishing the present IRS are correct in that the United States certainly can get along perfectly well without the politicized, abusive and rights-trampling tax agency the IRS has become.

There is simply no excuse for much of what the IRS does. IRS agents complain that nobody likes them and they are shunned when they go to parties. Count me as one who is not sympathetic.

Some IRS workers claim they are there for patriotic reasons because someone has to raise the revenue to keep the government going.  Here's a question to ask them:

What if IRS agents went on strike - as real patriots - to demand that the monies they collect would no longer be used for political payoffs, mismanaged programs and unconstitutional activities?

A friend of mine built a very successful company, sold it for a substantial amount, then took some time off to get his MBA at Harvard Business School. Ironically, for years after getting that degree, he wasn't able to make a penny in business.

He had become too careful, too wary of failure.

Who likes to fail? I don't. Failure can feel humiliating. But if we're not willing to risk failure, we won't be able to make the bold moves necessary to really succeed, either.

Learning to deal well with failure is a skill. It's something that we can learn, practice, and master. Not that anyone wants to become a master at failure; we want to become masters at dealing with failure... and masters at learning from our failures.

Our failures can be more effective teachers than our successes; and with understanding and practice, we can learn to make the most of them, even turning those failures into triumphs.

Things are suddenly going so badly for the Zerocrats now that the GOP has started to think "victory" in 2010.  But that's for the House, where anything close to the Pubs' 52-seat gain in 1994 would get their majority back.

What about the Senate?  November 2010 is a long ways away, but not that far for a "situation report" regarding the GOP's chances for retaking the Senate.  Things not only can but undoubtedly will change drastically over the coming months, but here's what and who to keep your eye on now.

With Minnesota's embarrassment, Al "Diapers" Franken, giving the Dems 60 seats and the Pubs 40, it will take a massive switch of 11 seats for the latter to pull it off.

Switches of this magnitude are rare, but they do occur.  In 1958, the Dems gained a net 16 seats, while in 1980, the Pubs gained 12.  Both resulted in shifts of majority status.  Other years of large switches were 1994 with the Pubs up 8, and last year, 2008, with the Dems up 8 plus Specter's defection for a net of up 9.

Next year, 36 seats are at stake, evenly split at 18 each between R's & D's.  Let's dispense with the ones that seem now clearly safe.

The Jade Steps

Chapter Twenty-Six:  Cleansing The Temple

Much of the royal household was transferred to the Palace of Axayacatl.  Montezuma's chefs set up the royal kitchens, attendants the royal baths, servants the royal wardrobe, so that he was fed, bathed, and clothed as before.  Suitable quarters were arranged for his wives and concubines, which he frequently visited.  His retinue of courtiers and counselors was with him throughout the day.  Petitioners and ambassadors from various parts of the empire came to plea with him or present him with tribute. 

All seemed normal - with one difference.  The only guards, of which there were many, were Spanish.  There wasn't a jaguar warrior in sight.

Yet to everyone who came to him with concern, to ask about his obvious imprisonment, Montezuma assured them he was happy and under no restraint.  He told them not to disturb themselves or the city, and commanded them not to be distressed, for his "visit" with the strangers was the will of Huitzilopochtli.

Obama can't defeat ISIS with soft power, though ISIS could beat him with soft power assuming its Caliph ever decided to agree to sit down at a table with John Kerry without beheading him.

Iran has picked up billions in sanctions relief and the right to take over Yemen and raid ships in international waters in the Persian Gulf just for agreeing to listen to Kerry talk for an hour. And that might be a fair exchange.

As bad as having your capital or ship seized by Iran is, listening to John Kerry talk is even worse.

So far ISIS has preferred the classical approach of killing everything in its path. The approach, deemed insufficiently nuanced by masters of subtlety like Obama and Kerry, has worked surprisingly well.

For it's hard to destroy something if you don't know what it is. And it's hard to know what a thing is if you won't even call it by its name or name its ideology.

The left loves root causes, but the root cause of ISIS isn't poverty, unemployment or a lack of democracy.  It's...