Roy Orbison Toasts Rick Lazio: "It's Over"

Roy Orbison released "It's Over" in 1963, the year after the Cuban missile crisis.  America was robust; the gold standard was still in effect internationally, and I am told that JFK was considering bringing it back domestically as well.  Jimmy Hoffa was making money for the Teamsters and the Kennedys were after him.  Orbison died 25 years later, in 1988, the year he made a comeback with the Traveling Wilburys. 

Bless Rick Lazio's heart for saying that he would drop out of the race. "It's Over" is a toast to him. In fact I'll make it two toasts with "Blue Bayou":

New York's Conservative Party Belongs in Yesterday's Trash

I dislike the label "conservative" when applied to people who believe in freedom and in life. The debate between laissez faire liberals and mercantilists goes back to the 18th century. Advocated by Anthony Ashley Cooper, Earl of Shaftesbury, and David Hume, mercantilism was an earlier doctrine than laissez faire. Adam Smith wrote in response to Shaftesbury just as Locke wrote in response to Filmer, who advocated the divine right of kings.  David Hume was the source of Alexander Hamilton's belief in a central bank and in government intervention in the economy. Hence, state activism with respect to the economy is an older doctrine than laisser faire, which has always been a radical response to the failure of traditional (i.e., conservative) doctrines like monarchy, state intervention in the economy and central banking.

More important with respect to today's Conservative Party in New York is that the purpose for its very existence has been obviated.  The Conservative Party was founded for two conceivable reasons: (1) the dominance of corporatist, big government Republicans, so-called "Rockefeller Republicans," in New York's Republican Party and (2) the pro-choice platform of many Republicans.  Some Republicans are pro-choice and some are pro-life.  The Conservatives were presumably aiming to define themselves as "social" as well as economic "conservatives" and so offer a position consistent with the Catholic Church's and the various Protestant denominations' that are pro-life.

In 2010 the Conservative Party, led by Mike Long, chose to nominate Rick Lazio over at least two superior alternatives (there were likely more; virtually anyone I know would have been a superior alternative to Rick Lazio): Steve Levy and Carl Paladino.  The Conservatives' and GOP's backing of Lazio removed Levy, who lacked the resources for an independent bid.  The Conservative Party and the Republican Party memberships had the opportunity yesterday to redeem their parties from, respectively, the Rockefeller Conservatives and the Rockefeller Republicans, who are eager for jobs and corrupt bonuses from big government.  The GOP membership showed that it is fundamentally "conservative" in the sense that I don't like using the word.  The Conservative Party members showed that it is less "conservative" than the GOP.

Although much press has been given to "Rockefeller Republicans" much less has been given to "Rockefeller Conservatives."  Yet, it is clear that under Mike Long's leadership the Conservatives have veered to the left and are now more "liberal" (another inappropriate term) than the GOP.   So who needs a Conservative Party?

The Conservative Party is creating a serious problem.  The "conservative" candidate, who is pro-life and for small government, is running on the GOP line but not on the conservative line.  The Conservative Party has reserved their line for a pro-choice, big government advocate, Rick Lazio.  The Conservatives are proving that corrupt motivations rather than an interest in liberty or in life is are enough to determine their nominations.   Conservative Party members might consider that by belonging to it they are harming the cause of "conservatism."

Yesterday's election proved that the GOP is more conservative than the Conservative Party.  It was enough to consign Mike Long and the Conservative Party to the trash bin of history.

Rockefeller Conservatives

Rick Lazio is a progressive Republican in the Rockefeller tradition.  There is little conservative about him.  Hence it is a puzzle why Mike Long and the Conservative Party, chose to support him.   I raised this question at the Tea Party meeting where I gave a pro-Paladino talk last night, and one of the CP people in the audience said that the rank-and-file and leadership in Ulster County, NY opposed Lazio.  But this was also true of the Ulster County GOP, for the Catskills and Hudson Valley still have a living libertarian tradition.  As I said to the Conservative Party guy at our meeting, I always knew that Rockefeller Republicans were prominent in the GOP, but I never knew that Rockefeller Conservatives were  prominent in the CP.


Does the Conservative Party serve any purpose?  Might conservatives find better representation in a Paladino-led GOP?

Republican Decision 2010

The interesting primary this September 14 is the GOP's race between Rick Lazio and Carl Paladino even though Democratic candidate-designate Andrew Cuomo leads both.  A September 11 Siena poll finds that Lazio leads Paladino by one percent, 43 to 42. Paladino leads with 53 percent among Upstate New Yorkers while Lazio leads with a similar margin downstate.  Paladino leads among Tea Partiers 47 to 42 percent.  This slim margin suggests that the appellation Tea Party is amorphous. The Tea Party is neither small government- nor Rockefeller- Republican.  For while Paladino advocates a twenty percent cut in New York's budget, Lazio's record does not put him in the small government camp.

Carl Paladino

 Paladino is a Buffalo-based real estate developer who attended St. Bonaventure University and Syracuse Law.  He is a tough, inspiring speaker who befriends but challenges his audience.

Paladino built a real estate empire from scratch. His current net worth is about $150 million.  While overseeing 15 office buildings is not an executive responsibility with as much latitude as the governor's, Paladino has had more at risk personally than any governor. As a result, he has developed management skills that would be more likely to benefit the public than those of a lifelong politician.

Paladino is accused of forwarding racist and sexist e-mails to friends. The New York Times has endorsed Rick Lazio over Paladino saying that the e-mails alone are grounds for rejecting Paladino. However, writing of Jesse Jackson's having called New York City "Hymietown", Times reporter Jodi Kantor implied on May 22, 2008 that Jews should not hold the epithet against Jackson because he has apologized.  Although Paladino has similarly apologized for forwarding e-mails the Times applies a different standard to him. 

Like Lazio, Paladino opposes construction of the Ground Zero mosque.  He has run advertisements saying that as governor he would use eminent domain to foreclose the mosque.  I questioned him on this point because many conservatives oppose eminent domain.  At an Ulster County Republican appearance in late August Paladino insisted that he is opposed to private use eminent domain and that he would like to see less use of eminent domain more generally.

Paladino is running on a specific platform of 20 percent budget cuts.  Although Lazio also states that he would like to reduce government, his promises are not so specific.  The chief targets for Paladino's cuts are welfare and Medicaid, whose per capita costs in New York are double those in California.  There are in fact many areas where Medicaid and other aspects of New York's budget could be cut without loss in public welfare.

Rick Lazio 

Lazio grew up in West Islip on Long Island.  He attended Vassar College and American University Law School.  He worked as a Suffolk County prosecutor. He was elected to the Suffolk County legislature in 1989 and to Congress in 1992. He resigned his congressional post to oppose Hillary Clinton for Senate in 2000.  His website states that he expanded public housing for seniors and the disabled.  He also boasts of having increased the number of welfare-related Section 8 housing vouchers. In other words, Lazio's track record includes winning votes by expanding welfare benefits. He also has endorsements from the Sierra Club.

According to his Website Lazio favors three chief positions. The first, "getting our financial house in order," involves a property tax cap of 2.5% and instituting regional control of Medicaid. Also, Lazio aims to reduce public sector pension benefits for new employees and to reform Medicaid.  Second, Lazio aims at job creation. He favors lower taxes, but unlike Paladino does not offer a specific target for tax or budget relief. Nor does he offer targets for Medicaid cuts. Lazio's third position is improvement of ethics in government.

This last position is puzzling given evidence that the Village Voice has uncovered about Lazio's dealings at JPMorgan, for whom Lazio has worked as a lobbyist. During his eight-year congressional tenure Lazio collected more in contributions from financial service firms than any other Congressman. He was chair of the House housing subcommittee and through Louis Ranieri, his campaign manager, linked to the real estate bubble of the Bush administration.  On March, 18 2008, six months prior to the financial crisis of 2008, the New York Times reported that JPMorgan’s stock had increased ten percent, roughly equal to a $12 billion handout it had received in part from the Federal Reserve Bank. JP Morgan also received $25 billion in TARP funds during the crisis, which it repaid in 2009.   The Albany Times Union reported that Lazio's 2008 JPMorgan Chase salary was $325,000, with a bonus of $1.3 million.

According to the Village Voice, both Congressman Lazio and Democrat Andrew Cuomo as head of HUD worked on rules that legalized bonuses paid to real estate brokers who steered customers to more expensive real estate and higher-end mortgages.  This marked the inception of the sub-prime crisis.  The Voice also reports that in 2007 Lazio used his influence with Charles Millard, head of the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, to secure a $900 million PBGC investment in JPMorgan's real estate management division.  The PBGC insures private pension plans. The untimely 2008 investment led to significant losses.  Moreover, in dealing with Millard, Lazio violated laws concerning communication during the bid process.  The PBGC's Inspector General has investigated the case and has referred it to a prosecutor.

Analysis

Liberals dislike Paladino's style, which I would describe as Jacksonian.  Andrew Jackson was a people's candidate who infuriated upper class Whigs, the 1820s' and 1830s' equivalent of today's Rockefeller Republicans and Soros Democrats.  Jackson, like today's libertarians, advocated elimination of the biggest government program of then and now: the central bank. Like Lazio, Jackson's opponent, Henry Clay, supported big government and was friendly to banking interests.  Jackson was an unabashed racist who was responsible for the Trail of Tears and whose Supreme Court appointee, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, wrote the Dred Scott decision.  But unlike the Jackson of 1828 and like the Jackson of 1984, Paladino has apologized for forwarding the e-mails.

Paladino's opponent, Rick Lazio, has been involved in marginally illegal activity in his role as JPMorgan lobbyist, and was very much associated with the bailout. Yet, he aims to get the state's fiscal house in order and clean up the state ethically.  Paladino appeals to non-racist Jacksonians in the Tea Party who are righteously indignant about the Bush and Obama administrations' massive transfer of wealth to Wall Street.  What is most puzzling about Lazio is his appeal to self-described Tea Party activists.

Mitchell Langbert is associate professor, Brooklyn College and is a member of the Ulster County Republican Committee. This essay was presented to the Kingston-Rhinebeck Tea Party on September 12, 2010.

Leo Strauss, American Ethical Decline and Aristotle's Highest Hope

I was just reading Leo Strauss's magnificent Natural Right and History.  Strauss is a first rate thinker, on a par with the great libertarians, yet I disagree with a large chunk of his perspective.  I must say that the early chapter on Max Weber is of tremendous importance to the work I have been doing on business schools' teaching of justice as the core management competency and the Aristotelian and Nietzschean traditions in mangement theory.  Strauss's arguments in favor of natural right and law are profound and explicate a core insight at which I arrived in my undergraduate years. That is, that the justification of ethics is inherent in the socio-biology of humanity.  Natural right and natural law are socio-biological constructs.  Conventionalism, the notion that ethics is arbitrary, can be disproved empirically.  Strauss makes invaluable arguments along those lines.  As well, Strauss outlines the very concept I have been thinking about and am working toward: the crucial importance of decentralization to the development of the virtuous and liberal state.  I am glad I am reading Strauss now after I have outlined the project in my mind.  Although the idea is my own independent of Strauss, Strauss must be given major credit for conceptualizing the project in 1953.

I do not agree with Strauss in a number of ways. Most important among these is his emphasis on human differentials with respect to the prospects of attaining virtue.  Strauss's emphasis on this aspect of Plato and Aristotle leads to elitism which I do not share.  This elitism is very much in the Progressive and Marxist traditions.  I do not agree that there are people who have a special claim to virtue.  Anyone who thinks so can try to fix their own plumbing or their own cars.  Just because someone can go to Harvard does not make them more valuable than a plumber.  When my pipes go, I care about a plumber, not a philosopher or a politician. Sorry, Ayn Rand. What I want is a virtuous plumber.  And a virtuous plumber will not go home, drink a 12-pack of beer, and wash his hands of what has happened to the nation.  Rather, America has declined because of the elitism inherent in Progressivism.

Coincidentally Jim Crum sent me Andrew Malcolm's LA Times article that suggests that America is indeed in serious moral decline due to the Progressive and socialist policies that the Democratic and Republican Parties advocate.  The article finds that 41 Obama appointees have not paid their taxes.  As well, federal employees in general owe a billion dollars in unpaid taxes, and 638 workers on capitol hill owe $9.3 million in unpaid taxes. As Treasury Secretary, who is in charge of collecting taxes, Obama appointee Timothy Geithner owes $43,000 in unpaid taxes.  As well, within the department of homeland security  "4,856 people owe $37,012,174."

Aristotle argued that the role of the city state is to educate moral citizens.  Clearly American society has failed in this elementary task. The problem is not just with dysfunctional schools which systematically fail to teach the three 'rs along with basic morals; nor with the decaying family, harmed by the Wall Street economy that has destroyed job opportunities in general but especially for men and has fractured the family by forcing women to return to work at an early age.   It is also due to the miasma of bad ethics that imbues the casino economy; the get-rich-quick psychology of Federal Reserve Bank-financed Wall Street speculation and the carry trade; the mentality that one gets rich by sucking at the tit of the state rather than working hard.  All of this is nothing new.  For decades the Progressive state structure has systematically rewarded fast-talking corporate types with smooth interpersonal but limited productive skills and penalized those who take legitimate risks. The Federal Reserve Bank churns out easy credit made available to speculators in stocks and real estate but the government taxes work (through the income tax) and thereby inhibits small scale capital accumulation, creating a bank-dominated economy that is inherently corrupt.  All of this tends to manipulation of paper and cheating, at which Republicans like Rick Lazio as well as Democrats like Timothy Geithner excel.

A nation which allows cheats like Lazio and Geithner to attain high office has failed Aristotle's highest hope for the city state.  The nation is failing morally and the fault is Progressivism. Moral failure will lead to collapse. The Founding Fathers knew Aristotle and they were aware of this point.  So were the Mugwumps of the Gilded Age.  Because of its fascist economy, the nation has foresaken its moral foundations.

New York City Tea Party to Rename Itself King George Tea Tax Party in Honor of Rick Lazio

The Tea Party movement was started by Ron Paul and his followers.  It was then adopted and perhaps coopted by a wide range of Republicans, many of whom have not thought very much about what they belive, or who are dupes of economic royalists, those who would have supported King George on December 16, 1773.  Nowhere is the confusion more evident than among those Republicans who claim to be members of a "tea party" but who support a candidate like Rick Lazio, a lobbyist for JP Morgan who oversaw the transfer of $25 billion from the public purse to the private pockets of JP Morgan's incompetent, morally depraved executives.

The royalist, pro Rick Lazio Tea Party movement should consider renaming itself the King George Tea Tax movement. Supporters of the bailout are advocates of higher taxes, more regulation, more corruption and the kind of insane public policies that King George favored. 

How Embarrassing for the New York Times

The Buffalo News reports that the socialist advocates of welfare for bankers at the New York Times have endorsed a socialist advocate of welfare for bankers, Rick Lazio.  How embarrassing for the Times.

Republican Paradox

Several of my friends support Rick Lazio for Governor of New York State.  Lazio had worked as a lobbyist for JP Morgan and had helped arrange Morgan's $25 billion bailout. No greater expansion of government power has occurred in the past two decades.  In exchange for his help in facilitating the expansion of government, JP Morgan paid Lazio a one million dollar bonus.  In addition, Lazio is on record in support of abortion.  As well, Lazio is entrenched in the same self destructive New York GOP that has allowed Alfonse D'Amato to play the GOP against itself in favor of the Democrats.  It is the same GOP  that continues to support Governor George Pataki, whose last term in office involved expansion of state government, an alliance with the state's Service Employees International Union boss Dennis Rivera and corrupt indifference to extensive Medicaid fraud.  These patterns cannot be excused by the State Assembly's Democratic majority or the state's liberal ideology, as even the left-wing New York Times took issue with the criminality in Medicaid that flourished during the Pataki administration.

It is thus puzzling that so many Republicans continue to favor Rick Lazio for governor, the GOP establishment's choice. These Republicans seek an outsider with considerable establishment experience.  That is, someone who supports less government but has spent his life earning a living through big government.   I would support Paladino if only to keep Lazio out of office, and a candidate who makes a 20% budget cut the centerpiece of his platform is certainly preferable to a paid lobbyist for JP Morgan. Another Pataki-like fraud would simply be too discrediting to the GOP.

The Republicans have grown used to dissonance between words and deeds.  The dissonance has become so sharp that the party's image has deteriorated and will not recover until new personnel are introduced at the highest levels.  Mr. Pataki and Mr. D'Amato are relics and do not belong in any leadership role.  Likewise, candidates such as Michael Bloomberg and Rick Lazio with big government track records need to be purged.  There is nothing moderate about the the bailout that Mr. Lazio facilitated. It is not mainstream; it is not "conservative".  The bailout was an extreme, self-indulgent, radical expansion of government, a violent taking of money by the powerful from those less powerful, and those participating in it lack the moral fiber to play any prominent role in government.

Obama Stimulus Has Failed

 
Remember the 2009 stimulus? Remember Barney Frank and his Merry Band of Democratic Party Idiots and their economic advisors telling us that Keynes's ideas really do work despite a century of failure?  (Their reasoning: how else can we subsidize all-thumbs investment and commercial bankers and hedge fund managers?)

It turns out that a nearly a trillion dollars in stimulus has not improved the jobs picture.  The economics profession is to the economy as doctors like Benjamin Rush who used to use leeches to draw blood are to medicine. 

Unfortunately, quite a few Republicans are just as incompetent as the Democrats. Examples are George W. Bush and his compeer in idiocy and greed, Rick Lazio, the New York State GOP gubernatorial candidate who was instrumental in obtaining $25 billion for JP Morgan during the Bush administration's bailout days.

The ways and means Republicans sent the above table. Scroll down to see how much damage the Democrats’ deficit spending stimulus bill has done in your state.  The three exceptions are North Dakota, Alaska, and of course Washington, DC.

Lazio Should Step Down

PO Box 130
West Shokan, NY 12494
June 12, 2010

Rick Lazio
Lazio 2010 Inc.
PO Box 4818
New York, New York 10185

Dear Mr. Lazio:

I am writing as a registered Republican and a member of my Town’s Republican Committee.

Your opponent, Carl Paladino, has publicly stated that during your tenure as a full-time employee and lobbyist for JP Morgan Chase you lobbied for and arranged a payment of $25 billion from the US Treasury to your employer. In other words, Mr. Paladino has publicly alleged that you participated in the “bailout." In return you received a $1.3 million bonus.

If Mr. Paladino’s allegations are inaccurate, please respond to this inquiry publicly.

If Mr. Paladino’s allegations are accurate then you are morally unfit to serve in public office. I am posting this letter on my blog and stating explicitly that if Mr. Paladino’s allegations are accurate you are morally equivalent to a common criminal and belong in jail. Consequently, I would urge you to step down from the gubernatorial candidacy and allow the better man to run.

Sincerely,


Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Rick Lazio's Links to Wall Street

Wall Street is the chief force for the expansion of government. Wall Street sells the bonds that finance government, so its stake in the expansion of the state is enormous.  To cloak this relationship the media depicts the debate between advocates of small and big government as one between business and the poor.  That is nonsense.

The big government party in America has always been the pro-big business party.  That started with the Federalists and Alexander Hamilton, continued through the Whigs and Henry Clay, continued further through the Republicans of Abraham Lincoln and then Jay Gould, and was then reinvented by Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressives.  The Democrats learned from the Republicans and became the bigger government and the bigger big business party under Franklin D. Roosevelt, a wealthy New Yorker.

Hence, when Republicans claim to favor small government, voters need to look under the hoods of their lie-mobiles.  When chronically lying Whigs like George Pataki, George W. Bush or Alfonse D'Amato claim to be for small government, it is better to pass on the clunker. Rick Lazio appears to be offering New York a used, big government Whig-mobile, complete with bailout tires and big business subsidy spares.

According to Emily Lenihan of WIVB in Buffalo, Carl Paladino, who publicly states he will cut government by 20% if elected, has made the following statement:

"Rick Lazio is a nice fellow and we have developed a cordial relationship and I think he is a man of his word- but he took a $1.2million dollar bonus as a lobbyist for Wall Street Bank handed $25 Billion in the Federal bail out. That's our tax money Rick put in his pocket," Paladino said.

"While in Congress, Lazio served as the chair of the Banking Committee's subcommittee on housing and community opportunity and was a cheerleader for and supporter of Andrew Cuomo's Federal Housing Goals which forced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy $2.4 BILLION in sub-prime mortgages while lowering underwriting standards and lowed down payments on 105% financing," Paladino said. "As chair of the relevant House sub-committee with oversight Lazio said....nothing."

Rick Lazio is a supporter of big government, despite the engine sounds of his lie-mobile.

Steve Levy for Governor II

I e-mailed three GOP activists whom I respect inquiries about Steve Levy. Two of them have interviewed Levy. As well, I had suggested to one that he ask about Levy's position on the Wicks Law. Here are their responses.

I. First, while I have not checked all of the candidates thoroughly, I have given some thought to Levy, and I certainly think that he would do a better job than Lazio. I also believe that with adequate financing that he would not drag down the rest of the ticket the way Lazio will.

Regarding the Wicks Law

Second, as a very young man, I was a commercial banker. One of my best customers , was the owner of a steel company who at times was forced, because of economic conditions, to operate in New York City. One of his fixed costs was a 15% markup to handle the graft required to operate in NYC.

A year or two later, I ended up as President of a conglomerate which included a major highway and heavy construction contractor which operated primarily in southeastern New York and the NYC Metro Area. In time I learned that the bids were all fixed, and indeed all of the estimates were done by one of our "competitors". In on the fix were all of the asphalt and concrete producers, as well as corrupt union officials who all ended up with a piece of the "action". It was my understanding that the cost to the taxpayers was normally 15% or more of the total bill!. And of course, as you know, state government contracts require the highest prevailing labor rate to be charged.

While I have no knowledge as to current conditions in the "highway" business, I suspect that the same conditions prevail to this day.

II. As a member of the State GOP Committee and more importantly a VERY concerned resident of this state, I am supporting Steve Levy. He met with us two weeks ago and I was very impressed.

As a resident, and putting all politics aside, I have no faith that Lazio or Cuomo would do anything to turn this state around. I believe Levy is our only hope to get us back on track. Without him I am certain that in 2014 when my youngest daughter graduates from high school I, too, will be leaving for greener and cheaper pastures.

My honest two cents.

Follow Up (after I stated that I was afraid that Levy might appoint Democratic staffers)

I agree that the fact that he’s a Democrat is worrisome, but rumor has it ... (deleted on request)...

I also liked Chris Collins, the Republican County Executive from Erie County, but his dreams of the governorship imploded after some anti-Semitic remarks. Too bad because he was a great candidate and has taken a hard line approach to government and turned things around in Erie County. He would have been a terrific candidate for the GOP, but he apparently suffers from foot in mouth syndrome like too many wannabe politicians!

III. I did have a chance to question him on a mouthful of issues including Medicaid waste and fraud and the mammoth public unions that control the state. He answered the Medicaid question adequately and although pressed for time...I did get to ask him if he would repeal Wick's Law. His answer to this was most comprehensive. He gave a detailed explanation of Wicks Law, similar to your description...He said he would fight to repeal Wicks and has been advocating for the same. He gave an example from his tenure in Suffolk of negotiating a contract with public construction unions I believe, where Wicks was suspended, and they did not have to abide by it.

Although I did not agree with him on 100% of the issues, he was upfront and honest and did not try to squirm and conceal some of his more "liberal" leaning agenda, such as promoting the US to take the lead in a "Green Revolution" (it's in his plan to reform the state economy on his website) to provide a boost to the economy which he believes is the next revolution following industrial and information technology, for which we gave him hell! I respect him more for talking straight and not being disingenuous about his disagreeable issues. All in all, I would support him as a man who excels and has a proven track record on fiscal issues like balanced budgets and standing up to special interests and public sector unions. I believe he has the ability to beat Cuomo and I want to ask others who feel the same to write to State Chairman Cox pronto and their County Chairmen of both the Conservative and Republican Parties, since he needs their lines in order to win.

I haven't heard any others except for Rick Lazio and one other fellow who recently dropped out. But I believe I have a good knack for spotting good people...I have also recently seen some other candidates who have impressed me, such as Michael Faulkner running for Congress in Harlem against Charlie Rangel, and Dan Maloney running in CD#4 (Nassau)against Carolyn McCarthy. There are more than a handful of other impressive figures who I believe have the integrity not to cave in to special interests, (like unions, wall st, etc.) that have impressed me. But I could be wrong on them.

However I believe there are the beginnings of a new type of leader emerging among Tea Party, Repub. and Libertarian circles. People who identify with the Constitution and have taken the plunge and are going into politics to serve their country and the people, since they have seen the ruin that radical Marxism and political cronyism can bring to our great nation through our current crop of leaders, and yes, I'll admit it, past Republican presidents and congresses as well are just as guilty.