"Who Could Have Known?"

(Via Arianna Huffington)

See if this sounds familiar:

An ambitious and risky undertaking carried out with hubris, and featuring the weeding out of anyone who raises alarm bells, little-to-no transparency, an oversight system in which no central authority is accountable, and the deliberate manufacturing of ambiguity and complexity so that if -- when -- it all falls to pieces, the excuse "who could have known?" can be used....

Is it Iraq? Fannie Mae? Citigroup? Bernie Madoff?

The correct answer is: all of the above.

When you look at the elements that were crucial to the creation of each of these debacles, it's amazing how much in common they all have. And not just in how they began but in how they ended: with those responsible being amazed at what happened, because...who could have known? Well, to paraphrase James Inhofe, I'm amazed at the amazement.

In fact, when historians look for a name that sums up the Bush II years, they could do worse than calling them The "Who Could Have Known?" Era.

This is so utterly true. Time and time again warnings were raised about the risky endeavors of the powers that be, and the alarm raisers were marginalized as wrong-headed, unpatriotic, Marxist---you name it. Then when the things the alarms were being raised about crash and burn, the ones who made the wrong decisions say "no one could have predicted" that such things would happen.

OF COURSE SOMEONE COULD!!!! Someone did in all these cases, and they were laughed at and actively derided. This is the lamest excuse for incompetence and denial I have ever seen, and Arianna is right:

It's time to say goodbye to the "Who Could Have Known?" era. It's time to know things again. And to know that you know them.