My Storify mini-rant on what happens if Donald Trump wins the nomination.
Do not fall in love with politicians. They will only break your heart.Read More »
In Minnesota, we are used to hearing about how wonderful it is to be thy brother’s keeper. Do-gooding, busybodies are exalted as paragons of virtue. As a result, we have elected the penultimate meddler in human interaction, Senator Nanny Klobuchar. She embodies that ever-expanding creep of governmental control over each and every aspect of our lives. Senator Nanny believes quite sincerely that regular citizens are nothing more than schoolchildren. We are so unprepared for ‘real life’, she is determined to create a Big Brother monstrosity to act as a caretaker for us in every avenue. Her most recent pontification was in regards to the oil industry.
“At hearings of both the Senate Environment and Commerce Committees, on which I serve, we listened to the leaders of BP, Transocean and Halliburton explain how each of their companies may not have been at fault for the disaster. Their evasive testimony reminded me of kids who knock a baseball through the neighbor’s window and won’t own up to their actions.” Senator Amy ‘Nanny’ Klobuchar, Minnesota Democrat in an oped piece in the State-run StarTribune, May 29th, 2010
I have decided to take Nanny Klobuchar’s premise at face value. Let’s pretend she’s right. Let’s pretend that BP and Halliburton and Transocean are nothing but kids who broke a window and squabble over who must pay for it. Let’s take the Governess’ contention and let it play out.
First, who was watching these ‘children’? Why weren’t they supervised? If the beneficent government was the watchdog, it appears they were rather ineffectual in the role. The Obama administration, which Nanny Klobuchar cannot say enough good about, gave these children an award for achievement. They were so highly regarded, the Party in power gave them kudos for their actions. This would suggest the ‘children’ weren’t really to blame at all. They just made a mistake. It was the custodian or guardian of the children who should have been more careful.
Who is the custodian? Well, Nanny Klobuchar would say the federal government. So, why didn’t the federal government do its job and watch the children. I think the children may have given the Party treats in the form of campaign contributions. It seems the Party may have dropped the ball on this one.
So, now we have ‘broken glass’ laying around the broken window. Why isn’t the federal government doing more to ensure the safety of the rest of society and the environment? Well, Nanny Klobuchar would argue that the breakers of the window should have to pick up the pieces. But, which kid broke the window? Doesn’t matter. Should we have the children picking up the broken glass? Should the guardian pick up the glass? Should they just stand around and let the glass injure others while you argue and nitpick? Apparently so, if you are the Obama regime.
So, let’s say, for argument’s sake, the glass has been picked up, the well has been plugged. Whose going to pay to fix the broken window? Children are not responsible for the cost of their actions, the custodian is. Really, if we follow Nanny’s analogy, the government must pay to fix the window. The guardian must cover the costs. At least, that’s the way it would work in Nanny Klobuchar’s world.
But, we must remember, Nanny Klobuchar is a shill of the Democratic Party. They are not true guardians of the public but paid guardians of their interests. In Klobuchar’s case, she is a paid governess of the trial lawyers and unions. It is their interests, and not the public’s, that she is concerned about. That is why Nanny Klobuchar demands we open up the children’s pockets for plundering. It would be a giant boon to the trial lawyers to pillage BP and any other child involved. They could break the piggybanks of innumberable children and rob them blind.
We must remember, these governesses and guardians of the public trust have employers. It is the children of their employer who must be taken care of, not all the children. In Nanny’s case, she is only interested in caring for her benefactors, and not the rest of us.