The politics of denial

The latest George Nethercutt editorial appeared in last week’s “The Inlander.” I hadn’t much gotten around to reading it before now, with the intent to blog about it. And I wasn’t disappointed by Nethercutt’s out of touch with reality brand of politics. Between the Oak Crest Yuletide potluck, working fairly steadily on my sci fi novel, shoveling snow, and overcoming a severe cold; it wasn’t before now that I could sit down to the keyboard and write my latest.

It would do that former Representative from Washington State some good to think about this particular reality: when the majority of voters, and yes, the Electoral College chose President Obama instead of former Guv. Romney; that should have served as a wake up call to the GOP in general. The people are not exactly stupid and are very capable of looking after their best interests. When the GOP by 2010 basically felt it necessary to lie to the American electorate in order to gain the majority in at least one house in Congress: the House of Representatives; did they in fact want to represent the people who voted for them? Or just the people who shelled out a humongous amount of sawbucks to help them buy their way into office? If the Republicans made it quite plain that they were only going to represent narrow special interests and engage in the politics of obstruction; then the voters don’t have any qualms putting back into office a man who tried to do something for them. The same can’t be said of the GOP.

Quite frankly, there are a few matters that Nethercutt could get a bit educated on: The politics of division and the culture wars only happened to be what the Republican party extolled when turning on the Democratic party and their special interests. After all this time, wouldn’t it be nice to have new ideas coming from the GOP? Engaging in vicious name calling and childish attacks doesn’t impress people whom, over the last election season, chose Obama over Romney. So, how about showing that you can be the kind of guy who is capable of accepting defeat with grace and offer congratulations to the winner? Then there is what Nethercutt only expressed in his editorial: Our children aren’t getting the right kind of education? Perhaps Nethercutt ought to be reminded about how political education got. How quickly the parents were to get up in arms over what was available in the public schools. What parents and religious special interests wanted was an alternative with government—yes, government to support their personal desires. If as a result of all this turmoil in education overall that our children aren’t now as educated as they should be; stand at the head of the line as a Representative for much of why that only happened to be.

Low taxes, huh? Or zero taxes? Nethercutt was only a member of Congress, where did he think his paycheck came from, anyway? The taxpayer, natch. Where does he figure that all those entitlements given to agribusiness in the form of subsidies come from? The taxpayer. Rather regrettably, the money for this can’t be plucked like magic out of thin air. As for excessive spending, that was not an argument that the GOP was prepared to make when one of their own was at the helm. Next onto “stifling regulations.” I’d personally like to propose to Nethercutt, that if the people who headed various companies to corporations were actually prepared to be honest and ethical in their treatment of the workforce and their customers, “stifling regulations” would never be necessary. On the other hand, the GOP were all about handing out stifling regulations when they went full out to protect various major corporations from accountability through “tort reform.” By blatantly acting on the behalf of the people who funded their campaign war chests, they turned around and created stifling regulations for the workforce and the customers. Trying to make it impossible for those wronged by frankly illegal practices to seek out justice. So here is the proposal: Nethercutt wants his entire kitchen redone. But the contractor he hires goes way over budget, takes too long to install the counters, sink, shelving, and etc. Then after he’s slapped ol’ Nethercutt with a hefty bill, the kitchen he installs, in a matter of time, starts literally falling apart. So, Nethercutt wants that “strong free market” does he? He’ll just shoulder another hefty bill and simply repair the mistakes the last guy made while in the course of having the kitchen redone? Probably not. He’d want the contractor held liable for scamming him out of some hard earned money. That’s the nature of those “stifling” regulations. They enable the corporate heads to be held accountable by their customers. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, on the behalf of people who’d come to major hurt because of financial institutions running amok, started tasking the various banks and credit card companies for basically swindling the people they did business with. To include: Capital One. If hypothetically, Nethercutt should have every opportunity to hold accountable a contractor who does a sloppy job and demands in the excess money for the actual work preformed, so should we have the same opportunity.

I am not prepared to go word for word through all of his editorial, because I figure that Nethercutt isn’t likely to get bankrupted for health care costs that skyrocketed long before Obama. Nor is he likely to get misdiagnosed or given the hypochondriac treatment by a medical staff that wants to get their hands on some money. Whether through private insurance, or from the government itself. Don’t we all wish we could enjoy Nethercutt’s assured position in this world. As for what else could be found on his editorial, he claims the GOP have “libertarian roots.” From my understanding of libertarian, they are generally opposed to any institution of authority beyond themselves. The Republicans aren’t opposed to representing some form of authority when it comes to acting on the behalf of special interests and against the rest of us. All this argues, is that the GOP simply love to co-opt various political ideologies if it will get them a tad closer to achieving and holding total power in this nation. Then abandoning it just as abruptly if it doesn’t work out so well. I’ll remind ol’ George that government is only as big as the people, inclusive of the special interests, wants it to be. Government therefore can only shrink the fewer demands that are made upon it. When he was in office, Nethercutt didn’t have a problem extending government on the behalf of people with money to spend. Then I guess he also contributed to putting this nation on a “leftward course,” as much as any of his political opposition. As for the “darkness of liberalism,” that he seems to whine so much about: one of the dictionary definitions of liberal is to be a proponent of change. As he in particular and the GOP in general aren’t exactly hostile to some form of change, then I guess Nethercutt is as much a part of that darkness as anyone he’d love pointing a finger at. The bottom line is: Nethercutt would do better selling this fiction in a novel form than trying to express to the rest of us that it can be a good future and a good direction for this nation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: