I.A.D's or I.W.D.C's Needed?

[reconeil]

I.A.D's or I.W.D.C's Needed?
by N.R. Filidei (October 2, 2005)


Since Internal Affairs Divisions or Independent Watch Dog Commissions have worked fairly well for policing or scrutinizing City and State Governments where used, why not go Federal with such for The United States Congress? Logically, my personal preference would be I.W.D.C's, since expecting political appointees to turn against, correct or police their very own FAIRLY, goes beyond the most absurd of all expectations.

Then too, and since most everything in America is determined and regulated (or not) in The Congress, wouldn't letting politicians police fellow politicians under such circumstances,...actually be quite stupid and downright silly permitting? Most Americans just aren't that masochistic. Are they?

Besides, The U.S. Congress is from where most all American Taxpayer Funds are dispersed wisely, equally and fairly (or not) and where actually needed (or not), cannot be scrutinized honestly INTERNALLY. Handling such large $um$ daily are just too-damn-much of a temptation, tease or testing,...for even the most honest in Congress. For those already historically proven greedy, unconscionable and self/clique-serving with The People's Money,...forget it.

My warranted: "(or not)"(?) sarcasm aside, don't realistically believe such needed for The Executive Branch. Normally about half or 300 or so Congressional Opposition, the entire press/media and a host of others considering it their full time jobs picking apart every word and undermining everything proposed by The Executive,...is already sufficient enough an: "INQUISITION". Believe such sufficient enough,...even by Old Spanish Standards.

Granted, when: "Recapture The White House" AT ANY COST to America Democrats take their turn (the norm) being in charge of The Executive Branch, no such vicious and vindictive criticism is displayed towards The Democrats and/or: "Darlings of The Press".
Guess that when Democrats take their turn I'll just have to change my position, and include The Executive for needed policing also. Makes a lot of sense.

Regardless and for now, let's stick to where presently most needed for safeguarding the interests and monies of: "We The (Schnooks)", "The UN-Connected" or those not politically beholding, The American Worker/Taxpayer, and/or the vast majority. Such a place currently needing greater scrutiny than ever before,...being The United States Congress.

However, and so that such a new regulatory and oversight entity differently or TRULY functions well and TRULY works well: "For The People" INSTEAD,...believe all applicants should at least meet minimum requirements of being totally honest and/or be apolitical or non-political beings.

Naturally, such will automatically exclude most all registered voters other than Independents or independent thinkers, and of course all politicians. But, Se La Vi, That's Life, or quite differently having others than just foxes guarding The Hen House,...for-a-change or INSTEAD.

Also, why-on-earth take chances that some fanatical: "Democrats/Socialists/Leftists posing as Liberals" moles and career underminers slip-through or infiltrate? This newly recommended agency is TRULY meant to Serve & Safeguard The People's Interests & Monies. Not just solely Serve & Safeguard political institutions, politicians and foreigners' American Rights (The American norm).

And besides, aren't there already enough obstructors, disruptors, underminers and saboteurs (every which way possible) in The United States, ALREADY? Hey,...who needs more of such daily nonsenses anyway,...and especially during wartime?

Then too, why should any American be concerned about excluding or denying participation of most The Electorate Minority of about 40% from such an important Independent Watch Dog Commission, for The Congress? Nothing to be concerned about.

The about 40% Electorate is normally divided about 50/50 on most everything anyway, and even what's right or wrong. So then why start up a new agency with sand in the gears, just like all the others? The People need an agency to work FOR THEM for-a-change.

Also, applicants mainly derived from the 60% of non-voters and/or those totally disgusted by politics (and rightfully so), makes more than just honestly good common sense. Much more.

Such makes more sense both logically and mathematically.
Drawing from 60% Solid Citizens rather than from The 40% Electorate (about 1/2 normally politically duped or suspect at minimum), when National Unity, National Security and National Survival are at stake,...makes great sense. Hell,...forget about the money. Money and: "Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness" mean nothing if dead.

Hey again,...don't believe me or think me to irreverant towards many greedy and career people-dividing lords? Well then, just believe the words of Lincoln alone and/or:

"A house divided against itself cannot stand".

Credit given where credit due.
Old Abe made a-helluva-lot of good old common sense also, even though I would have included to his quote: ",...and especially during wartime".
In fairness, Abe probably did just that, and some fool Democrat and/or: "Carpetbagger" type Editor likely censored it out? Would be so typical and common, and especially nowadays.

For those unaware, "The Carpetbaggers" was the name given to Democrat Party Officials of low regard and disrepute, while doing their dastardly deeds during The Reconstruction Period of The South after The Civil War.
Thought such might be of interest to some non-whites?

The End

Neil