Op/Ed: A Case For Government Oversight







Why Is 'Government' Such A Dirty Word To The GOP?

Government Established as a Servant & Representative of 'We The People'
NewsFocus  030109

For many years the argument of corporations and big money has always been that government has no right telling business how to operate. A mantra of the political right in this country has always been the dissolution of government as the regulator of big business, heralding a "free market" system with little or no government oversight, freeing the corporate rule to "let the markets decide." The argument of the far right has always been that government has no right telling business how to operate. That is all we've ever heard for some time, but now not that the economy is collapsing on top of that flawed ideal, along with all the rest of us, this tired cliché has been exposed as nothing more than what it is, letting the unscrupulous and crooked run the game the way they want to.

Government regulation of Wall Street, banks and our large corporations was always touted as a bad thing by the wealthy, something that would stifle economic growth and progress, limiting business in the process. The problem with this argument is that the world is full of imperfect people who sadly use greed as their driving force in life. Until someone can definitively say that avarice has been removed from the corporate universe, oversight is needed to protect the populace from the clutches of the corporate elite. Many from the far-right and the upper crust might cry foul at such a charge, but they would be remiss in their argument before it even began... Bernie Madoff, Enron, etc.

No Regulation Required- Trust Us

It would now seem that the recent devastating events on Wall Street and the disastrous downturn in the economy are showing us the staggering damage that can be wreaked by unregulated corporate Wall Street elitists whose pocketbooks and wallets serve as their only guidebook and moral compass in business and in life. When big money tells us that we need less government it usually means it wants no regulatory oversight of itself. The hypocrisy and inequality in that thinking is that a greater majority of the ultra-wealthy are generally quite gung ho for increasing our military forces or federal, state and local police forces, as a way to kneel on the people, but yet they will never admit to any government regulation of themselves.

So where has that mentality taken us the last 30 years? The rich have become richer while many in the middle class have now moved to the lower class. Very few have escaped the lower class under this ideology.

Since the Bush II administration there has undeniably been a growing divide amongst the rich and the ultra-rich, creating powerful uber-rich with pockets deep enough to take on free governments, influencing their political systems for their own personal gain. Many have commented on this open danger to a free democracy, but yet the game has been allowed to continue unfettered and under-regulated for years now, quite literally to the breaking point of the flawed and corrupt system that it truly is. But to quote the fictitious Gomer Pyle, "Surprise, surprise," the American people get to pay for it.

Government oversight and regulation is clearly the people’s way of policing corporate corruption. Without it, the high risk of fraud, diminishing safety standards, and financial impropriety increases as a direct result. Corporations grow unchecked, becoming more powerful and influential over our political system, allowing the danger for fascist control to creep in. Make no mistake about it, a people's government is highly recommended for any advancing society with the hope of flourishing as a nation and a culture.

Government Was Established as a Guardian & Servant of We The People

A government is meant to facilitate the hopes and dreams of the people, as well as acting as a guardian of their inalienable rights and liberties.

You cannot have a functioning society without some form of oversight to protect the people from each other. Historically that oversight has generally been needed between the upper and lower class, as well as a regulating body against corporate greed and evil. The component to accomplish this social organization is called government. It is without a doubt a most necessary ingredient to an intelligent organized society.

What many on the right fail to realize, is that a "society" is a mixture of various people, oftentimes distinguished by their race, religion, wealth and social status. The benefit of society is the benefit to all, not the few. The reason that man came together to form societies in the first place was for safety, living necessities and companionship. In any decent society you will find degrees of socialism as a way of caring for the people. That's what having a society is all about. It's not coming together to rape and pillage each other until the last man standing has all the wealth. Like it or not, that mentality is for all intents and purposes the unchecked capitalism that we allow to thrive within our free society.

Argue all you want about the virtues of capitalism versus socialism or communism, but it all comes down to the altruistic nature and benevolence displayed by the government for the people it serves. The particular system or type of government would appear to be secondary to the kind or nefarious intentions of those governing it. A government equal with the people because it is of the people, that is what our forefathers intended, but we have been misled to believe that government is a bad thing, when in reality it is a necessary component of a free society.

How Much Government Is Necessary For Society To Run Effectively?

It would seem that the argument lies in how much governance is necessary and how much is too much? While both sides can argue that too much government can be restrictive to society, the other side of the coin is too little, which is clearly of no social value which defeats the cause it was established for. Quite frankly when it comes to the extremes between too little and too much government, the latter is hands-down the best option when that government is functioning as expected and making the people's lives undeniably better as a result.

With the above points made, over the years the corporate and wealthy elite have gone out of their way to tell us that big government is bad. The old less is more argument. They attack government as if it is an unnecessary cog in the capitalist machinery of our nation, claiming it negatively affects the potential of the country as a whole as well as stifling innovation and ingenuity. Nothing could be further from the truth.

