They know what’s best for us

And Democracy ain’t all that in their eyes.

First up, the Governor of North Carolina:

File this in the random-things-politicians-say file. Speaking to a Cary Rotary Club today, N.C. Gov. Bev Perdue suggested suspending Congressional elections for two years so that Congress can focus on economic recovery and not the next election.

“I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that,” Perdue said. “You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”

Of course, the Governor’s office is now saying she was speaking in hyperbole to make a point.  Of course.

Can we say the same for former Obama budget director Peter Orzag?

In an 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote that “there never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” That may read today like an overstatement, but it is certainly true that our democracy finds itself facing a deep challenge: During my recent stint in the Obama administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget, it was clear to me that the country’s political polarization was growing worse—harming Washington’s ability to do the basic, necessary work of governing. If you need confirmation of this, look no further than the recent debt-limit debacle, which clearly showed that we are becoming two nations governed by a single Congress—and that paralyzing gridlock is the result.

So what to do? To solve the serious problems facing our country, we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.

Automatic policies… but how would they be enacted?  Depoliticized commissions… implemented by whom?

Oh… I know… by electing someone like Barack Hussein Obama and letting him rule roughshod over us.

Wouldn’t that solve all our problems?


Ford pulls "bailout" TV ad
Back to Blogging
  • Pingback: Brutally Honest()

  • Anonymous

    “I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for
    two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever
    decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I
    really hope that someone can agree with me on that,” Perdue said. “You
    want people who don’t worry about the next election.”

    Why would we EVER want that? Congress is barely accountable as it it, and this idiot thinks that taking away our right to vote them out of office will somehow result in them settling down and fixing the very problems that they helped create?

    Oh, her people are already saying she was joking. No. She wasn’t. This was one of those lines that give a  window into someone’s true beliefs. Like Obama’s “spread the wealth” comment, it’s something she believes but regrets saying out loud.

    Any politician who says something like this should be impeached. Immediately. It should be like joking about carrying a bomb through airport security… you just don’t do it.

  • Anonymous

    Just like deem-n-pass.  Hell no!  

  • Yeah, I think this was a rare moment of unfettered, absolutely candid honesty on the Governor’s part.

    I mean, seriously, why wouldn’t we WANT an elite core of legislators who have no fear of being held responsible for their decisions? 

    What could POSSIBLY go wrong?

  • herddog505

    Evil_OttoAny politician who says something like this should be impeached. Immediately.
    Right there with you.
    It’s axiomatic that, when people are under stress, you see who they REALLY are.  Democrats, faced with the real prospect of another shellacking in the upcoming elections, are desperate.  Their response?  NOT changing their policies.  NOT admitting that they’ve fouled up and will changed their ways.  No: their response is to suggest ditching the fundamental basis of our system of government, something we’ve never done in our history.

    Lest it be thought that this is some aberation, consider Tom Friedman’s waxing lyrical about the virtues of the Red Chinese system of government (“Do what we say or we’ll run you down with a tank”), as well as other libs wishing that Bad Luck Barry had dictatorial powers.  Libs simply don’t like democracy unless it’s of the “one man, one vote, one time” variety.

    “You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”

    Here’s a thought: maybe we should have politicians who don’t regard their offices as careers.  And, if I had my way, Bev certainly wouldn’t worry about HER next election because she’d have about as a good a shot at getting back into the governor’s mansion in Raleigh as I would at winning the Miss Universe pageant.

    • Long as Photoshop is around, we’ve ALL got a chance at that.  (Grin)

      • herddog505

        There are limits to what Photoshop can do.

    • Anonymous


      I think your on to something with your “stress” analysis… cause just like in combat, the smallest character flaw or personality defect comes to the fore.  Makes folks do the damnedest things I’ve ever seen in my entire life – things even my dog wouldn’t do. 

      That future unemployment abyss must be unbearably stressful for them lifer politicians… recon they’ll become completely unhinged as it really starts to sink in that we know, that they know… that we know, that they know they’ll be goners.   

      Semper Fidelis-

      • herddog505

        They’ll get used to it pretty quickly.  The lobbyist industry always has openings for people who know how Capitol Hill works.  Pay is pretty good and no need to ask pesky questions at town halls.

  • Anonymous

    They talk about grid lock like it’s a bad thing. Look what happened when 1 party controlled everything we got a bunch of stuff through congress and most if not all of it was bad, so bring on the grid lock.

  • savagenation

    Think she’s a blowhard or nuts? Don’t forget after his worshippers were calling for a 3rd term, ultra-narcissist Demorcat Bill Clintong had his lawyas scrambling to find a way around the 22nd Amendment so he could Rule for unlimited time. Both parties are corrupt, but the Pro-Slavery Demorat Party is Criminal.

