As developments continue unabated (DJ Trump Jr. admits annoyance that Russians promised dirt but didn't deliver), if this kind of revelation came about a candidate for whom you didn't vote, what would be your reaction? Honest answers only, please. Not asking anyone to go public, just think.
If you are playing first chair in the Trumpet section, there is no point in you reading this, because you are committed to that melody and will brook no criticism of the conductor. However, if you are a convert from another instrument, a reluctant joiner who just didn’t like HRC’s oboe, or just part of the listening audience waiting for the concert and either hoping you will enjoy it or dreading that you’ll hate it, then this piece is for you.
If you are playing first chair in the Trumpet section, there is no point in you reading this, because you are committed to that melody and will brook no criticism of the conductor. However, if you are a convert from another instrument, a reluctant joiner who just didn’t like HRC’s oboe, or just part of the listening audience waiting for the concert and either hoping you will enjoy it or dreading that you’ll hate it, then this piece is for you.
The Stink Test refers to applying the same standards of
judgment for one person (in this case, DJ Trump) that you would for another,
whether that person is HR Clinton or BH Obama or some as yet to be named
politico. For example, for the last eight years I’ve heard a multitude of
screams from the right about executive overreach, of the misuse of executive
orders, even though President Obama issued fewer than his predecessors, in fact,
fewer
than any 2-term president since Grover Cleveland.
PEOTUS Trump has promised he will not only continue the trend of
using executive orders, he will expand the scope and power of the executive
branch. If you have stopped screaming, it is time to admit that it wasn’t the
principle, it was the person and/or political direction (and the same is true
if you protested its use by Presidents Bush (either one, or Reagan), but not
President Clinton or Obama). If the growing power of the president to bypass
Congress (and if Congress would do its damn job, which, of course, requires
that less than august body to communicate honestly with each other and think
about the good of the country and not their party or themselves) is a concern,
then who holds office and what orders are given is irrelevant.
If it’s okay, in principle, for President Trump to undo the
actions of President Obama, then it was also okay, in principle, for President
Obama to undo the action of President Bush. The stink test.
If you refused to even hold hearings on a Supreme Court
nominee but complain about Democrats insisting that appointments go through the
same kind of vetting process you demanded in order to slow things down for the
last eight years, you have violated the stink test. Sadly, while we all expect
a certain amount of hypocrisy in politics, Mitch McConnell apparently hasn’t
showered in years and stinks to high heaven. Harry Reid wasn’t any better.
At the risk of sounding like a voice-over intro for “The New
Twilight Zone” (and about half the country feels like THAT is the name of the
current new reality show), imagine, if you will, an alternate universe where
the president-elect is Hillary Rodham Clinton. Imagine also the following
transition actions:
• appoints Chelsea’s husband to her transition team
• nominates Leonardo DiCaprio for head of the EPA (lots of
opinions, no actual experience)
• nominates a Vietnam era draft-dodger, pardoned by Jimmy
Carter, as Secretary of Defense
• nominates Harry Reid as Attorney General
• appoints former President Bill Clinton to, well, anything
• states that she will separate herself from the Clinton
Foundation and have Chelsea run it
• will keep her paid speech commitments at least through 2017
• nominates the Chief Counsel of the National Abortion
Rights Action League to the Supreme Court
• appoints NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia as Secretary of
Education *
• pardons Edward Snowden and appoints him Chairman of
the NSA
• nominates Leonard Weinstock for head of the Small Business
Association
• nominates George Soros as Secretary of the Treasury
Well, this has been fun (and educational, because I actually
had to do some research to come up with names and matching positions, instead
of emulating the PEOTUS and just pulling them out of my, uh, hat), but if I
haven’t made the point yet, then go back to practicing your trumpet.
If an action stinks on one side, it stinks on both sides. You cannot pick and choose which alligators to remove from the swamp and then hope it’s now safe to retrieve your golf ball or go wading. Your, or my, agreement or disagreement, like or dislike, is irrelevant. I am
not suggesting you refrain from either a critical or glowing review of any piece
from the concert, but be honest enough with yourself to admit that your
applause or criticism may be based not on some exalted moral or Constitutional principle but on whether
you like the music.
* If you would have raised your voice
against Clinton, had she won, appointing a big donor to a position for which he
had opinions but no expertise or experience), then surely you must object to the
choice of Betsy Devos as Secretary of Education. If you have ANY stake in
public education PK-University), whether as a parent, teacher, student,
grandparent, hell, even as a concerned citizen who recognizes that our country’s
future depends on a successful public education program, you must be concerned
about this appointment. Her nomination is an abomination.
No comments:
Post a Comment