'My goal is to cut government in half in 25 years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.' 

Grover Norquist, May 14, 2001        

The cry from the right has always been that the left will ask for bigger government, tax everyday Americans more, plus hand out free money to the poor through unnecessary socialism programs. This charge is factually inaccurate and grossly unfair and is meant to scare moderates and to incite conservatives.

The conservative right will claim it is not responsible for big government when in fact it is. They like to claim that they are for reduced government when in reality they are more interested in reducing regulation and taxes regarding big business and the ultra-wealthy, rather than the overall scope of large government. Noted Republican ideological Grover Norquist once said that his goal was to cut government in half in 25 years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub. One can only hope that he and others like him are not proposing a fascist rule in the absence of government of, for and by the people.

For the record, the Federal government grew under George W. Bush at a much faster pace, and larger than ever before in the history of this country. While post 9/11 programs were part of that, many were illegal wiretap, surveillance and detention directives that you were far beyond necessity and fiscal responsibility.

What a dichotomy; the left warns of fascism while the right screams of socialism. This truly is not the best partnership for saving our country from a financial meltdown, but it's quite literally all we have. Once again this nation is faced with the historic call, "united we stand, or divided we fall."

Need to account for $2.3 trillion missing on the day before 9/11, the Iraq

[ Tie from drowning government to socialism and the bail-out ]


Why does George W. Bush think our revered and hallowed constitution is nothing more than a worthless piece of paper?


Year Congress House Senate President National Debt
1981 97 242 53  Ronald Reagan $997 Billion
1982 97       1.1 Trillion
1983 98 269 54   1.3 Trillion
1984 98       1.5 Trillion
1985 99 253 53  Ronald Reagan 1.8 Trillion
1986 99       2.1 Trillion
1987 100 258 55   2.3 Trillion
1988 100       2.6 Trillion
1989 101 260 55  George HW Bush 2.8 Trillion
1990 101       3.2 Trillion
1991 102 267 56   3.6 Trillion
1992 102       4.0 Trillion
1993 103 258 57  Bill Clinton 4.4 Trillion
1994 103       4.6 Trillion
1995 104 230 52   4.9 Trillion
1996 104       5.2 Trillion
1997 105 228 55  Bill Clinton 5.4 Trillion
1998 105       5.5 Trillion
1999 106 223 55   $5.6 Trillion
2000 106       $5.6 Trillion
2001 107 221 50  George W Bush $5.8 Trillion
2002 107       $6.2 Trillion
2003 108 229 51   $6.7 Trillion
2004 108       $7.3 Trillion
2005 109 232 55  George W Bush $7.9 Trillion
2006 109       $8.5 Trillion
2007 110 233 51   $9.0 Trillion
2008 110       $10.0 Trillion
2009 111 256 59  Barack Obama $10.8 Trillion
 Key:  Democrat  |  Republican
From 1975 to 1985 the National Debt was not exactly to the penny. It was rounded to the nearest million.
* There were 50 Ds and 50 Rs until May 24, 2001, when Sen. James Jeffords (R-VT) switched to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001; he announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving the Democrats a one-seat advantage.
** Independent Sen. Bernard Sanders (VT) gives the Democrats a one-seat majority.
*** Two Independents and two vacancies (IL and MN)


Democrats have generally always been willing to police and prosecute within their own party. When the Republicans show that they can adhere to a standard such as this the American people might decide to trust them once again, but the prospects are certainly lesser now as a result of years of blatant lies and ill-conceived policy.


Today's GOP... wiping out the savings of thousands of middle and lower income families and threatening the financial well-being of hundreds of millions more.



[ Tie-In To Anti-Dem Socialism Piece... ]


A Dangerous Divide Has Been Created In America

For those watching the recent CPAC convention on C-SPAN, many were uncomfortable with the arguably divisive stark tone and anti-Americanism displayed by the various speakers. The dais ranged from indoctrinated youth too young for any tangible life experiences to help them fully understand the myriad aspects of sociology and politics, to the ever pompous and terminally inflammatory Rush Limbaugh, all railing against the Democratic platform, as if it were the root cause of all this countries ills the over last ten years, all the while calling it an unprecedented revolution of socialism coming to this country. You would think that Stalin himself had crawled from the grave and had been elected as President of the United States. The vitriol and rancor expressed towards Democrats since the election has undeniably been passionate, very heated, and sadly enough, completely without foundation. Ironically enough, all coming from a political party whose own foundation is crumbling to pieces underneath it.

First off, it seems quite odd for rich conservatives to rail on and on incessantly about their fears of socialism coming to America when the bail-out to the rich bankers of Wall Street is exactly just that! For the rich corporate elite to ask for and accept this bail-out money, yet somehow differentiate it from the poor receiving monetary assistance is patently ludicrous and offensive to anyone with even the slightest IQ to reason with.

