I think most people would say that integrity is about doing the right thing. The best description I have heard is that 'integrity means doing the right thing, even when no one else is looking'.
Most people would, I suggest, also like to think that they and their fellow countrymen and most particularly their political leaders, act with integrity. There is a sense that is common, on how we should behave.
However, and you knew there was one coming. However, when people enter through the doors of the political world, integrity leaves through the windows.
In short, why do politicians act as poorly as they do? And, to be clear, when I say politicians I include all the government service bureaucrats and all of those that swim in the public-funded pool - be they directly funded organizations, NGOs or 'funded' scientists, etc..
Take Lois Lerner, as an example. This is the woman that was, until recently, the head of America's Internal Revenue Service. During her tenure, the IRS targeted right of centre groups. These groups were entitled to certain tax-privileged status under the US Tax Code, so long as they met certain conditions. Lerner's IRS repeatedly challenged and delayed the special tax status for these right of centre groups - such as various Tea Party organizations. The purpose seems clear. Use unelected government employees to frustrate, using illegal means, the rights of American citizens to exercise democratically passed tax laws, in the furtherance of opposing political aims. One defence put forward by Lerner and her allies, is that they applied the rules 'even-handedly'. They did the same due diligence on tax exempt status for left of centre groups. As evidence they talk of 5 or 6 such groups being impeded in gaining their special status. When you contrast that with the hundreds of 'right' groups that suffered delays and bully-boy tactics, you can see a very clear political agenda being followed.
Lois Lerner, an employee of the IRS - or, put another way, a (well) paid servant of the American people, was called before Congress. Now, excuse me while I get a little 'utopian' on you but Congress, or in the UK, parliament, is where the representatives of the people go to transact business on behalf of their electorate. Where we expect them to do things and hold people to account for things, that we, as individuals cannot.
Ms Lerner, then preceded to plead the 5th Amendment in front of Congress. She refused to answer questions put to her, on the grounds that to do so honestly, might incriminate herself. So, when asked, by representatives of the American people, about how she did the job for which the American people lavishly compensate her, she refused to answer. I guess I wouldn't make a good juror if Lois ever came to trial before me. I figure that asking her how she carried out her job is an entirely legitimate question and, when she pleaded the 5th, I would draw the reasonable conclusion that she was not carrying out those duties in a legal manner otherwise she wouldn't be worried about self-incrimination.
Anyway, it seems that Lerner will now face sanctions of some kind as the House of Representatives found her to be in contempt of Congress. The vote was 231 in favour and 187 against. Those in favour included 6 Democrat party representatives. In terms of integrity though, I find it both appalling and and at the same time interesting/instructive that 187 politicians - all Democrat Party members - didn't see that Lerner's actions were, in fact, a contempt of Congress and, by extension, contempt for the American people.
To take it a bit further, acting with integrity, screams that Lerner is in contempt. Abandoning integrity and toeing the party line, says that while she may be in contempt, we Democrats won't throw her to the Republican wolves nor will we do anything that aids the opposition. (Or, for that matter, we Democrats will do nothing to restore the faith of the people in politicians either knowing or doing the 'right thing'!)
Some of those 187 will be out of a job, come November and will have more time to ponder their character deficiencies. But think about it. What causes such people to abandon morality on political grounds?
In case you think I am Lerner obsessed, I am not. I am just using that to illustrate the point about the decline or lack of morality that is seen in modern day politics. My focus is on the UK and US. These are 'mature' democracies and as such, one would expect the basic values to be more ingrained. There are numbers of European countries, for example, where democracy and the rule 'of the people, by the people' are new concepts - some being in place for less than 40 years. In those countries, one might expect the flower of integrity to be fragile and initially feeble as the plant comes up against modern day real-politiks but in the established UK and US democracies - countries founded on documents like Magna Carta and the US Constitution and indeed, a Judeo-Christian religious ethic - one would really expect that the roots of integrity and basic honesty, would be deeper and stronger.
What makes Jay Carney, the White House Press spokesman, stand up in front of a largely compliant media, and day after day, dodge and prevaricate, when answering the few questions that he gets asked, about Benghazi? It surely isn't to protect the national security interests of the USA - that might make it slightly more legitimate - but no, it is solely to protect the Obama administration (the one that was elected by we the people, I do hope you are keeping up! ) from questions to which the people, want answers.
I do hope my American readers don't think I am targeting them and suggesting that my home country is any better.
