November 30, 2009
How Do You Measure Integrity?
By Bob Weir
The term "kleptocracy" is applied to a government that extends the personal
wealth and political power of its own officials and the ruling class via the
embezzlement of state funds at the expense of the wider population, sometimes
without even the pretense of honest service. That sounds pretty close to what we
have in America today.
Have you ever seen so much in-your-face corruption being dangled in front of
you? It's as though elective office were an entitlement which, once achieved,
gave the holder veto power over the laws the rest of us must abide by. Just
about every week, there's another news article about some elected or appointed
official caught using his influence to rip off the American public. We can
assume that there are many more that just haven't been caught yet.
But let's also assume that the majority of
our elected reps are honest. We also can conclude that they are at least as
aware of the crooks among them, as we are. Yet how often do we hear one of them
speak out against their corrupt colleagues? Even after one of those bums gets
arrested and indicted, there's a suspicious silence among those who have worked
with, and probably partied with, the crooks.
When William Jefferson, the Louisiana congressman who got caught by the FBI with
ninety grand in his freezer, was arrogantly running for reelection, did anyone
hear an elected official criticize him for his moral turpitude? Surely, one
congressman could have taken to the floor of the House and given a verbal
thrashing to the man who made the term "cold cash" a punchline on the late-night
comedy shows.
When California Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham was able to buy a $2.5
million mansion, a yacht, a Rolls-Royce, and a condo in suburban Washington, why
didn't it sound an alarm to at least some of the other 434 members of the House?
They knew more than anyone else that such luxuries are not obtainable on an
annual salary of $160,000. Cunningham sat on a powerful subcommittee that
approves billions of dollars in spending for defense programs. Did it take too
much detective work for his colleagues to figure out that his larcenous largess
was a reward for his influence?
Keep in mind that his co-workers at the Capitol are some of the most educated
people in the country, and a majority of them are lawyers. They're not exactly
the type of people who are easily fooled by such obvious perfidy concerning
one's oath of office. It seems to me that their failure to blow the whistle on
the malevolent renegades in their midst makes them accessories during and after
the fact. No, not legally, but certainly morally.
It's not as though we don't hear our esteemed reps blasting the excesses of the
business community. When a corporate executive is awarded a hefty bonus or a
golden parachute, the cries of "greedy capitalist" are either insinuated in
press releases or raucously bellowed in the hallowed halls of our legislative
bodies. Yet when one of their own is drinking imported champagne on a domestic
beer budget, it doesn't seem to motivate our "leaders" to make their own
inquiry. Instead, when one of these sticky-fingered frauds is nabbed, it's
because an outside agency like the FBI has handled the probe.
In police departments, when a cop is aware of corruption but refuses to expose
it or testify against it, we call it "the blue wall of silence." What's it
called in the higher echelons of power? Police departments have had their
Serpicos, and the Mafia had their Sammy "the Bull" Gravano, but to my knowledge,
we've never seen an informer in the House or Senate.
How can the public be expected to have any confidence in the government or the
system of laws generated by that once-august body if the good people inside
refuse to expose the bad? The idea that someone who "drops a dime" on a thief is
going to be known as a "rat" is a childish admonishment. It may have been
acceptable in grammar school, but it has no relevance in adulthood...that is,
unless everyone has a closet full of skeletons is therefore afraid that exposure
of others will lead to his or her own undoing. The cop who's been getting away
with taking bribes is not about to publicly condemn another cop who is under
indictment for the same crime. Therefore, unless there's some kind of unwritten
law that says you can't "tattle" on people who you know are corrupt, it must be
that you are as guilty as they are. Refusal to address evil while pretending to
be good is an example of cognitive dissonance, and it, like conscience, makes
cowards of its subscribers.
Page Printed from:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/how_do_you_measure_integrity.html
* * * * *
Your Honor, the prosecution rests its case.