This country is crumbling economically from 30 years of Reaganomics and its horribly overrated Milton Friedman trickle down theory, yet the GOP wants to say that a switch from this course will take us to the complete opposite of the political spectrum, to the extreme left, with sweeping Stalinist socialism.

Nothing could be further from the truth nor farther away from this tired old Republican lie.

The sad fact is, the welfare paid out in this country pales sorely in comparison to the subsidies and tax breaks given to our large corporate entities and the ultra-wealthy. The point that appears to be painfully clear throughout the years is that the far-right definition of socialism clearly seems to be a one-sided interpretation that is blind to their own blatant hypocrisy when it comes to eagerly accepting subsidies or taking government money.

To be fair, the GOP definition exempts the corporate uber-rich from the charge of socialism, while holding any financial help for the middle and lower class to a wholly different standard. This could be argued as either psychotic behavior or criminal intent, but it most certainly cannot be accepted as a fair and balanced view of society. The divide is very clear.

Punctuating the social disconnect with today's far-right Republican party is their livid screed of sweeping Democratic socialism, all the while their Wall Street rich get fat from the government bail-out trough.

Adding insult to injury, (and you have to ask how stupid some of these guys really are) we now have Republican governors apparently posturing naively for their own political future, while pontificating wildly about the vastness of the stimulus package, in the process not saying a thing about their own rich corporate donors, yet rejecting stimulus aid for the unemployed destitute families in their states. It's apparently okay for wealthy corporations to be bailed-out, but damn the unemployed American worker, huh?

The country is crumbling economically from 30 years of Reaganomics and its now horribly overrated Milton Friedman trickle down theory, and the GOP wants to say that a switch from this course will take us to sweeping Stalinistic socialism? Nothing could be further from the truth nor farther away from this tired old Republican lie.

Is The GOP making a political boner out of resistance to the much needed stimulus?

What has undeniably been most unsettling since the regime change in this country has been the call to arms by the extreme-right for a revolution in this country. This radical clarion call for dissent was a troubling theme for the recent CPAC convention and one that could arguably be considered as treasonous, especially in light of the unfounded rhetoric being propagated by the GOP in just the first month of the new Democratic administration.

Think about that for a minute. Only one month of Obama and many key GOP leaders are actually encouraging a revolution in this country. And for what life threatening reason? Because someone is trying to pick up the pieces from a failed economic theory that has benefited only 1% of Americans in the last thirty years, or trying to right a domestic ship that is rapidly sinking from the last eight years of irresponsible governance and fiscal malfeasance?

ONE month! C'mon GOP. It can't be that bad can it? One month of Democrats in charge and you're ready to throw the country under the bus? Seriously?

Is it really as bad as having our country attacked on 9/11 when bush had an August Presidential Daily Briefing that explicitly warned him to take action?

Is it as bad as the rash of unsolved US army grade anthrax attacks on America?

Is it as bad as the resulting Patriot Act that now allows our government to incarcerate anyone we deem to be a terrorist, indefinitely, with no Habeas Corpus rights, or to kill them with no explanations allowed to family members? (American citizens included.)

Is it really as bad as starting a pre-emptive war against an innocent country, savagely killing millions of civilians, (men, women, children, animals) with no aforementioned link to 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction?

Is it really as bad as all that? Seriously?

One could go on and on about the gazillion other Bush administration gaffes, deceits, and travesties... the illegal wiretapping, surveillance and detention of US citizens, the loss of Habeas Corpus, the allowance of rendition and torture despite our pious belief in Geneva Convention rules that we so arrogantly fight others for, the outing of a known CIA agent for purely political retribution, the $2-trillion dollars missing from the Pentagon the day before 9/11, paying newspaper reporters to write stories of propaganda in US newspapers, the ineptitude and lack of urgency in handling the Katrina disaster, making America a bigger target for terrorism with reckless accusations and an overly aggressive foreign policy, the refusal to show honor and respect for our war dead by issuing a media blackout so Americans don't see the true horror and cost of war... I mean, c'mon.

Stop me please if the GOP already gets this.

We've finally transitioned to a president who actually thinks before he speaks, as opposed to one who has a problem just speaking at all. (nuke-a-ler weapons)

And one month of this is just too much for some in the Republican party? Really?

Wow.  :o(

Some in the GOP apparently need to take a huge chill pill and a serious reality check, puh-leez. It's time to quit being partisan and become Americans in this life or death fight that we're all now collectively up against. The far-right has had undeniable power and influence on Capitol Hill for many years now and this nation is most arguably suffering from its policy effects. In light of this blinding reality, one would think it might be a great time to buck up and take one for the American people, as opposed to fomenting the rabid irrational side of their struggling party.

