Monday, June 20, 2011

Pelosi's All Knowing Hypocrisy

House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi frequently positions herself as "friend of the middle class." In reality that would have been like Joseph Stalin calling himself "friend to the Peasant Farmer" in 1934.

Stalin stole their land, livestock and forced them to collectivize. Better than 14 million Peasant Farmers perished during this time of collectivization in the former Soviet Union. Stories are told about "Kulaks" who were violently forced from their land, herded into unheated cattle cars and shipped east. The term "Kulak" translates to a landowning farmer. One "Kulak" that comes to mind had 200 acres of land, 20 cows, 10 horses, some Hogs and Chickens and two barns. These "rich farmers" resisted and the Bolsheviks shot both adult men dead. The women were given five minutes to grab the children and whatever they could carry. Then it was on to the train for their 1000 mile junket to Siberia.

Of course, this action was in the interest of the common good. "The people" who Bolsheviks represented with hypocritical ardor, would ultimately benefit from this practice. Never mind how many would perish in the process! The countless tales of women arriving in snowbound Siberia, digging shallow holes and laying atop their children to keep them from freezing, was considered "for the common good." The famine and starvation these Peasants endured was a small price to pay when observing the big picture. To understand "why" was simply beyond the average persons' grasp! Stalinists considered all actions necessary for the betterment of the whole. Comrade Stalin knew best. Those who questioned him would quickly became proud holders of "a ticket;" to the Gulag!

While the methods may have softened, the mentality remains the same. Nancy Pelosi epitomizes "Americas' ruling class." She is one of those "all knowing elites" referenced in "E" is for English. One could reason that her "35 million plus" in personal assets might make it impossible for her to identity with the $30,000 per year "Disaffecteds" referenced in my June 16th blog. But in her mind, she is their ambassador!

Actually, she is as "out of touch as any human being on the planet!" If she were not, she would be first in line to condemn the actions of the Environmental Protection Agency: Americas "foremost job killer." If she truly cared about Americas' unemployed, she would be "burning the midnight oil" seeking ways to get people back to work. This might be as simple as joining Republicans in their plea to federal agencies to please "show indisputable facts and not theories when delaying issuance of permits, or enacting unnecessary lawsuits.

Maybe it's not Nancy's way! She had demonstrated little sympathy for the pocketbooks of Middle America! A vocal advocate of Henry Waxman's creation, AKA "Cap and Trade," her rationale was "we have a planet to save." It is a position that is held by surprisingly large numbers of politicians! Not the majority, perhaps. But there were enough votes either through genuine belief or via naive adoption to pass the bill in the House of Representitves. The Senate later proved to be a "hurdle too high." In the end, the E.P.A. proceeded anyway!

The Environmental Protection Agency is now larger than the Internal Revenue Service. As expected, a big staff translates to "the need to create more work to insure that everyone remain busy." It generally translates to "overzealousness." This can lead to problems.

At the top of the list may be the question of "hydralic fracturing." This process of "pumping water, sand and trace chemicals" into a completed wellbore is the subject of vigorous debate. Proponents affirm correctly that the process unlocks vast stores of oil and natural gas. The opposition led by an aggressive E.P.A. cite issues ranging from "earthquakes to fire in your kitchen faucet."

Evidence is inconclusive at best. Many assertions are simply misrepresentations or exaggerations! The E.P.A. largely makes determinations based on limited studies by inside panels. Their way often does not to consult industry professionals. Perhaps these outside conclusions might deviate from what is politically correct! They might even be at odds with a pre-determined agenda!

From a practical point of view, the country needs to become energy independent. The United States has more energy resources than any country in the world. But, like no other country, we limit or prohibit access to these resources. Would Nancy Pelosi care if this practice might be standing in the way of a recovery? You would think that she would! After all, she calls herself a "friend of the middle class!" Hydrallic fracturing potentially creates hundred of thousands of high paying jobs. A lot would go to holders of a G.E.D.! These are working people who have been especially hurt by the recession.

Maybe in her mind, Nancy Pelosi is convinced that she is acting in the best interest of America! Stalinists concluded the act of collectivation was in the interest of both Peasants, Working Class and the overall common good. The question becomes, "is this the kind of America most of us want?"

What about the "unemployed Joe?" Would he bank on E.P.A. wisdom? Or would he take his chances that they were wrong? The answer is too predictable. That's why "elites" such as Ms. Pelosi argue that these "Disaffecteds" simply lack the depth to understand the big picture.

When Ronald Reagan ousted Jimmy Carter in 1980, the centerpiece of his argument was the need to "reduce the cost of government." This translated to downsizing overstaffed agencies such as the E.P.A.. As Reagan phraised, "when government becomes too large, in their efforts to help, they often bring about harm."

It's probable that Nancy Pelosi would differ with President Reagan. But Senator Rand Paul quickly pointed out that fiscal sanity begins with a government that knows how to live within its means. His proposed budget alternative makes great strides in this direction. The plan also has an answer to overzealousness: "It is more difficult to over regulate when you are understaffed."

From "Joe Six-Pack's" point of view, "it's about jobs!" He will take the $22 per hour job at the well and worry about the downside of "hydralic fracturing" later! Nancy Pelosi would tell you this. In her eyes, "Joe Six-Pack" is simply not sufficiently astute on the subject. While initially painful, "our way" is for the "common good."

Sound familiar?

No comments:

Post a Comment