06/20/12 — Foolishness filter: Maybe political hypocrisy needs a department all its own

View Archive

Foolishness filter: Maybe political hypocrisy needs a department all its own

There is one department that would be a great addition to the government -- one that taxpayers might actually fall all over themselves to support -- and fund.

We could call it the "What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander" Agency or the Department of Hypocrisy, take your pick.

It's purpose? To save us the time we would waste listening to politicians say one thing when it suits their purpose, only to do exactly the opposite when it comes time to run for re-election or when the shoe is on the other foot.

There are too many examples to count, but let's start with President Barack Obama.

Remember the promise to stay away from special interest money in his campaign and not to hire anyone with ties to those special interests in his administration?

The Department of Hypocrisy could save us the trouble of having to ferret out just how quickly that one went down the tubes.

Same thing with the belly-aching over a proposal to appoint a special investigator to look at the Operation Fast and Furious dilly-dallyings of Attorney General Eric Holder. If the Bush administration could not be trusted to look into its own troubles with leaks, the same should be true for Obama's search for the truth about the intelligence miscues in his administration.

This department could also come in handy when Congress is in town.

When the arguments begin again against asking for identification at the voting booth because it is discriminatory, officials with the Department of Hypocrisy can ask how many congressmen and administration officials allow visitors to simply walk into their offices with no identification or appointment. Then, they can ask them to identify how many people could go to first lady Michelle Obama's book signing without providing a driver's license and a Social Security card.

See how much time we could save? Think of all the hot air that would stay put.

Now, in all fairness, there are examples of stupidity on either side of the aisle.

We could use the same department to keep an eye on the state Republican Party, while we are at it, but we might have to add a Stupid Arrogance Branch.

After all, how many state leaders do you know who think they can pass legislation to regulate the ocean or to refuse to acknowledge the laws of nature?

And there is another upside to the Department of Hypocrisy -- this would be one government agency that we would know for sure would be busy 24-7.

Published in Editorials on June 20, 2012 11:37 AM