What Good Is Reading?
July 27th, 2009I know that, at this point, nothing that politicians do should surprise me anymore.
But I can’t help it. I still, at times, naively assume that some people exercise the same prudence in voting as they do in other important aspects of their life, such as buying a home.
Hmmm, perhaps that’s not the best example. If all the US homeowners who bought a house that they knew they could never afford voted in the same manner, then we’d end up with a government led by a man who has never achieved anything.
Which, strangely enough, is exactly what happened.
Anyway, my point is that politicians always find new ways to corrode the popular opinion of politics. It’s like it’s some inside game for them, whereby the politician that can inflict the most damage on the body-politic wins. I’m just not sure what prize they think they’re going to receive.
The new odds-on favorite for this honor is Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) who positively sneers at the foolish notion that he, or any other representative, should read the bills on which they vote.
Precisely what, then, does he think his job entails?
Simply taking bribes like his wife, perhaps?
He does have a point when he says that you need lawyers and more than two days to read a 1,000 bill (referring to cap ‘n’ tax). But the answer to that is not to then not read the bill, but to make it less needlessly complex and allowing the appropriate time in Congress for debate.
When it comes time to perform the post-mortem, the Chineses nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek will be proven right (again): Communists are a cancer of the heart.
