My way or the highway

Imagine for a moment that parties engaged to be married were discussing their future. One party issued an ultimatum to the other: During our marriage, you will be required to do exactly as I say, without discussion or compromise. Given such a requirement for marriage, few couples would ever tie the knot. Unfortunately, this appears to be the attitude at the congressional level of our government, especially of members of the Tea Party. Such an attitude was clearly expressed by Richard Mourdock, the Tea Party candidate who recently defeated Republican Sen. Dick Lugar in the primary election in their state. When asked about his attitude about bi-partisanship approaches to legislation, Mr. Mourdock said his attitude about bi-partisanship was that the Democrats should simply come and agree with everything the Republicans wanted.

Such an attitude is very unlikely to change the deadlock that has paralyzed the U.S. Congress for far too long. The rhetoric of campaign extremes, particularly on the conservative side, seems to attempt to make “compromise” or “moderate” dirty words. Candidates in the Republican primary appeared to want to out-conservative one another while, unfortunately, failing to advise the electorate as to what they might or might not do about jobs, the economy, flagging education and increasing attacks on the environment.

Unfortunately, too many right-wingers who carry little copies of the United States Constitution in their pockets have forgotten the lessons of our forefathers. These ideologues should revisit the book detailing how our Constitution was born titled “The Miracle at Philadelphia.” Had our forefathers carried forward the attitude of today’s politicians, the wonderful instrument known as the United States Constitution would never have been born. The history of the writing of the basic instrument of our laws is a history of compromise among people with strongly held views. It produced a foundation instrument for government that has endured longer than almost any other document known to man, with the possible exception of the Ten Commandments.

The issue of the federal deficit is a good example of why an unyielding attitude and the mantra of “no compromise” does not work. Politicians often compare government to a family and rant about the fact that families must live within their means. Any family who found themselves deeply in debt but had the opportunity to both increase their income and reduce their expenditures would most certainly adopt an approach including both.

Unfortunately, Republicans choose to follow written pledges they have given to “no tax” gurus without regard to what the future may hold or what might be the critical needs of this country. In my opinion, the future of America is certainly not just “my way” but certainly should be “our way.”

Carl Parker has practiced law in Port Arthur since 1958. He is a 1958 graduate of the University of Texas School of Law. Elected to the Texas House of Representatives in 1962 and the Senate in 1976, Parker continued to practice law while writing and sponsoring hundreds of bills that became laws relating to every aspect of life in Texas, including many regarding consumer safety. His e-mail is cap1934 [at] aol [dot] com.

shadow

Comments

Exactly Which Political Party has Proven their Worth ?

Political paralysis can sometimes be considered to be a 'blessing' . . . especially when verifying that current US President Barack Hussein Obama had aligned himself not just with the philosophy of Saul Alinsky but with the Marxist led New Party just before being elected US President.

And, although the Democrat party has partnered with the Republican party to the advantage of their cronies and at the expense of 'the people', it will be the need for 'the people' to determine what path our republic should pursue . . . after the day of reckoning; that is, the time period in which the monetary and fiscal ills come face to face with the very politicians who have embraced an unsustainable political dictate.

Question is: will the Tea Party that shadows the Libertarian concept be the party to usher in the re-establishment of the very ideals upon which our republic were founded? . . . that all men are created equal . . . with the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness . . . in a society that embraces the free market place with currency backed by gold and silver . . . under the rule of law?

Or, will 'the people' choose to embrace one of the two established political parties that want to pass ever more regulations, establish ever more bureaucracies, tax and spend ever more monies, and embrace the rule of man?

If in doubt, reflect upon how many have walked free, not even being brought to justice . . . whether from the latest financial sector fiascos or those locally who have misallocated millions from the hurricane assistance funds, the PA Housing Authority or the BISD bond funds. Consider the worthiness of placing additional trust in the two major political parties to solve problems . . . the very problems in which they have created. And, does anyone really believe it is possible to bring under control the ever increasing national debt? Really? REALLY?

Nope, it isn't the Tea Party nor the Libertarian party that should be scrutinized . . . it is the very political parties now occupying the seats of power. And, it just so happens to be the Democrat party that is in the driver's seat that has overstayed their welcome.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.