Republicans have openly refused to work together with Obama during a time of crisis.

At this point, it would seem that the Republicans are more about assigning the blame elsewhere in an attempt to save their political party, rather than rolling their sleeves up and going to work in a collective bi-partisan effort, for the good of all Americans, to save this once great nation. The temerity of the Republicans to employ partisan politics during a time when our country is sinking from past GOP policies is galling at the least and treasonous at its worst. A case could be made, if you helped start the fire, you damn well better shut up and help put it out. The is an American threat, so please treat it as such with the unity and patriotism it deserves. Is that asking the GOP too much?

As it stands, the current GOP stance on the stimulus package is tantamount to blatant recalcitrance for the people they serve, those who need the help most, more so than the fat-cats on Wall Street who put us here in the first place.

This situation is as serious as it gets for the future of our country, and yet the Republican party, just crushed in the recent election, thinks this is a great time to play politics while the nation is hanging by a thread from economic collapse.

Let's see now, the GOP was once big on being patriotic, like right after 9/11 and also during the Iraq war, with anything less being considered to be against the US.

Remember all of that patriotic rhetoric?

And so, somehow, it is now okay to stand against the President, at a time when our country is truly in trouble of not only crumbling, but also taking down others tied to our unsteady dollar. And those countries will be pretty angry when all is said and done if this collapse is worldwide and they sink with us. All they'll have left is a dire need and lots of nuclear weapons. Not a pretty scenario to entertain, unless you're for that sordid type of thing. The latter is brought up only because, unfortunately, with all seriousness intended, that has become a pretty hard call for some when it comes to the extreme right these days. Apologies to those offended.

But again, this is about unbalanced right-wing individuals using unfounded incendiary language and encouraging revolution and anarchy, all after just ONE MONTH of the Obama administration. For crying out loud people. It took most Democrats and Americans a little longer than that with Bush.

Speaking of the Democrats... they have only come back to power in Congress the last two years, but what did they do? Remember hot headed Nancy Pelosi? "Mr. Bush, there's a new sheriff in town." And what did they do? They laid down and rolled over for the GOP under the guise of doing what's right during a time of war and conflict. They played ball rather than try to derail the Iraq war effort. More importantly, for such a party that was supposed to be so partisan, they took impeachment off the table, much to the chagrin, dismay and anger of their political base and those who voted them to office.

Two years. Hardly any time at all to rack up the historically horrible situation that our country faces, yet according to far right parrots such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, this is the Democrats fault is is increasing exponentially under Obama with all the fault being his.

One month and this is Obama's fault? One month and some are ready to riot already?

This alone ought to raise red flags for most Americans while highlighting the character and lack of integrity from those screaming the loudest on behalf of the Republican party. At times you have to call a spade a spade and this is just simply shameful on all counts, humanely and morally.

If anything can be said for the Democratic party, they played ball with the Republicans when they came into office, as opposed to the suicidal timing of the GOP who now fervently struggle to oppose absolutely anything Obama and the Democratic party.

The term "tax and spend" liberal is a calculated attempt to brainwash the average American into thinking that there is something terribly wrong with the concept of tax and spend, yet by the very nature of the capitalism we espouse so virtuously to all the world, that is the correct way to govern.

For anyone to question raising taxes now clearly highlights the true depth of their ignorance in the understanding of this crisis.

[ more to come..... ]



Check Our Current National Debt

Big-Money Lines Up Against Obama


'Republicans Gone Wild!'

Keith Olbermann examines the Republican vitriol towards liberal Americans.

Keith Olbermann Interviews Nobel Prize Winning Economist Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman dissects the right's attack on the Obama stimulus plan.

Olbermann Interviews Robert Reich On The Obama Budget

A veteran of the Clinton administration, a fruitful economy, weighs in.

Keith Olbermann On The CPAC Conference

The right-wing rhetoric at this conference is disturbingly unpatriotic.

Rachel Maddow Reports On The CPAC COnference

This is hard to watch.

The GOP Had The Plan Revised, Did Not Vote For It, But Take Credit For It

The hypocrisy of taking credit for something they had nothing to do with.

The perception that comes from this creepy indoctrination is the Hitler youth.

This kid has no life experience to possibly measure social politics from.


Ed Note: If you are one of the 17% in America that still cling to the denying belief that the policies of the Bush administration were sound in principle and morality, or that it doesn't matter that Iraq had no 9/11 ties, nor weapons of mass destruction, please take the time to read this piece and do not be blinded by political bias which renders most Republicans incapable of discerning accurate accountability for this country's current economic crisis. More than likely, you place your party before patriotism for our country, which makes you part of the problem that this article seeks to highlight.

United we stand or divided we fall.
Which are you choosing?

Copyright © 2008 News Focus
Last modified: March 02, 2009