"You Can't Govern if You Don't Believe in Government"

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
by Thom Hartmann

In a May 25, 2001 interview, Grover Norquist told National Public Radio's Mara Liasson, "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."

Norquist got his wish. Democracy - and at least several thousand people, most of them Democrats, black, and poor - drowned last week in the basin of New Orleans. Our nation failed in its response, because for most of the past 25 years conservatives who don't believe in governance have run our government.

As incompetent as George W. Bush has been in his response to the disaster in New Orleans, he wasn't the one who began the process that inevitably led to that disaster spiraling out of control.

That would be Ronald Reagan.

It was Reagan who began the deliberate and intentional destruction of the United States of America when he famously cracked (and then incessantly repeated): "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

Reagan, like George W. Bush after him, failed to understand that when people come together into community, and then into nationhood, that they organize themselves to protect themselves from predators, both human and corporate, both domestic and foreign. This form of organization is called government.

But the Reagan/Bush ideologues don't "believe" in government, in anything other than a military and police capacity. Government should punish, they agree, but it should never nurture, protect, or defend individuals. Nurturing and protecting, they suggest, is the more appropriate role of religious institutions, private charities, families, and - perhaps most important - corporations.

Let the corporations handle your old-age pension. Let the corporations decide how much protection we and our environment need from their toxics. Let the corporations decide what we're paid. Let the corporations decide what doctor we can see, when, and for what purpose.

This is the exact opposite of the vision for which the Founders of this nation fought and died. When Thomas Jefferson changed John Locke's "Life, liberty, and private property" to "Live, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," it was the first time in the history of the world that a newly founded nation had written the word "happiness" into its founding document. The phrase "promote the general welfare" - another revolutionary concept - first appeared in the preamble to our Constitution in 1787.

Talk show cons and TV talking head cons and political cons - both Republican and DLC Democratic - repeat the mantra of "smaller government," and Americans nod their heads in agreement, not realizing the hidden agenda at work.

Reagan was the first American president to actually preach that his own job was a bad thing. He once said, "Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." One can only assume he was speaking of himself and his fellow Republicans, and certainly the current Congress's devotion to the interests of inherited wealth and large corporations displays how badly his philosophy has corrupted a role so noble it drew idealists like Jefferson, Lincoln, and the two Roosevelts.

But cons can't imagine anybody wanting to devote their lives to the service of their nation. The highest calling in their minds is to make profit.

As Reagan said: "The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away."

This mind-set - that the only purpose for service in government is to set up the interests of business - may account for why not a single military-eligible member of the Bush or Cheney families has enlisted in their parents' "Noble Cause," whereas all four sons of Franklin Roosevelt joined and each was decorated - on merit - for bravery in the deadly conflict of World War II.

There are, after all, no reasons in the conservative worldview for government service other than self-enrichment. As Ronald Reagan said: "Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed there are many rewards, if you disgrace yourself you can always write a book."

What they don't say is that the reason they want to remove government in its protective capacity is because they can then make an enormous amount of money, and have a lot of control over people's lives, when they privatize former governmental functions. They want a power vacuum, so corporations and the rich can step in. And with no limits on the inheritability of riches after the "death tax" is ended, wealth vast enough to take over the government can emerge.

Given this conservative world-view, it shouldn't surprise us that in 2001 George W. Bush appointed his 2000 presidential campaign manager (Joseph Albaugh) as head of FEMA, or that two years later Albaugh would have left FEMA to start a consulting firm to marry corporations with Iraq "reconstruction" federal dollars, and put in charge of FEMA his assistant (and old college roommate), an equally unqualified former failed executive with the International Arabian Horse Association.

It also shouldn't surprise us that although Dick Cheney has stayed on vacation in Wyoming through all of this, his company, Halliburton, has already obtained a multi-million-dollar contract to profit from Hurricane Katrina's cleanup.

It's not that these conservatives are incompetent or stupid. When their interests are at stake, they can be very efficient. Consider when Hurricane Charley hit Jeb Bush's state - a year earlier than Katrina - on the second weekend of August, 2004, just months before the elections. The White House website notes:

As of noon Monday [the day after the hurricane left], in response to Hurricane Frances, FEMA and other Federal response agencies have taken the following actions:


-- About one hundred trucks of water and 280 trucks of ice are present or will arrive in the Jacksonville staging area today. 900,000 Meals-Ready-to-Eat are on site in Jacksonville, ready to be distributed.

