I think that there are times when the appearance of George Nethercutt on the editorial pages of “The Inlander” is because “The Inlander” staff want him there for comic relief. How else to explain some of his particularly bizarre positions. When he isn’t trotting out the typical GOP talking points about the Democrats in general and President Obama in particular, then he is instead projecting the failures of GOP governance onto the current administration.
In the GOP controlled “future” of Congress, Nethercutt’s idea of “freedom” comes up short. National health care reform has already been discussed in previous posts. But if it came to matters of freedom; those who are sick or injured and who do not have the funds to pay for their health care are surely less free than those with the wealth to do so. Those who have the wealth to travel to other countries for cheaper health care are in fact more free to do so than those who do not have such wealth. But of course, that can never be Nethercutt’s argument. So, just how many times can you rebut an argument like this without endlessly repeating yourself?
Maybe it comes with Nethercutt’s next position that those in Wall Street in the face of financial reform will now be less free than the people who do indeed benefit from financial reform. Such as people with credit cards finding themselves in opposition to the lending banks that issue these cards… Lending banks that end up over-charging their credit card holding customers for the use of the cards. Or lending banks who defy existing law while scheming to get more and more money from the credit card holder. Providing an example: assessing “past due fees” when the payment(s) arrive days, even a week or more before the posted (on the billing statement) due date. And accruing high interest rates against the account because of the attachment of a “past due fee.” The credit card holder who finds him or herself overwhelmed by an illegally engineered “debt” created by a bank is hardly going to be a “small time investor” dear to Nethercutt’s heart? And just how many people with foreclosed homes are going to herd to Wall Street with any kind of investment? In short, the GOP that Nethercutt fronts for wouldn’t have a clue about who’s “freedom” would be traded off for the favored special interest. Bottom line, if you have the money to burn on lobbyists, you are free. The same being true for the politicians only the wealthy and influential can buy.
That however would not be true of anyone who can not afford to be “heard” in Congress through a lobbyist who expects tens of thousands of dollars an hour. To say the least, Nethercutt doesn’t have a clue.
Security only became an issue for the GOP in general and GW in particular after the events of 9/11/2001. That is, security that could be politically exploited, but vulnerabilities from its lack thereof were routinely shown to exist on the mainstream media. When Nethercutt discusses a Gallup poll (An aside here, “scientific samplings” presumably randomly selected across a wide spectrum of the populace, but only a thousand or so people may in fact get polled. 79% of “the people” this, that, or the other thing is actually more accurately stated as 79% of those polled.) about what people think of “security” vis a vis terrorism, perhaps(?) neglects to take into consideration that people supposedly wetting their britches over the continued fear of terrorism none the less do not want this nation to continue its war in Afghanistan. And given how homeland security funding was applied in ways that can’t be said to have actually added to our “security” during the era of G.W. Bush; how much of that money was actually wasted, any poll that Gallup should really run is to ask the people how effective do they want national security. Something the GOP couldn’t be bothered with asking themselves.
Competency, when coupled with the British Petroleum engineered Gulf of Mexico disaster. Best not look to closely, right, to the deregulatory fervor that must also argue that despite BP’s track record of accidents and known criminal negligence, the Mineral Management Services (part of the big gvt after all) must still award BP a deep water drilling lease. How long had BP possessed this lease before the disaster took place? But, BP after all was able to run amok, just like the banks, until that disaster (financial or environmental) cost the livelihoods of potentially millions of people. Shouldn’t competency find its proof in not repeating past mistakes? You wouldn’t know that from the Nethercutt editorial.
But speaking of, whining about the deficit out of one side of the GOP mouth while demanding the continuous deficit creating tax cuts (courtesy: The Daily Show with Jon Stewart) doesn’t impress anyone with an ounce of common sense that there is any competency in this argument. Or for that matter, Newt Gingrich (same show, same night) who compares the Tax Codes of the U.S. with that of (drops Communist for purposes of political expedience) China. Only Stewart could pick up on the obvious (GOP who blows hole in foot with a shotgun) problem with Gingrich’s political position. The U.S. is a capitalist system, to say that this capitalist system lacks something essential when compared to China’s communist system; says a great deal about Gingrich’s radical thought processes. As Stewart said, “To defeat socialism, first you must become communists.” Competency would necessarily argue that you don’t hold the view that an old enemy has a better system than your own.
Bottom line, wouldn’t it be nice if Nethercutt read “Troubletown” found on the following page of his editorial. It actually provides a far better rebuttal than I can write here.