  • Anonymous

    Two ‘trial balloons’ in one day…coincidence? 

    Lord Obama would love nothing better than to dispense with all this icky “democracy stuff”…HE HAS SAID SO.,,several times.

    • jim_m

      No coincidence.

      Friedman has suggested that we should be more like China.   Woody Allen advocated (with much agreement on the left) that we should allow obama to be dictator.  obama has criticized the Constitution as “Seriously flawed” because it doesn’t grant the government powers over the people to act against the will of he people.

      Leftist thugs tried to shut down the legally elected government of the State of Wisconsin all the while chanting, “This is what democracy looks like!” as they tried to seize control of the state through mob action.

      The left has shed any pretense of believing in the rule of law or in democracy.  We can safely assume that the 2012 elections will not be an exercise in democracy but an exercise in whether the left can corrupt the ballot box, or failing that to usurp power directly.

      • Anonymous

        I agree, but I don’t see everything with a partisan filter.  It’s not a matter of “left” or “right,” but populist vs. elite movements.  Someone like Ron Paul spans the ideological spectrum, along with Jim Webb and Elizabeth Warren.  

        The truth is that there is an oligarchical elite that likes the Chinese system a lot: technocrats running the country giving more economic and social freedom while repressing political freedom.  Big Business likes the Chinese system, because they have no labor problems and work as cronies to the state.   Leftist statists and rightist militarists also like the Chinese system, for obvious reasons.

        • jim_m

          Currently I do not see a lot of this on the right.  The largest movement on the right is the TEA Party and this is diametrically opposed to what they are about. 

          The left has for some time now been embracing anti-democratic ideas.  “Let’s deem the bill to have passed without voting on it”, “Let’s appoint czars to run the government instead of officials that need to be confirmed by the Senate.” “Let’s declare news organizations we don’t like to not be journalists and revoke their rights to cover the WH.” “Let’s suspend elections until we can fix the economy.”

          Does anyone really think that if we suspend elections until the economy is fixed that it will EVER be fixed?  Of course not.  This is the single greatest incentive for the government to ensure that the economy NEVER gets fixed.

        • herddog505

          In which of the two major parties is this sort of language openly spoken?  Which of the two major parties publicly seem to find the idea of dictatorship (or, at least, technocracy) much more congenial?

        • Anonymous

          You are ignoring the massive expansion of state power involved in the War on Drugs and the War or Terror, much of which came from the right.  When the Bush administration argued in federal court that it had the power as CinC under the Constitution to lock up even American citizens arrested in the USA indefinitely, without a lawyer or review by a judge, that was advancing the goal of a total state.  Ditto for electronic surveillance of Americans, which we still do not have knowledge of how far it goes. 

          Enthusiasm for the death penalty is one thing the right shares with the Chinese, as is “enhanced interrogation.” More extension of state power over the individual.

          Things like that have a bad effect on democracy.

          • herddog505

            Commander_ChicoEnthusiasm for the death penalty is one thing the right shares with the Chinese, as is “enhanced interrogation.” More extension of state power over the individual.

            I agree with your remarks about the dangerous expansion of government power brought about by the WoT and the War on Drugs (two things that have had bipartisan support, BTW), but I disagree with the idea that the death penalty has a bad effect on democracy simply because it is demonstrably untrue based on the experience of history.  The Age of Enlightenment – when democracy was really starting to “catch on” in Europe and America – was also the age of the hangman.  The only time that the death penalty has a bad effect on democracy is when it – like any other legal penalty – is applied in a capricious or biased manner.  This is because such application undermines both the rule of law and confidence in the government.  We see something of that sort today with racially biased sentencing, “three strikes” rules, and jail terms associated with the War on Drugs generally: people lose faith in the justice system, which undermines their faith in the government and our democratic system generally.

            In short, how does hanging a child murderer or a serial killer have a bad effect on democracy?

          • Anonymous

            Morally, I have no real problem with child killers or serial killers being put to death, if they are proved guilty beyond all doubt – not a “reasonable” doubt, as the DNA exonerations have shown that things like police and eyewitness testimony are unreliable.  I don’t think creating a higher standard of proof is necessarily a good thing, though.

            One problem is that the whole death penalty system creates bias and capriciousness – for example “death qualified” juries screened for support of the death penalty are more likely to convict than juries not so screened. 

            The state is also never satisfied with just killing John Wayne Gacy – it wants to add more eligible crimes to keep the death infrastructure fed.  So we had that guy in Georgia whose conviction was in doubt killed a couple of weeks ago.

