Throw Out the Entire D.C. Establishment

American Thinker via Real Clear Politics ^ | December 28, 2011 | J.R. Dunn

[neverdem]

Crony capitalism is the most serious current danger to the American community, a threat not simply to government or the economy, but to our very way of life. It is the worst such threat since the trusts and monopolies of the early 20th century, and in much the same way. Cronyism is one of the major forces behind the establishment of the corrupt pseudo-aristocracy that has been taking shape in this country over the past two decades, a synthetic privileged class made up in large part of politicians, hustlers, and hangers-on who have become expert in exploiting the rest of us.

The legacy media, for some obscure reason, tends to bury discussions about this group. While the reportage on discrete incidents is there -- see the parade of stories on Solyndra, Goldman Sachs, and MF Global for examples -- we find little effort to pull it all together. Academics, with the single exception of Angelo Codevilla, who sounded the alarm two years ago in The Ruling Class, appear oblivious, as if they had no idea what's going on, which may well be the case.

The customary watchdogs having remained asleep, we need to rely on independents. Chief among these in Peter Schweizer, whose latest book Throw Them All Out (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2011) gives us the clearest picture we've yet had of the activities of the new crony class.

Schweizer examines the new cronyism through the lens of the old -- specifically, the political philosophy of George Washington Plunkett, 19th-century Tammany stalwart who seen his opportunities and took 'em. Plunkett's modus operandi was based on "honest graft" -- rather than fish for bribes or payoffs, Plunkett would discover what contractor was putting up the new schoolhouse and then mosey over to drop a few hints about his cousin's brick company...

[dforest]

The big problem is crony socialism pretending to be crony capitalism. Maybe it is more like fascism, but who understands that anymore?

Our side has never learned yet how words are used to win the narrative. Until we learn to put the correct label on something that describes it, we lose the argument.

[harpu]

My suggestion...leading to term limits.

2013 thru 2016; Congress, both houses, works in session only 9 months per year @ 75% of current pay.

2017 & 2018; Congress, both houses, works in session only 6 months per year @ 50% of current pay.

2019 and on; Congress, both houses, works in session only 4 months per year @ 50% of current pay which will equal a pay raise from 2018.

THIS will naturally term-limit both houses, sooner than later!

Annual increases will only come based on the SAME COLA formula that Social Security recipients get. AND, in fact, ALL government employees' pay increases should be limited to the same COLA formula that Social Security recipients receive.

Further, ALL government employees, when the Congressional plan is implemented, should get a one time 5% across the board pay reduction for the years 2013 thru 2016 and another one time pay reduction for years 2017 and on. BUT, these reductions would be offset by whatever amount results from the same COLA formula used for Social Security recipients.

[Justa]

“The legacy media, for some obscure reason, tends to bury discussions...”

Oh my gosh, why would a $20 million-per year news anchor bury a story about “crony capitalism” ...because they’re just like us?

The author is a bit behind on the learning curve.

And it’s not crony capitalism, it’s crony federalism. Capitalism is not the mechanics of the corruption. Rather it is the selective use of government regulations, contracts and enforcement which is the mechanics of the cronyism. Ergo it is crony federalism.

[stevie_d_64]

Bingo!!!

Nail on the proverbial head, “post of the day!”...

Thank you!!!

[mewzilla]

BTTT.

[neverdem]

Thanks for the link!

[exnavy]

Where do I sign up?

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Thank you for some sanity. There is no way in you-know-what that I am going to throw out Congressman Steve King and vote in ultra-liberal, Christie Vilsack.

However, the idea of throwing them all out has some merit in certain regions that are populated with idiot Democrats. They're so stupid, if they can be convinced they're doing the right thing by throwing them all out, then, go for it BUT if someone has a brain and has the intelligence to think this dumb idea through, do not throw out good conservative Republicans.

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you Conservativegreatgrandma. I agree with your line of reasoning.