The Sometimes Tragedy of When Ambition Comes to Fruition.

Wayne Gretzky dreamed of someday hoisting the Stanley Cup.  Willie Mays, in his youth, dreamed of making a great over-the-shoulder catch in a big game someday.  Tom Brady played in his backyard, pretending to take the snap in the final consequential moments of a future Super Bowl.  You have to know that Michael Jordan spent hours and hours shooting solo at a hoop while visions of NBA greatness danced in his head.  Just as certain it is that all of these great sports legends harbored ambitions of greatness, there is no doubt that all of the ambitions tucked away in the recesses of other wannabe’s minds were not, and are not, of such honorable quality.  Ambition in and of itself is not a redeeming quality.  It is the goal of that ambition and how it is orchestrated that makes it admirable.

From the beginning of our great nation, United States Presidents have unquestionably wrestled with the balance of their immense power and the ethics of exactly how, when, and to what degree that power should be exercised.  The ambitions of Nixon, who was drunk with power and ravenous for more of it, were effectively tempered by Legislative and Judicial counterweights.  It is revealing of exactly how far the integrity of our government has eroded that many of the unsuccessful efforts made by Nixon have been fully realized by subsequent Presidents with little or no consequence.  Articles of Impeachment were drawn up for Nixon accusing him of attempting unsuccessfully to weaponize the IRS for political purposes, while Obama successfully weaponized pretty much the entire Executive Branch to a good deal of celebration and fanfare.   Watergate was simply a ham-handed and unsuccessful attempt to steal the game plans of Nixon’s opponents; Nixon never ordered the break-in, but he orchestrated the attempted cover-up.  The Obama Administration used the power of the Justice Department and the FBI to steal the game plans of their opponents; even when “their” opponents weren’t even “their” opponents.  The acts that resulted in Nixon’s Articles of Impeachment and ultimate resignation hardly made a dent in the media-hyped gloss of The One.  Why have the ethical standards of government depreciated so badly and what does it mean for our country’s future?

In Nixon’s days, the Democrats and the Republicans fought tooth and nail for political supremacy.   But each Party had leaders who exhibited some modicum of statesmanship, foreign policy always enjoyed bipartisan efforts, and Congress took its role as a co-equal pillar of our tri-column government seriously.  Today, WDC is bereft of statesmanship, foreign policy is as politicized as domestic policy, and there are damn few serious people in Congress.  Nixon’s improper efforts to abuse his power were tamped down by the systems put in place by our founders.  Congress embraced its oversight role regarding the Executive Branch and both Parties joined in the effort to fulfill their appointed duties.    Today, both Parties eschew bipartisan efforts to serve in their proper oversight role and end up splitting  two ways; the Party that controls the White House acquiesces with the President to pursue the Party’s agenda and the Party that does not control the White House seizes every opportunity to obstruct the President’s initiatives. 

Just as the NCAA College Football Championship system is an aberration; so too are the Special Counsel provisions of the Justice Department.  Rather than deciding a championship on the field of play,  which I believe is the penultimate definition of championship,  a few individuals of overrated value and skill sit around and usurp the essence of competition to deign exactly who shall compete for the big prize.  Is it really so different when a Special Counsel is selected to operate on an unlimited budget of taxpayer funds to pursue legal ambitions that may wander far and wide with no boundaries while paying no mind whatsoever to time constraints?  Is this not the usurpation of the Congressional oversight mandate that the founders built into our government? 

When we as a people, when we as an institution, when we as nation put our complete faith and trust in individuals; we are condemned to disappointment.  Yes, there are honorable people amongst us and on various occasions, those honorable people are in the right place at the right time to help make the system work as it should.  These are the people whose ambitions met fruition in a good way.  Unfortunately, and all too often, we discover that when we allow the system to overly rely on the judgment or quality of a single individual, that individual turns out to one whose ambitions were meeting fruition in a fashion that provides a disservice to all involved.  We as people are inherently flawed and if we fail to embrace that truth, repeat that truth faithfully, and incorporate that truth in our daily lives, we do so at our own peril.  We need look no further than the lifetime appointments of the Federal Judiciary and how the rulings and legal misadventures of partisan and rogue judges have created havoc throughout our nation.  The current scandals surrounding FISA surveillance is another example of the corruption that excessive power cultivates.

There is a delicate and ongoing balance between national security and personal liberty.  We live in a world that contains dangerous people who want to harm us, our families, our communities, and our way of life.  But if we surrender our liberty…the very essence of this country…for the sake of added security, have we not forfeited the very thing that makes our lives worth living?  Not only is FISA questionable on the basis of its cost in loss of personal liberty, but the FISA system has been exposed as being highly susceptible to corruption.  Once again, if we rely on individuals to maintain the integrity of a system, we are bound to be disappointed.  Patronage appointees and high-ranking civil servants many times mistake their positions and/or tenure as a license to exercise personal judgment notwithstanding which actions are proper and which actions are improper, regardless of how the law impacts their decisions. 

Don’t miss the next post!  Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.  If you enjoy the blog, pass it on to your friends.

The oversight Committees of the House and the Senate are composed of men and women who will make mistakes.  But these people have been chosen by We the Citizens and they are subject to recall.  When they abdicate their duties to a Special Counsel, the process is distorted.  All of the proverbial eggs are put in a precarious position; a position that was unintended by our Founders.  Just as that NCAA Committee is a “less than optimum” option compared to a broader playoff system; the Special Counsel is a “less than optimum” option compared to orderly and responsible Congressional oversight of the Executive.

Nixon’s unholy ambitions came to fruition with Obama’s ability to somehow implement institutional abuse of Executive Power and escape (at least so far) accountability for that abuse.  Both men sought inordinate power in their office; Nixon simply for the love of power and Obama because of his narcissistic idealism.  Obama could not have done this if the Democrats in Congress had not colluded with him by surrendering their equal and rightful role in government administration and if the mainstream media had not turned a blind eye to his misbehavior because they bought into his mantra.  Obama was enabled by his Party in Congress to corrupt our government.  Nixon was not enabled by his Party in Congress to corrupt our government.  If and when President Trump ever seeks to co-opt the Republicans in Congress to corrupt our government, the Republicans in Congress must break the downward ethical spiral that our balance of power government is locked into and refuse to relinquish their role of co-equal party in control of government.  Failure to do so will only further solidify the entrenchment of Executive abuse of power, the corruptive and rogue behavior of federal agencies, and the dysfunction of this nation’s civil affairs.