The great debate. or an exercise in demagoguery. by D.R. Starr II
(centrist)
Friday, December 11, 2009
For the folks on capital hill this is a vigorously debated topic. To a large number of politicians in Washington the word entitlement is code for welfare, or any government aid directly benefiting the common class. It seems that those who scream "NO ENTITLEMENT." the loudest when debating an issue of this nature, will without second thought vote in favor of a corporate subsidy, which is in effect corporate welfare. As much as we would like everyone to make it on their own accord, It is recognized that in order to have a society, some form of compromise is necessary.
What, by nature of ones birth, is an American entitled to? The easy ones are spelled out in the constitution and the bill of rights. The gray area lies in the "entitlements" many would call unconstitutional that were put in place by the Franklin D. Roosevelts administration. Many say that it was a major shift into Socialism. This statement, in spirit & letter, is accurate. However, how would one go about maintaining a society without some form, and degree of socialism?
Should a corporate entity be afforded the same entitlements, rights, and privileges given an American citizen? They now enjoy "corporate personhood or legal person ". A large number of people argue that this is a move toward fascism, taking the position that by having the right to lobby government, the one with the most money speaks loudest. The concern being, that the common will not be able to organize a collective voice effective enough, to keep the corporate_military complex from seizing power. But again, without legal protection to corporations, how could one maintain a healthy economy?
Both arguments have merit, and a basis on which a compromise could be found, through reasonable debate. This is where it gets sticky. The atmosphere in Washington is a continuous run for office, with political posturing on both sides, not based on the issues or the best choices for the common good, but on the populous polls. The result being such ridiculous arguments and talking points that you can't believe such a person could get elected in the first place. Televised debates in the house and senate are for the most part orchestrated political theater, though providing more entertainment value than Comedy Central, it is not conducive to good government.
The American populous are reactionaries who can't see past the current news cycle. Governing from polls are a great way to keep being re-elected, but the job is to govern for posterity, always looking to the future and learning from the past. Giving the masses what they demand today, may be their demise tomorrow. It used to be said by politicians that some times you have to give something up to do some good. Not so any more, it is simply a game of appeasement to stay in office, it matters not if any public good is actually accomplished so long as re-election is secure. So in effect persons are being elected who's job, is to keep getting re-elected and maybe get a few dollars, and a few projects funneled back home.
If something close to a miracle dosen't happen soon, I'm afraid we will be past the point of no return.
I'm Just Say'n
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 3
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of D.R. Starr II only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
D.R. Starr II is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
