BCT Editorial – 12/22/05

This page was last updated on December 24, 2005.

Lap dog; Editorial; Beaver County Times; December 22, 2005.

If any organization knows about lapdogs, it’s the Times. I believe the Times is little more than an organ of the left.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“When it comes to oversight of the executive branch, the Republican-controlled Congress is little more than a lap dog for the Bush administration, doing whatever it can to please its master.”

[RWC] I hate to break it to the author, but oversight of other branches is not a function of any branch of government. Providing a check and balance is not the same as oversight.

“The Washington Post reported that U.S. Rep. Thomas M. Davis III, R-Va., chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, last week said ‘it’s a fair comment’ that the GOP-controlled Congress has done insufficient oversight and ‘ought to be’ doing more.

“No kidding.”

[RWC] Right or wrong, I have no doubt that Congresses of the same party as the President tend to go easier.

“Consider this. Democrats on Davis’s committee said the panel issued 1,052 subpoenas to probe alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration between 1997 and 2002, at a cost of more than $35 million.”

[RWC] The author failed to note a chunk of the “alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration” resulted in convictions.

“The Post reported the committee under Davis has issued just three subpoenas to the Bush administration, two to the Energy Department over nuclear waste disposal at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and one last week to the Defense Department over Katrina documents.

“Obviously, congressional Republicans have failed to fulfill their role as watchdog over the executive branch of government. It’s no wonder the Bush administration thinks it can do anything it wants. With this Congress, it knows it can.”

[RWC] This is the same BS we got from yesterday’s editorial. According to the Times, the Bush administration is running amok and needs to be reigned in. As in the previous editorial, though, the author doesn’t present any examples to support his allegations. I think we know why.

What really bugs the Times is that the Bush administration hasn’t had any real (non-manufactured) scandals whereas the Clinton administration had scandals coming out of its ears, from Travelgate and Whitewater to Monica Lewinsky. If there had been any true scandals, we’d here about them nonstop from mainstream media outlets like the Times. As I’ve noted in many critiques, editorials, letters, and other opinion pieces bashing President Bush never provide cite credible cases.