Statist of Affairs
By: Eddie Clements
He who pays the piper calls the tune. Accept government (taxpayer) money and elected representatives, claiming to speak for taxpayers, can take it back, regulate salaries, or configure benefits.
Whether or not to extend moneys to private companies is problematic, depending on the terms of the offer. When Chrysler was loaned money in the 1970â€™s to escape financial collapse, the main rational was that the loss of jobs would be more detrimental than loss of taxpayer dollars, should the company default. There were other factors, but no one really howled except maybe their competitors.
The outcome for Chrysler was the emergence of a dynamic, innovative auto company under Lee Iacoccaâ€™s leadership that became so profitable again they paid back the loans ahead of schedule. Too bad the company didnâ€™t build on that solid foundation, and got in trouble again. Some people never learn.
There was no provision to use the loans as leverage for the government to intimately involve itself in the companyâ€™s affairs, like with the recent absolute confiscation of General Motors for purely political purposes. When reorganization talks didnâ€™t go Obamaâ€™s way during the GM mess, he just basically confiscated the companyâ€™s assets and gave the lionâ€™s share of ownership to the unions. More or less the same happened in the Daimler-Chrysler affair. These acts bypassed the due process of law provisions of the constitution.
With the Community Reinvestment Act pushed by then-president Jimmy Carter, the government sought to get into the social engineering business big-time. When lending institutions hesitated to loan money to a class of people known to default, the poor, government threatened them to loan money or be investigated. We see the results of that in September 2008, with the financial crisis. The reasons given by politicians for the crisis were spuriousâ€¦no, letâ€™s just say Democrats lied about it outright, because they did.
Fox News has been attacked as the spokesmen for Republicans. As if all the rest of the news media were not spokesmen for Democrats, a little detail that is glossed over. Rush says, correctly once again I believe, that this is a concerted effort to destroy Fox News. The administration is open to government funding of privately-owned media outlets performing poorly in the market.
When Humana tried to render its opinion in a mailing opposing proposed health-care legislation, Senator Max Baucus reacted with threats. Congressman Barney Frank wants to regulate executive compensation, in all companies. Congressman Henry Waxman wants to subjugate insurance companies through investigations of their profits and procedures. Senator Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi call Americans expressing dissenting opinions un-American, potentially violent NAZIâ€™s. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says non-Democrats are all potentially violent. Congressman Allan Grayson says Fox News and Republicans are enemies of America. If he wanted attention, he got it.
Lawyers from the Bush administration rendering opinions on the question of the legality of enhanced interrogation techniques used on terrorists have those opinions examined for criminality. CIA officers applying those techniques are being investigated.
These are just a few examples recalled at random. The only pattern that can explain all these threats and intimidation by Democrats and Obama is a march toward tyranny and despotism the Constitution is supposed to prevent. We are currently experiencing a Reign of Terror, an insurrection from the Left by our elected government against citizens of the United States of America.
Who is standing up to say â€œStopâ€? If anyone is, they are not doing so loudly enough. Republicans, where not completely silent, dither around the edges of health-care legislation. Lindsey Graham and John McCain are teaming up to subdue forceful responses to these outrages to democracy. Newt Gingrich is busily endorsing a RINO stealth Democrat in New York, Dede Scozzafava, though he defends that choice coherently. But if they think moderation will win anything, they havenâ€™t been paying attention.
Executives of large corporations are not protesting. They would say socio-political activism is not their job, which under ordinary circumstances is true. They would say we have survived bad times before, as in the Woodrow Wilson administration; we will recover again. But these ainâ€™t ordinary times. CEOâ€™s are acting like frightened villagers under attack by a dragon thought to be only a fable, making deals with him in hopes they will be eaten last.
In fact, almost every move made by this administration is unconstitutional. The US Constitution is therefore in abeyance, since those who made these moves have violated their oaths under it and have not taken steps to correct the wrongs.
What Obama-like radicals donâ€™t understand, or wonâ€™t acknowledge, is the Constitution was written and agreed to in order to prevent the very things he is doing. Obama believes the same as other radical leftists that the Constitution is illegitimate at worst, incomplete at best. Yet he swore the oath anyway; did he do so sincerely? Did he mean it when he swore â€œto the best of [his] ability, preserve, protect, and defendâ€ the Constitution? Note he did not swear to follow it, a subtlety of rhetoric that a slick, deceptive lawyer like him certainly appreciates, but Americans do not.
Battle lines are being drawn. Obamaâ€™s own rhetoric is setting the table for violent confrontation. He fails to understand that Fox Newsâ€™ opinion shows are warning of impending disaster, should he maintain his present course. Beck and Hannity arenâ€™t criticizing out of joy, but alarm.
Obamaâ€™s virtues stated in mere words and style rather than a record of accomplishment are morphing into narcissistic delusion, while we watch, wary but embarrassed at the spectacle. The president we elected is aflame with failures, small and large. Bullying critics is his recourse of choice, a decision reflecting his inner impotence and inexperience.
This has the flavor of â€œplay by my rules or Iâ€™ll take my ball and go home.â€ They are the actions of children who have acquired more power than they can handle. This administration more closely resembles deranged juveniles in the story Lord of the Flies than mature, responsible, duty-minded administrators of the worldâ€™s most influential nation.
The worst thing about starting an â€œenemies listâ€ is that it keeps growing, while your â€œfriendsâ€ list shrinks. OK for some perhaps, but not good in a US president. For intimidation to work, one has to stay intimidated. How long can you sustain it, Mr. President?
Despots retain power because they are willing to murder their enemies. Is the administration willing to go that far? Because nothing short of death will stop a people who reject slavery, the organizing principle of tyranny.