In the UK, we have seen and heard, over the years countless examples of politicians and public servants acting without integrity. From accepting money to ask questions in parliament to other far more serious issues.
To illustrate the latter. Under the (envy of the world, so British leftists claim) National Health System
more than 1,300 patients died at a hospital group called Mid Staffs. These hospital patients were found to have received very poor and in some cases downright inhumane treatment from the staff into whose care they had been placed. An eventual Public Inquiry found significant numbers of short comings and examples of abuse.
And yet. Sir David Nicholson, then head of the NHS area that included Mid Staffs, who later went on to become overall head of the NHS received no punishment. Indeed he was able to retire, just this year on a full, highly remunerative, pension. Andy Burnham, who was the Labour Party minister responsible for the NHS, has received no sanction. Indeed he continues to represent that portfolio for the Labour Party.
Okay neither received punishment. I think that many, if not most, people would say that they should have experienced some small percentage of the suffering that was inflicted on those 1,300 victims but, that aside, what kind of people are they, that they have no integrity or moral compass that screams at them saying 'this was wrong and even while I didn't personally commit any injury to people, this happened on my watch and I must set an example and do the decent thing' ?
Why is it that so many people, on entering politics or public service, abandon basic morality and act with little or no integrity? We have scientists for heaven's sake, scientists who purposefully distort data and suppress information and then seek to silence and punish any critics, all in the furtherance of an unproven theory. (In fact a theory that is not just unproven but for which the contrary position is becoming ever more apparent, based on facts and evidence!)
We have American military people who are given orders to not go to the aid of Americans that are being attacked (and ended-up being brutally tortured, raped and murdered) and these people do not have the integrity to do the right thing. Incidentally, the current stories suggest that President Obama wasn't even in the White House Situation Room while events in Benghazi unfolded. The word is that the President's special adviser, his fellow-traveler from Chicago, the unelected Valerie Jarrett, was calling the shots. Maybe that's what Jay is covering-up?
I am not seeking to set off some kind of moral crusade here but is it so crazy to expect higher standards from our elected officials? Suppose it is. Is it crazy to expect that those that are paid by 'the people' are at least answerable to those self same 'people' and this is especially important when those 'sucking on the public teet' are unelected.
Please feel free to pass this on and particularly to your elected representatives - we really do need to bring about change and restore the notion that acting with integrity is the right thing to do.
Most people would, I suggest, also like to think that they and their fellow countrymen and most particularly their political leaders, act with integrity. There is a sense that is common, on how we should behave.
However, and you knew there was one coming. However, when people enter through the doors of the political world, integrity leaves through the windows.
In short, why do politicians act as poorly as they do? And, to be clear, when I say politicians I include all the government service bureaucrats and all of those that swim in the public-funded pool - be they directly funded organizations, NGOs or 'funded' scientists, etc..
Take Lois Lerner, as an example. This is the woman that was, until recently, the head of America's Internal Revenue Service. During her tenure, the IRS targeted right of centre groups. These groups were entitled to certain tax-privileged status under the US Tax Code, so long as they met certain conditions. Lerner's IRS repeatedly challenged and delayed the special tax status for these right of centre groups - such as various Tea Party organizations. The purpose seems clear. Use unelected government employees to frustrate, using illegal means, the rights of American citizens to exercise democratically passed tax laws, in the furtherance of opposing political aims. One defence put forward by Lerner and her allies, is that they applied the rules 'even-handedly'. They did the same due diligence on tax exempt status for left of centre groups. As evidence they talk of 5 or 6 such groups being impeded in gaining their special status. When you contrast that with the hundreds of 'right' groups that suffered delays and bully-boy tactics, you can see a very clear political agenda being followed.
Lois Lerner, an employee of the IRS - or, put another way, a (well) paid servant of the American people, was called before Congress. Now, excuse me while I get a little 'utopian' on you but Congress, or in the UK, parliament, is where the representatives of the people go to transact business on behalf of their electorate. Where we expect them to do things and hold people to account for things, that we, as individuals cannot.
Ms Lerner, then preceded to plead the 5th Amendment in front of Congress. She refused to answer questions put to her, on the grounds that to do so honestly, might incriminate herself. So, when asked, by representatives of the American people, about how she did the job for which the American people lavishly compensate her, she refused to answer. I guess I wouldn't make a good juror if Lois ever came to trial before me. I figure that asking her how she carried out her job is an entirely legitimate question and, when she pleaded the 5th, I would draw the reasonable conclusion that she was not carrying out those duties in a legal manner otherwise she wouldn't be worried about self-incrimination.
