Just saw this Tweet by none other than the man who broadcasts “from somewhere below the brick and steel of a nondescript building” – conservative talk radio host Mark Levin – and had to share it with you. In a Facebook note, he asks the question(s) that all of us should be asking – not just in terms of the current debt standoff – but in terms of accountable government and adequate representation from the men and women we continue to send to Washington under the banner of the Republican Party.
“What if We Controlled All Elected Branches of the Federal Government?”
As Mr. Levin points out, that question is one being raised raised by conservative thinkers like Charles Krauthammer in the context of balancing what Congressional Republicans must do now versus what they could potentially do after next November’s elections. I echoed that inquiry with this post yesterday sharing my thoughts on the matter and pointing out that both Charles Krauthammer and Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson seem to understand the reality that befalls a party that controls but one half of one third of government.
I won’t belabor that point or that question here. You can read the content therein if you’d like. I’d much prefer to explore the second question posed by Mr. Levin as it appears to me to be the only real question worth asking. I suppose it’s more of a statement than a question, but I am certain your curiosity and frustration with the dilemma will produce sufficient points to ponder.
“The problem is far worse than not controlling all the elected branches of the federal government. The problem is that Republicans, especially the leaders and those who’ve been on Capitol Hill a long time, simply do not agree with us. They simply are protectors of the status quo, while railing against it when they are running for office or even while promoting destructive policies.”
As Mr. Levin points out in his brief but poignant and prescient remarks, the problem may not be the fact that we do not control government in Washington, but the fact that we do not send the right men and women there to do the People’s Business.
He calls them “protectors of the status quo.” He aptly reminds us that these are the same people that openly “rail against it [the status quo] when they are running for office or even while promoting destructive polities.” He points out that even though Republicans controlled the Senate for much of the Bush years, they still did very little to change the course of “business as usual” in Washington.
My question – why is this so?
As I’ve’ said repeatedly here, I believe with all my heart that the reason we continue to elect men and women incapable of governing with the same sense of conviction and commitment to Founding Principles as those who “campaign” is because WE do not do the hard work of weighing and measuring our candidates before we anoint them with the label of “conservative.” We want candidates willing to sign pledges, take oaths, agree to pacts, and regurgitate laundry list talking point positions on issues; but we ask very little of these men and women regarding their actual approach to governance. How do they come to said positions is far more important a question to ask than “what is their position” on any given issue. What does the latter tell you about how they will balance conflicting interests that arise in the course of actually legislating? I say very little.
In what other walk of life would we take men so carelessly and recklessly at their word? In what reality would reasonable inquiry not pose even stiffer and probing questions to those who would seek to “represent” us? What logic would allow us to have an even lower standard for politicians – of all people – than everyone else in life we may encounter?
Let me be clear about one thing here. I am not giving these mindless, conviction-depraved sycophants, a pass here. Just because I expect nothing from them does not mean I believe that they will not have to answer to a higher power for their transgressions and shortcomings. One cannot swear oaths to a multitude of masters without ultimately paying the price of being judged in this world or the next. There is but one oath of office and it is to God our Creator. It is an oath to defend the Constitution and to do the bidding of the American People. I would humbly submit that far too many of our elected officials have lost sight of which oath, pledge, or pact they put at the top of the list.
So what’s the solution here? I’m not sure there is a simple answer. In a system of representative government we are always going to find ourselves putting faith in other men and women who by the very nature as human beings are inherently flawed. There is always going to be an element of faith and trust. I understand that. I would simply prefer that we do the vetting of the visible flaws/truths before we send them to Washington and give them the advantage of incumbency.
In sum, I suppose it’s time to establish a new formula for picking and choosing among those flawed individuals who aim to serve in representative government. We can no longer rely upon the rote recitation of talking points. We can no longer grant absolution with the simple act of signing a pledge. We can no longer send to Washington men and women who know only enough about Founding Principles as to find a clear trail to elected office. We must begin to ask more of our candidates than “what are your positions on the issues?” We must begin to ask the only question that matters – WHY do you take those positions?
Without asking WHY(?); we have no way of knowing how our elected representatives will govern when they take to Capitol Hill and are forced to tackle real-world questions that weren’t spelled out for them in a pledge, an oath, a pact, or a list of talking points. Without that, we will continue to have more of the same. We will have status quo and our hands will not be clean of the stench.
If Republicans controlled all branches of government we would return to the 19th century. You guys are as guilty of lacking leadership as President Obama and the Democrats. This debate illustrates the need for a third party in this country. No not the tea party either. A real party that represents the will of real Americans.