-- Over 7,000 cases of food (e.g., vegetables, fruits, cheese, ham, and turkey) are scheduled to arrive in Winter Haven today. Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMAT) are on the ground and setting up comfort stations. FEMA community relations personnel will coordinate with DMATs to assist victims. -- Urban Search and Rescue Teams are completing reconnaissance missions in coordination with state officials.

-- FEMA is coordinating with the Department of Energy and the state to ensure that necessary fuel supplies can be distributed throughout the state, with a special focus on hospitals and other emergency facilities that are running on generators.

-- The Army Corps of Engineers will soon begin its efforts to provide tarps to tens of thousands of owners of homes and buildings that have seen damage to their roofs.

-- The National Guard has called up 4,100 troops in Florida, as well as thousands in other nearby states to assist in the distribution of supplies and in preparation for any flooding.

-- The Departments of Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs, and Defense together have organized 300 medical personnel to be on standby. Medical personnel will begin deployment to Florida tomorrow.

-- FEMA is coordinating public information messages with Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, and North Carolina so that evacuees from Florida can be informed when it is safe to return. -- In addition to federal personnel already in place to respond to Hurricane Charley, 1,000 additional community relations personnel are being deployed to Atlanta for training and further assignment in Florida.​

All of this aid was vitally important to Bush family political fortunes in the upcoming election of 2004. Disaster relief checks were in the mail within a week. In just the first thirteen days after Hurricane Charley hit Florida, the White House web site notes that the Bush administration had succeeded in:


-- Registering approximately 136,000 assistance applicants
-- Approving over 13,500 applications for more than $59 million in housing assistance

-- Establishing 12 disaster recovery centers, which have assisted nearly 19,000 disaster victims

-- Deploying medical teams that have seen nearly 3,000 patients

-- Disbursing 1.2 million liters of water, 8.1 million pounds of ice, and 2 million meals and snacks

-- Delivering over 20,000 rolls of plastic sheeting and nearly 170 generators

-- Treating more than 2,900 individuals through FEMA Disaster Medical Assistance Teams, supporting damaged hospitals​

That, of course, was for a Republican State, with a Republican governor, the crony brother of the President. Republicans needed to act like they cared about governing, because they wanted people to vote for them three months later.

But now, with no election looming and with death stalking a Democratic State with a Democratic Governor unrelated to the President, we once again see the Reagan philosophy held ascendant. Bush's call to action? "Send cash to the Red Cross." One of those "thousand points of light" non-governmental organizations his father told us about.

As Brian Gurney, a listener from California, noted: "You can't govern if you don't believe in government."

But you sure can make a buck, and take care of your brother, your campaign manager, and your vice president's company.
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
wonder why the democratic governor or the democratic mayor didn't make a plan to deal with the disaster like the "crony" brother did and why they didn't set things in motion before the storm like the "crony" brother did. just a couple phone calls is all it would have taken. in fact, as it became clear that a level of government incompetence never before witnessed was unfolding before the nation's eyes, bush called the governor who refused federal intervention! she told him that they had things under control and she also admitted this publicly on more than one occasion.

how can this come back to bush when numerous cities in Mississippi were just as devastated as NO but received less federal help and are now further along?

how can the left blame bush, the president, for mismanagement at the state level?

why are we supposed to think that the federal government is always on call to bail us out?

isn't that what the left really wants the federal government for, to step in and fix their screw ups?








.
 

medicineman

New Member
wonder why the democratic governor or the democratic mayor didn't make a plan to deal with the disaster like the "crony" brother did and why they didn't set things in motion before the storm like the "crony" brother did. just a couple phone calls is all it would have taken. in fact, as it became clear that a level of government incompetence never before witnessed was unfolding before the nation's eyes, bush called the governor who refused federal intervention! she told him that they had things under control and she also admitted this publicly on more than one occasion.

how can this come back to bush when numerous cities in Mississippi were just as devastated as NO but received less federal help and are now further along?

how can the left blame bush, the president, for mismanagement at the state level?

why are we supposed to think that the federal government is always on call to bail us out?

isn't that what the left really wants the federal government for, to step in and fix their screw ups?