            The death penalty becomes part of the cult of state power – the cheers for the notoriously capricious Texas death penalty during that recent debate even creeped Rick Perry out.

          • Anonymous

            I know! Lets argue about the death penalty so nobody will notice how poorly named the democratic party is!

          • herddog505

            Commander_ChicoThe death penalty becomes part of the cult of state power…

            I disagree.  The death penalty was an accepted – even common – feature of American penology a century and more ago when the “state” was much smaller and weaker than it is today.  In the years when Americans would attend public hangings, there was no Dept. of Homeland Security, no FBI, no DEA, no BATF, no Department of Education SWAT teams, no “no-knock” raids, no Patriot Act, etc.

            The “cult of state power” exists independent of the death penalty.  Indeed, I suggest that the people most likely to worship in that cult are the very ones who are most likely to oppose the death penalty.  It’s a philosophical difference between those who believe that people ought to be held accountable for what they do (which, in extreme cases, will cost them their life) and those who believe that bad behavior can be regulated out of existence.

          • Anonymous

            Yeah, and probably a large percentage of people hanged back in the day were innocent.  Hell, they even hanged the Salem witches.  Was that about being “held accountable?”

            We will have to disagree on the death penalty being a part of the cult of state power.  The Chinese, with their thousands of executions, seem to find it useful, and there’s never been a fascist or communist country without it.

        • retired.military

          “As I said, I don’t think she was joking. I take her at her initial word. ‘

          But you already know that you are going to vote for Obama no matter what.

  • jim_m

    This was always the plan:
    You don’t say that you are going to be President for “8 to 10 years” unless you either are a complete idiot, or actually expecting to do it.

    Fascism – It’s what democracy looks like to the left.

  • Oysteria

    “…and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make,…”

    When hell freezes over. 

  • Anonymous

    Yep, “Democracy” is so messy.  Differing points of view.  People with different aspirations.  Trying to reach a middle ground.  “Governing is hard”, to quote The One.  Yeah.  Especially when your idea of “governing” is “I WON!”.

    Moving on from canceling the next Congressional election, why not throw in the Presidential race as well?  I’m sure that would be the next offering.  Purely in the spirit of bipartisanship, of course!

    “Oh, if only we could be like (Red) China for a day.  Think of all the things we could accomplish!”

    Yep, imprison all who dissent.  Seize their assets.   Seize all businesses.  Dictate salaries.   Of course all of this will be done “fairly”.

  • Anonymous

    I think everyone has that idea in their head that wants a temporary dictatorship. Its usually just a fantasy where you wave your magic wand or point your finger and all the crap you hate is obliterated and everyone ends up happy.
    It makes for a humorous joke among friends to say “if you were king for a day..”. To come out publicly and say something stupid like this as an elected official? That’s just crazy or stupid. Or both. Maybe just liberal.

    • Anonymous

      I think you’re right but no matter who is wavng the magic wand only 1/2 the people (maybe less) will be happy.

  • Anonymous

    He looks like Burger Clown..

  • Pingback: No Joking Matter | Wizbang()

  • A recording survives, and she clearly wasn’t joking.  Neither was Orzag.  To the Left, the goal is their vision of Utopia, not a messy democratic republic. 

    Despite the typical leftist attempts to confuse the issue, remember the Left has always defended communism and totalitarian dictators aligned with it, going back to the Russian Revolution.  Duranty and the NYT covered up the purges in the ’30s, and leftists were apologists for “Uncle Joe” Stalin through the ’50s, participated in Marxist radical movements in the ’60s and ’70s, marched to prevent Reagan from updating our European nukes in the ’80s AFTER the Soviets had upgraded theirs to silent acquiescence, and claimed Gorbachev – whose armies dropped small mines in colorful plastic in Afghanistan just to maim children and destroy morale – as more a “man of peace” than Reagan.

    Their heroes have included Castro and Chavez.  If you hate freedom and America, the Left is the place for you.

    Purdue and Orzag are guilty only of letting it slip out of the bag.

  • Flush Obama Now!

  • retired.military

    The fact that dems are (per every indication at this time – yes 14 months is a lifetime in national politics) going to take a shellacking at the polls and that things arent going to get much better economically for the next 14 months either didnt play any in her thinking I am sure.

  • herddog505

    Good point.  Whether consciously or not, the dems counted on the economy recovering nicely by 2010 no matter what they did, so that they could reward themselves with stimulus money (where DID it all go?) and then claim credit for the economic “recovery” that they thought would happen anyway.  Unfortunately, their policies caused the economy to stall (one could argue that it’s actually gotten worse).  So, they are in the position of needing more time: “Say, can we, um, ‘delay’ the elections long enough for things to get better so that we don’t all lose our phoney-baloney jobs?”