One-Party
Rule
Charlie Earl
Please allow
me to apologize in advance for not having a valid attribution or link for the
foundational premise of this column. I was listening to the “Quinn and Rose
Show, the Warroom,” (commercial for ‘I heart radio”) on Tuesday and heard a
reference about the pitiful conditions of many of our cities and some of the
states. Their fiscal and financial situations are bleak with the future being
no more promising. There is one constant element that ties the failing cities
and states together. They are all governed by Democrats. Their political
environments have been dominated by Democrats for decades. In those rare
instances where Republicans have held some power, they were “moderate” or
liberal Republicans … big spenders and big taxers.
Detroit is
the poster child and Washington D.C. runs a close second for ruinous policies
and profligate spending. The Motor City was a thriving, dynamic and wealthy
metropolis as recently as 50 years ago. Detroit and its products were the envy
of the globe, but Democrat politicians and their lock-step union allies have
managed to destroy the dynamism and dismantle a once-grand city. Empty
buildings abound and a crumbling infrastructure testifies that the former king
of the industrial world is now a mere skeleton. Taxpayers have been fleeing the
city in droves as its image has gone from powerful to pauper. In a frightening
way… Detroit could be a metaphor for the United States. Our industrial prowess
has been replaced by an entitlement state. The demands for government
assistance grow faster than the private sector’s ability to fund them. While
the Democrat political machines bear most of the blame for the demise of
Detroit, Washington, D.C., Illinois, California and other decaying sites, they
are not alone in their perfidy. They had willing accomplices.
The major
cities and destitute states in our country have not always been dominated by
Democrats. True, they generally held most of the cards, but Republicans from
time to time shared the power. The inability of the GOP to nominate and elect
true fiscal conservatives, however, has contributed to the downfall and
collapse of the cities and states. The elected Republicans were often
big-spending, go-along-to-get along types whose policies and practices made
them superfluous. Why elect a Republican who acts like a Democrat when you can
choose the genuine article? By incrementally ceding their usefulness the GOP
became unnecessary in the eyes and minds of the voters. They were not a loyal
opposition. They became loyal enablers.
The same has
occurred with our federal government but on a lower trajectory … until now. If
a party seeks to offer a viable alternate to a competing political entity, it
must be different. There must be a clear line of demarcation between the two
parties every time … all the time. If not, the public will be lulled into
voting for the party that appears to be more committed to its basic principles.
The line of reasoning is that one party is predictable and dependable while the
other wavers and is irresolute. Copycat politics, policies and practices merely
entrench the party whose original positions are copied. Schizophrenic positions
and campaigns confuse voters, and they may choose to support the “devil they
know” rather than the fickle unknown. In politics, love and faith … clarity is
preferred to obfuscation and spinelessness.
One party
rule has led to the demise of some once-great locales in America. Unchallenged
power will eventually become corrupt. The party that rules without meaningful
opposition will build a massive gravy train to cement their place in power.
Eventually reality will derail it, but the train wreck might be avoided if the
opposition actually offered alternatives rather than more of the same.
Opposition parties must shout out with principle rather than compliantly
whimper.
Charlie Earl