Have you heard of FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency? They are supposed to take over in these gross disasters, even if the governor is incompetent, "Thanks Brownie, Nice Job", ~LOL~, WTF?




.
............................
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
No, That is why Federal Emergency Management Agency was set up, It would bankrupt the state to take care of it on a state level, you don't think your arguments out well enough... Your selfishness holds no bounds.
There is a reason for taxes, it is to take care of the infrastructure of the nation such as roads, bridges, to help with disasters and anything else that the people (US citizens) mandate. This is the reason we put people in office. But your and others call for smaller and smaller government would serve nothing but cause anarchy.
Med it may have been brown who dropped the ball but it was Chertoff who tied his hands.
 

Chrisuperfly

Well-Known Member
"It was a foolish man who built his house upon the sand"

I agree with 7xstall on this, the fact of the matter is we are talking about a city that is ~10 feet below sea level in an area that gets hit by hurricanes on a regular basis. It wasnt a matter of if this would ever happen but when. Now when shit hits the fan everyone is scrambling to point the finger at someone else for their own fuck-ups. I agree this should have been handled at the state and local level instead of slapping the federal titty for not giving enough milk.
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
ok, just ignore what i point out and tell me i didn't think about my post..

anyway, the feds can't get involved until the state asks for it; that's a constitution thing. Jeb declared a state of emergency BEFORE the storm because he was smart enough to realize that it was better to cancel it than let his citizens suffer if things got really bad.

who's selfish now, is it me, or the dems who didn't want to be humble enough to ask for help?




.
 

medicineman

New Member
No, That is why Federal Emergency Management Agency was set up, It would bankrupt the state to take care of it on a state level, you don't think your arguments out well enough... Your selfishness holds no bounds.
There is a reason for taxes, it is to take care of the infrastructure of the nation such as roads, bridges, to help with disasters and anything else that the people (US citizens) mandate. This is the reason we put people in office. But your and others call for smaller and smaller government would serve nothing but cause anarchy.
Med it may have been brown who dropped the ball but it was Chertoff who tied his hands.
Don't think I don't hate that little weasel, (Chertoff). What a phony asshole. I'll bet he's lucky to have over a 2 digit IQ.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
No Med Chertoff was an US Attorney before he got his job in the Bush Administration and was good at prosecuting Mafia figures. The problem is when he got his Job as head of Department of Homeland Security he has no organization skills.
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
so it looks like it's settled.

the democrats screwed up with katrina and they just want to blame bush. they attack him for trampling state's rights and individual liberty with the patriot act but they lambaste him for not running them over when a big storm hits. standard democrat MO.





.
 

medicineman

New Member
so it looks like it's settled.

the democrats screwed up with katrina and they just want to blame bush. they attack him for trampling state's rights and individual liberty with the patriot act but they lambaste him for not running them over when a big storm hits. standard democrat MO.





.
I can't believe the hate you harbor for the Democrats, Did one of them rape your sister or something, steal your car, burn down your house? My God man, all he did wrong is get a blowjob from a chunky 21 year old intern and get caught.
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
it's not a person in particular, med. it's the concept that comes to mind when i think of dems.

i see a government that thinks we're too stupid to know that KFC is bad for us, a system that is racist and hypocritical, a system that believes human life is nothing.

dems are anti-American because they constantly assault speech, religion, families.

it's a party that has shifted from, abandoned, the principals that make this country great.

at least the republicans have a chance to reform. there is a glimmer.

the dems are just gone, completely gone. i wish they would stop playing with their followers and admit that they want to blot out any trace of a constitutional republic because that's what they really want. they drag the masses along and hand out token gifts, lip service, but they are a party of pure deception to the core.




.
 

ViRedd

New Member
Exactly right, 7x.

