You should never let a good tea party go to waste

To paraphrase a political parable we all heard recently, you should never let a good Tea Party go to waste.

The original version went like this: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." That was Rahm Emanuel's explanation of the federal government's unparalleled grasp of power in the early days of the Obama administration, when it rammed through Congress trillions of dollars in spending authority and grabbed control of banks, insurers and car companies.

Now it's our turn to pass judgment on those actions.

My thesis is that the public's business is no longer done in Washington. What is done in Washington is the work of lobbyists and political pressure groups which, in some cases, pursue objectives that would appall a normal citizen.

Just as television shows are designed to attract audiences for commercials, Washington's purpose is to gather members of congress and other movers and shakers in one place, where they are readily accessible to lobbyists and other persuaders.

In the current session, at President Obama's behest, Congress enacted a huge spending bill without a single member having read it.

This illustrates how far we have come. George Washington described the Senate as the saucer where the coffee would cool, having arrived from the House too hot.

Contrast that vision with the priorities of Obama, who saw to it that a huge spending bill was rushed through the House unread because time was short.

That outlandish display of arrogance and contempt for American history is one of the reasons the Tea Parties are taking place today.

One way to break up the seaminess and corruption of Washington is to overhaul the system by allowing, or even requiring, members of congress to vote electronically from their home districts or states on most matters.

Sessions in the Capitol would largely be reserved for controversial measures or those involving issues of national security.

Two benefits of such a scheme are obvious. One, members would spend much more time in their districts where they would get an earful before the vote instead of afterward. Two, voters would be better able to size up their senator or representative and ask themselves, "Do I really want this person to represent me?"

This is just one idea. Others may have better ideas about how to rein in a government that seems to become more and more brazen in defiance of the public will and common sense.

Not quite three months ago we had a new administration, confronting a recession, that deployed apocalyptic visions to bull-rush through Congress a series of unparalleled spending plans ostensibly designed to end the downturn and restore growth.

I observed at the time that emergency measures enacted during recessions are actually designed to end those recessions in a time frame that allows the incumbent party to escape punishment in the next congressional election. I still believe that to be the case.

At this point, the Obama administration can find only "a glimmer" of improvement in the economy. More than $10 trillion has been committed, and all we have to show for it is a glimmer.

This was a power grab. Instead of a consumer-driven economy in which rank and file citizens define what this country will be, we will have a neo-fascist government that determines what will be produced and who will manage our corporations.

Do you think, as I do, that global warming is a crock trumped up by neo-fascists to overcome consumer preferences and gain control of the economy?

It won't matter. The neo-fascists don't care what anyone else thinks.

In the new era, ACORN thugs will take pains to see that elections come out right.

They have their own man in the Oval Office.