Vail Daily letter: There he goes again
Vail, CO Colorado
In response to Frederic Butler’s recent letter: More hate and fear from the far right.
It seems this is their only tactic to get their point across – and, of course, distortion and hypocrisy so long as it serves their agenda. In his letter, Butler denounces, by inference, the use of legislation by “executive order” by the Obama administration.
During the Bush administration, governing by executive order happened over 260 times.
I guess it’s OK if it’s his side that does it.
As to Butler’s assertion that the recently passed health care legislation was “fomented” behind closed doors, that’s just plain false, a lie. If memory serves, the health care legislation was rancorously debated ad nauseam for 18 months and couldn’t have been more transparent, overtelevised, overexposed to the point that the term “health care fatigue” joined the lexicon. I don’t know what he’s talking about. Maybe he didn’t turn on the TV for a year and a half.
Cronyism in this administration? Butler’s comment about cronyism and the “evidence of imperialism” is a jaw-dropper and laughably shameless. He forgets the rampant cronyism of the Bush administration and the straight-faced defense of pathetically incompetent but well-connected appointees to very high offices like the Office of Management and Budget, key people to the FDA, Homeland Security, dozens of inspectors general with political connections (never vetted) more than qualifications and the now legendary inept but well-connected Michael Brown, Bush’s buddy chosen to head up FEMA.
At least the Obama administration hasn’t made any high-powered appointments to buddies who scored him good seats for the World Series.
Then, there’s Alberto Gonzales, the poster boy for a crony appointment. This list goes on. …
Mr. Butler could really boost the credibility of his position if he tried Googling a few things from an objective source next time he shoots off another wildly biased letter.
It doesn’t take much effort. He’s entitled to his opinions, but back them up with facts.
It’s important to keep in mind, as Butler states, the original intention of the Constitution as the guidepost. But I’d argue that it’s even more important to deal with current realities, laden with the law of unintended consequences, that ideologues seem to forget about in favor of simplistic ideas about constitutional purity. Managing nuance and evolving circumstances and legislating accordingly is a big part of what our elected officials are sent to Washington to do.
The history lesson he lays out in his letter in defense of constitutional purity is about the same as comparing oranges to fish hooks in terms of what was going on in 18th century America and today.
This type of selective spewing is part of the political poison in our country that is so toxic, people within their own party are eating their own.
Tea partiers conveniently leave out that one part where their membership (over 90 percent of them who earn less than $250,000 per year) have received a tax break already or that TARP – admittedly distasteful to everyone – worked. Financial reform legislation just passed.
Tea partiers want government out of the way. Fine, but does that mean that they’re in favor actually of leaving intact the formerly unregulated foxes minding the hen house, the system that almost brought the country down because it seems to fit their platform? Gee, I hope not.
Decades of unfettered capitalism (under Clinton, too, but he ran budget surpluses) almost destroyed our country. Some regulation and consumer protections are in order, if you ask me.
It’s very hard to take people seriously who won’t engage in anything like a reasoned discussion about the political atmosphere and policies when they won’t include facts. As I’ve said in previous letters, our demise will be saved by the checks and balances that our Constitution provides for. The end is not near.
Mr. Butler, I always look forward to your letters.
Tim Moffet, Vail