This is why I continually say that the Democrat Party is the more dangerous to liberty of the two parties. In addition to what you've pointed out, the Dems have made a major attempt to eliminate God from the equasion. They MUST if they are going to teach that our rights come from bureaucrats instead of a Creator. The egos of these people are simply amazing.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
it's not a person in particular, med. it's the concept that comes to mind when i think of dems.

i see a government that thinks we're too stupid to know that KFC is bad for us, a system that is racist and hypocritical, a system that believes human life is nothing.

dems are anti-American because they constantly assault speech, religion, families.

it's a party that has shifted from, abandoned, the principals that make this country great.

at least the republicans have a chance to reform. there is a glimmer.

the dems are just gone, completely gone. i wish they would stop playing with their followers and admit that they want to blot out any trace of a constitutional republic because that's what they really want. they drag the masses along and hand out token gifts, lip service, but they are a party of pure deception to the core.




.
Hogwash, This is not even worth debating, I'll Just add this. Reform what; gay republican scandals, the disolution of our constitutional rights, a war for profit, the disintegration of the middle class, over 2 million net job losses. an open border policy that allows illegals to steal American jobs and leech off the welfare system, Ever rising prices while wages stagnate, the insidious wage increases by corporate CEOs and the gravitation of wealth to the wealthy in record numbers, Tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest .5 percent while maybe buying Mr. average American a car wash. The list of fuck ups is endless, unless of course you're a wannabee and see things going your way!
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
why do you insist that anyone with motivation to succeed is a wannabe? what is wrong with wanting to accomplish more?

it's not worth debating my points because you know i'm right. yes, republicans have big problems but you can't blame them for CEO salaries that make you jealous. you can't blame them and only them for inflation, and you certainly can't blame them for the non-existent "disintegration" of the middle class. how many times will you throw that party line rhetoric up and have it utterly destroyed on this forum?

i'm not going to say that republicans are a superior bunch, but like Vi said, the dems are clearly the most dangerous to the cause of liberty. this isn't even arguable.

you can bring up the patriot act, which i believe should expire now, but there's not one example of it being abused.

you can make fun of the gay guy and have that same kind of glee that terrorist had when they saw footage of the towers falling if that is your spirit, i laugh at him and his lies, but i've never celebrated when yet another dem is arrested for DUI or getting prostitutes or any of the crazy stuff they do... they are human, humans screw up.

it's not personal to me, it's about the nation and i wish the dems had that perspective as well.






.
 

medicineman

New Member
How anyone could disagree with that last post is beyond me. That was excellent, 7x.

Vi
Hey, knock off the sucking and get a room. Frick and Frack of the right wing have just scored another one, Goooaaaallllll. What utter crap. How do you debate idiocy, Duh you're wrong because you're stupid? the Repukes are the party of business and the dems are the party of the people, so are you a people or a business man, seems too simple for you guys to grasp eh? as they say in jolly old England, Ballocks!
 

ViRedd

New Member
You're so right about one thing, I'm certainly negative about you're right wing posts.
Yes, I know you're negative about my posts, Med. But, do a little self examination. You suffer from Stinkin' Thinkin' and need a check up, from the neck up. ~lol~ You constantly see the glass as half empty. You seem to lack understanding of the human desire to excell and to enjoy the fruits of that excellence. It never seems to occure to you that the attainment of wealth isn't an end in itself. Its the striving for excellence along the way that counts, Med.

Vi
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
Hey, knock off the sucking and get a room. Frick and Frack of the right wing have just scored another one, Goooaaaallllll. What utter crap. How do you debate idiocy, Duh you're wrong because you're stupid? the Repukes are the party of business and the dems are the party of the people, so are you a people or a business man, seems too simple for you guys to grasp eh? as they say in jolly old England, Ballocks!
there's another gay reference..

here's a test that i've devised just for you, med. don't worry, it won't get too personal, just be yourself.


what makes business work?

A. People
B. Marshmallows
C. Various types of furniture

what makes government work?

A. Laws that are crafted by overpaid elected officials and enforced by overpaid para-military police with unmatched firepower
B. Concern for people and families
C. Solar power


if you are right and the republican party is for business and people make business work, how do the dems short circuit the system and also work for people if they don't work for business? do they have their own type of business that no one but them is privy to? i think you can see where the logic goes med... the dems want to take the liberty to produce and earn away from people. they think we can't handle it, med. they think we're pathetic animals and they want to put us in a cage of regulation, taxation and litigation. it's not a matter of being for people or being for business, the two things go together. the issue is who you want setting your priorities and deciding what your possibilities are - the government or yourself.







.
 
Top