Anyway, it seems that Lerner will now face sanctions of some kind as the House of Representatives found her to be in contempt of Congress. The vote was 231 in favour and 187 against. Those in favour included 6 Democrat party representatives. In terms of integrity though, I find it both appalling and and at the same time interesting/instructive that 187 politicians - all Democrat Party members - didn't see that Lerner's actions were, in fact, a contempt of Congress and, by extension, contempt for the American people.
To take it a bit further, acting with integrity, screams that Lerner is in contempt. Abandoning integrity and toeing the party line, says that while she may be in contempt, we Democrats won't throw her to the Republican wolves nor will we do anything that aids the opposition. (Or, for that matter, we Democrats will do nothing to restore the faith of the people in politicians either knowing or doing the 'right thing'!)
Some of those 187 will be out of a job, come November and will have more time to ponder their character deficiencies. But think about it. What causes such people to abandon morality on political grounds?
In case you think I am Lerner obsessed, I am not. I am just using that to illustrate the point about the decline or lack of morality that is seen in modern day politics. My focus is on the UK and US. These are 'mature' democracies and as such, one would expect the basic values to be more ingrained. There are numbers of European countries, for example, where democracy and the rule 'of the people, by the people' are new concepts - some being in place for less than 40 years. In those countries, one might expect the flower of integrity to be fragile and initially feeble as the plant comes up against modern day real-politiks but in the established UK and US democracies - countries founded on documents like Magna Carta and the US Constitution and indeed, a Judeo-Christian religious ethic - one would really expect that the roots of integrity and basic honesty, would be deeper and stronger.
What makes Jay Carney, the White House Press spokesman, stand up in front of a largely compliant media, and day after day, dodge and prevaricate, when answering the few questions that he gets asked, about Benghazi? It surely isn't to protect the national security interests of the USA - that might make it slightly more legitimate - but no, it is solely to protect the Obama administration (the one that was elected by we the people, I do hope you are keeping up! ) from questions to which the people, want answers.
I do hope my American readers don't think I am targeting them and suggesting that my home country is any better.
In the UK, we have seen and heard, over the years countless examples of politicians and public servants acting without integrity. From accepting money to ask questions in parliament to other far more serious issues.
To illustrate the latter. Under the (envy of the world, so British leftists claim) National Health System
more than 1,300 patients died at a hospital group called Mid Staffs. These hospital patients were found to have received very poor and in some cases downright inhumane treatment from the staff into whose care they had been placed. An eventual Public Inquiry found significant numbers of short comings and examples of abuse.
And yet. Sir David Nicholson, then head of the NHS area that included Mid Staffs, who later went on to become overall head of the NHS received no punishment. Indeed he was able to retire, just this year on a full, highly remunerative, pension. Andy Burnham, who was the Labour Party minister responsible for the NHS, has received no sanction. Indeed he continues to represent that portfolio for the Labour Party.
Okay neither received punishment. I think that many, if not most, people would say that they should have experienced some small percentage of the suffering that was inflicted on those 1,300 victims but, that aside, what kind of people are they, that they have no integrity or moral compass that screams at them saying 'this was wrong and even while I didn't personally commit any injury to people, this happened on my watch and I must set an example and do the decent thing' ?
Why is it that so many people, on entering politics or public service, abandon basic morality and act with little or no integrity? We have scientists for heaven's sake, scientists who purposefully distort data and suppress information and then seek to silence and punish any critics, all in the furtherance of an unproven theory. (In fact a theory that is not just unproven but for which the contrary position is becoming ever more apparent, based on facts and evidence!)
We have American military people who are given orders to not go to the aid of Americans that are being attacked (and ended-up being brutally tortured, raped and murdered) and these people do not have the integrity to do the right thing. Incidentally, the current stories suggest that President Obama wasn't even in the White House Situation Room while events in Benghazi unfolded. The word is that the President's special adviser, his fellow-traveler from Chicago, the unelected Valerie Jarrett, was calling the shots. Maybe that's what Jay is covering-up?
I am not seeking to set off some kind of moral crusade here but is it so crazy to expect higher standards from our elected officials? Suppose it is. Is it crazy to expect that those that are paid by 'the people' are at least answerable to those self same 'people' and this is especially important when those 'sucking on the public teet' are unelected.
Please feel free to pass this on and particularly to your elected representatives - we really do need to bring about change and restore the notion that acting with integrity is the right thing to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment