I have barely started to read John Dean’s book but it has already proven quite informative. Remember the squawking by the GOP in general and the radical “TEA Party” in particular about the failure of the Democratic majority to actually do much reading or debating of the Health Care Reform bill? According to Dean, seems the GOP—while in control of Congress—routinely engaged in such a practice no matter what, even when it came to appropriations as well as the Omnibus spending bill. No real debate, no actual study of the document, no determination if it might be improved upon, no ascertaining if there might be needless waste of taxpayers’ dollars, etc. Which makes GOP efforts at trying to obtain the majority in Congress particularly hypocritical. As Dean had said in his book, the kind of people who accepted no responsibility for anything. Not really, if instead, they can blame the Democrats. Quite frankly, I had figured that out anyway, but it was nice to have Dean confirm it.
What had become an eye-opener however, was Dean’s characterization of the “conservatives” (anti-government) as authoritarian. And provides a great many examples. Which is… interesting. Just as… interesting; the GOP claim a “strict constructionist” position on the U.S. Constitution. But when such an argument was put to the test; according to Dean, the GOP failed their own platform. They failed fiscal responsibility; they failed to be a party of morality. One of the most definitive proofs of immoral behavior by the GOP was to be the “rich man” in Old Testament lore. The rich man with plenty of sheep but he takes from the poor man his only ewe to feed to a visiting guest. Such was the GOP propensities during the time that they held the majority in Congress. The loss of the poor man’s ewe can be listed as followed: spending cuts that hurt the elderly, the sick, the young and the poor. On the behalf of people such as business interests who certainly did not need “more” having quite enough already. That can only say a lot about people who cared not at all about the fine print of their own bills (especially spending bills), the fine print of the U.S. Constitution; or the obvious black and white text of the bible. “Authoritarian,” interesting. The label is the next door neighbor to dictator.
And dictator, dear readers, isn’t a pro-constitutional or limited government argument.
Just as obviously; “authoritarian” doesn’t much care about moral governance. Only about the opportunity to rule. Something to consider when the voters go out in November to elect a questionable politician of their choice.
Time for a game of let’s look in the mirror: Expanded government equals socialism, right? During the GW years, we had plenty of it. Too much spending equals sky high debt, right? Again, during the GW years, we had plenty of that too. Business interests lose profits and etc. from taxes and regulation. Depends on which businesses you are talking about. Because it seems to me that the business interests who could hire the most expensive lobbyists to work the halls of Congress only managed to cost profits for other businesses through the loss of American jobs, favoritism by government toward very-wealthy and specifically politically connected industries. Not all businesses by any means. Which makes John Boehner a particularly hilarious fellow who today claims that regulation and tax hikes can only cost jobs. The same argument made at the beginning of this “authoritarian” revolution circa Ronald Reagan.
Take into consideration the Dino Rossi versus Patty Murray for her Senate seat (Washington state). KREM 2 News has run reality checks on Senator Murray’s ads. They haven’t done so on any ad supported by Rossi or run by anyone who supports Rossi (to my best knowledge). So, here is an ad regarding Patty Murray having been in the Senate for 18 years. She is attacked for “reckless spending,” or for “the loss of jobs.” Over that very period of Senator Murray’s 18 years in the U.S. Congress, by 1995 (some three years after Murray won her Senate seat?) the GOP had achieved control of Congress and were all for giving then President Clinton a lot of grief. Who would have at this point controlled the purse strings? Only the GOP. Any “reckless spending” by 1995 or afterwards, was entirely in the hands of the GOP until 2007.
Or make the 2010 mid term elections this “referendum on Obama.” Health Care Reform that endangers Medicare for seniors. Truth be told, the GOP helped big pharma and insurance companies “Medicare Part D” Medicare “reform” law; did nothing at all for seniors. Oh yeah, the GOP who want to deflect the blame in order to regain a Congressional majority. Literally, having learned nothing when Dean first reported this in his book.
After 2008, after the GOP were solidly trounced and literally replaced by a solid Democratic majority; they raised the shrill cries of socialism, ginormous debt, too much government… The kind of thing that actually didn’t concern them when they were the head of it all. Or as Dean was to note when the GOP could with far narrower majorities shut out the opposition and pass laws that were literally partisan-based; could then turn around and whine with “claims” (not so certain just how truthful they are) that the Democrats had “shut them out” on any participation in the sort of legislation that did get passed. Quite frankly, I wouldn’t mind a bit of a chuckle and advise my fellow Republicans about the shoe being on the other foot; however, given this sort of history, especially by 2001, the GOP are simply in the wrong category to claim to be victims.
Final thoughts: It will take a while to actually finish this book. When I do, I’ll be back to comment some more. John Dean, part of the Nixon Cabinet and former Republican.