Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How About Scandal, Incompetence, Venality, Hubris, Vanity and Error to Start
Townhall.com ^ | May 17, 2013 | John Ransom

Posted on 05/17/2013 5:40:59 AM PDT by Kaslin

Lost amidst the White House he-said-she-said of finger pointing, scandal, incompetence, venality, hubris, vanity, error, greed, gluttony, embarrassment, cover up, stupidity,  amateur bungling, brownnosing, grandstanding, photo-opting and hearings as the result of a few minor mistakes made by the Obama administration- an administration which rode roughshod over a several outdated laws, certain small parts of the Bill of Rights written by irrelevant white dudes; an administration that got people killed, violated civil rights, harassed government employees, ignored it’s basic responsibilities and common sense- are these small, little, niggling details: The folks in charge are freaking hypocrites; and because the are hypocrites they have nothing to offer the American people.

Nothing as in Zero (0).

Their ideas don’t work, and all they stand for is some vague notion of fairness and equity, with themselves as judge over what’s fair and what’s not.  Even in that they fail.

As demonstrated recently, their notions of fairness and equity are worrisome.  They want to win politically, by fair means or foul. That’s their only idea of fairness.   

Let’s get that straight right now:  Neither the Democrat Party, nor the Republican Party (or the Libertarians or the Party According to St. Ron Paul), occupies some morally superior position either by virtue of ideology, philosophy or through the grace of God.

Political parties, units of government, corporations, non-profits, churches or GBLT parade groups are not bestowed with moral qualities. 

Only people are moral beings. Institutions, including the corporations known as presidential administrations, are amoral.   

They all do whatever they can do to survive.  

I was struck by this as I was reading a Chicago Tribune editorial-board editorial that was less-than-supportive of the administration’s explanations about the triptych of scandals now besieging the White House.

“At each of these turns,” writes the Tribune, “the Obama administration has looked manipulative, defensive and peevish. In one sense those aren't startling reactions; they're vulnerabilities for any White House that, like this one, wants an image of moral righteousness, honesty and transparency.”

I know, I know: You’re laughing too that anyone, even the Chicago Tribune editorial board, could take seriously an Obama administration “that wants an image of moral righteousness, honesty and transparency.”

But the administration does want to project that image. Obama was re-elected not because he was effective as the executive head of government, but because the American people long for leaders who offer them moral righteousness.

The American people will overlook incompetence for the ability to live daringly, greatly and righteously.     

Obama, indisputably offers righteousness. It’s wrong-headed and self-righteous rather than virtuous, but a sucker is born every minute and the point still stands even if at a left angle.

That desire to live a “right” life, however, is also the most important vulnerability to the advance of the liberal-progressive ideology.   

Liberals, as president Obama reminded newly-minted Ohio State graduates last week, believe in a government serving the greater good through a slew of mechanisms, makeshifts and management run by Washington, D.C.

But if anything has been shown through the he-said-she-said of finger pointing, scandal, incompetence, venality, hubris, vanity and error is that when government and politics gets involved you can expect the he-said-she-said of finger pointing, scandal, incompetence, venality, hubris, vanity and error, regardless of which party is in charge, which federal agency is standing in judgment or what greater good they are trying to serve.

And that’s the essence of the smaller government argument, which, thankfully, president Obama has so artfully framed, even though he didn’t mean to.

Obama and the Democrats want to bind us into a moral community of righteousness where no child is left behind, insurance premiums react to any papal edict, the men are good looking and the women are always strong.   

But to this task they have only a blunt object to do the job  

Moral communities are created only by people, not by governments operating with blunt force.

Governments are remembered mostly for their mistakes and people are remembered mostly for their accomplishments.  

And there is a reason why it is so.

Americans will no doubt ponder that, when we follow our duty to give it expression.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 05/17/2013 5:40:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Dear Carpetbagger John, 

Scandal, Incompetence, Venality, Hubris, Vanity and Error?


"Oops"
 
 That Scandal, Incompetence, Venality, Hubris, Vanity and Error?
 
 FAIL.

2 posted on 05/17/2013 5:51:50 AM PDT by TArcher ("TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS, governments are instituted among men" -- Does that still work?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The Law Defends Plunder

But it does not always do this. Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Thus the beneficiaries are spared the shame, danger, and scruple which their acts would otherwise involve. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons, and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim — when he defends himself — as a criminal. In short, there is a legal plunder, and it is of this, no doubt, that Mr. de Montalembert speaks.

This legal plunder may be only an isolated stain among the legislative measures of the people. If so, it is best to wipe it out with a minimum of speeches and denunciations — and in spite of the uproar of the vested interests.

How to Identify Legal Plunder

But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

end excerpts from “The Law” - Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850

TREASON - “acting”/appointed/entrenched unaccountable bureaucrats (socialists) elevating to TOTALITARIAN tactics for the powers that be when the time is right.

DISMANTLE the IRS.

TREASON - continuous, PRE-MEDITATED, agenda-driven, in-your-face, media-complicit, AGENCY-ABETTED, REPRESENTATIVE-DIRECTED, ongoing...

DEPOPULATE totalitarians from the body politic. DISMANTLE their system.

How about TREASON?


3 posted on 05/17/2013 6:28:07 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson