If Government Were a Business, Obama Would Already Be Fired

Let's begin by stating the obvious.  If government were a business, and subject to economic realities and the consequences of its ignoring them, it would have been liquidated long ago -- its remaining assets of value would have been reclaimed by its creditors and shareholders (both of which are the American taxpayer), and its market share of consumers (also the American taxpayer, and those they are gracious enough to financially support) would be sought by other, more efficient businesses.

But let's pretend for a moment that it is a business.  And let's pretend that this business had engaged not only in unethical practices, but illegal practices, completely betraying the trust of its shareholders and customers and and disavowing the very foundational principles upon which its business is predicated.

The IRS, an agency under the control of this government that Obama assures youngsters is no threat to liberty whatsoever, has done exactly that.  They have apologized for selectively harassing, excessively scrutinizing, and denying benefits to conservative groups these last years.

Of particular note, the Treasury Department's inspector general J. Russell George disclosed on Friday that the Obama administration officials were well aware of his auditing the IRS for its political screening policies in June 2012.  Convenient as the IRS's targeting of Democrats' enemies was, the Obama administration chose not to reveal any of this knowledge to the public in the 2012 election year, yet it now feigns shock and indignation at the prospect that the IRS could have acted irresponsibly and illegally.

Transparency, indeed.

Obama is reasonably implicated in this crime, and this crime is nothing short of tyranny.

The IRS acted in direct defiance of that most hallowed of our laws, purposefully enumerated in the First Amendment to the Constitution, which ensures that a free people's right to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances" is to be protected by the government.  The people are not to be punished by the government against which that petition is directed.

Would the First Amendment have any purpose at all, if not to forbid the government from doing exactly this?  And yet IRS commissioner Steven Miller appears to seemingly perjure himself before Congress, suggesting that the agency has done nothing illegal, despite having admitted and apologized for its disregard of the First Amendment.

As Jon Stewart regretfully admits, there is good reason the IRS would seek to punish groups that teach and study the Constitution while the IRS blatantly subverts the concepts to be found therein. 

There is no hyperbole too strong to describe this revelation.  The IRS is now the Tax Gestapo, the Party Enforcer, and the soon-to-be Ministry of Worthiness when it comes to acquiring health care.

And as the president gives lip service about his concern, other Democrats express outrage, Republicans finally embrace the opportunity to lace into the administration for its disregard for the Constitution, and grassroots conservatives, beaten and battered by a government leviathan they could not defend against, are justifiably expressing their discontent.  But the question is, whose heads figuratively roll for this injustice?

It should be simple.  If government were a business, Timothy Geithner and the rest of the IRS Oversight Board would not have the political protection to pass the blame.  They would be held accountable to the fullest extent possible for violating our most sacred of laws.

And for the same reason, Obama arguing that he was ignorant of the offense, which now appears to be a lie (his administration, at least, was made aware), would not hold the slightest bit of water -- if government were a business. 

In the world of business, and in the real world outside government, leadership is invariably implicated in failure.  John Maxwell, in his book The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, refers to this as "The Law of the Lid."  Of the 21 laws, it's Number One.

Perspective.org summarizes this law this way: "Your leadership is like a lid or a ceiling on your organization.  Your church or business will not rise beyond the level your leadership allows.  That's why when a corporation or team needs to be fixed, they fire the leader."

Again, it's pertinent to note: this is law number one, and it is step number one -- the one thing that must happen before anything else can happen.  The leadership must be fired.

Also pertinent to note is that the government seems well aware of this law. 

Government recognized that figurehead leadership is inescapably culpable for the actions of those divisions under that leadership.  When the government assumed control of GM and its operations, and when they assumed control of AIG's operations, the government immediately removed the CEOs of both in efforts to "fix" the companies.  They knew without question that this was the first step on the road to recovery.  

How can the government now defend the notion that the guys at the top are barely, if at all, culpable for the IRS's actions, irrespective of the extensively large and impossibly cumbersome network of agencies that this administration and the government now oversee?

If government were a business, Obama would have already been fired.  If we lived in a sane world, impeachment proceedings against him and criminal proceedings against the IRS executives involved would begin forthwith.

And if sense applied prevalently in Americans' appraisal of this bloated and exceedingly powerful government, we would demand in unison that the government eliminate the excess by slimming it down, reducing the influence and reach of its agencies, and thereby making this necessary evil, as Thomas Paine profoundly reminds us that government is, a more efficient and less intrusive evil.

William Sullivan blogs at http://politicalpalaver.blogspot.com and can be followed on Twitter.

Let's begin by stating the obvious.  If government were a business, and subject to economic realities and the consequences of its ignoring them, it would have been liquidated long ago -- its remaining assets of value would have been reclaimed by its creditors and shareholders (both of which are the American taxpayer), and its market share of consumers (also the American taxpayer, and those they are gracious enough to financially support) would be sought by other, more efficient businesses.

But let's pretend for a moment that it is a business.  And let's pretend that this business had engaged not only in unethical practices, but illegal practices, completely betraying the trust of its shareholders and customers and and disavowing the very foundational principles upon which its business is predicated.

The IRS, an agency under the control of this government that Obama assures youngsters is no threat to liberty whatsoever, has done exactly that.  They have apologized for selectively harassing, excessively scrutinizing, and denying benefits to conservative groups these last years.

Of particular note, the Treasury Department's inspector general J. Russell George disclosed on Friday that the Obama administration officials were well aware of his auditing the IRS for its political screening policies in June 2012.  Convenient as the IRS's targeting of Democrats' enemies was, the Obama administration chose not to reveal any of this knowledge to the public in the 2012 election year, yet it now feigns shock and indignation at the prospect that the IRS could have acted irresponsibly and illegally.

Transparency, indeed.

Obama is reasonably implicated in this crime, and this crime is nothing short of tyranny.

The IRS acted in direct defiance of that most hallowed of our laws, purposefully enumerated in the First Amendment to the Constitution, which ensures that a free people's right to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances" is to be protected by the government.  The people are not to be punished by the government against which that petition is directed.

Would the First Amendment have any purpose at all, if not to forbid the government from doing exactly this?  And yet IRS commissioner Steven Miller appears to seemingly perjure himself before Congress, suggesting that the agency has done nothing illegal, despite having admitted and apologized for its disregard of the First Amendment.

As Jon Stewart regretfully admits, there is good reason the IRS would seek to punish groups that teach and study the Constitution while the IRS blatantly subverts the concepts to be found therein. 

There is no hyperbole too strong to describe this revelation.  The IRS is now the Tax Gestapo, the Party Enforcer, and the soon-to-be Ministry of Worthiness when it comes to acquiring health care.

And as the president gives lip service about his concern, other Democrats express outrage, Republicans finally embrace the opportunity to lace into the administration for its disregard for the Constitution, and grassroots conservatives, beaten and battered by a government leviathan they could not defend against, are justifiably expressing their discontent.  But the question is, whose heads figuratively roll for this injustice?

It should be simple.  If government were a business, Timothy Geithner and the rest of the IRS Oversight Board would not have the political protection to pass the blame.  They would be held accountable to the fullest extent possible for violating our most sacred of laws.

And for the same reason, Obama arguing that he was ignorant of the offense, which now appears to be a lie (his administration, at least, was made aware), would not hold the slightest bit of water -- if government were a business. 

In the world of business, and in the real world outside government, leadership is invariably implicated in failure.  John Maxwell, in his book The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, refers to this as "The Law of the Lid."  Of the 21 laws, it's Number One.

Perspective.org summarizes this law this way: "Your leadership is like a lid or a ceiling on your organization.  Your church or business will not rise beyond the level your leadership allows.  That's why when a corporation or team needs to be fixed, they fire the leader."

Again, it's pertinent to note: this is law number one, and it is step number one -- the one thing that must happen before anything else can happen.  The leadership must be fired.

Also pertinent to note is that the government seems well aware of this law. 

Government recognized that figurehead leadership is inescapably culpable for the actions of those divisions under that leadership.  When the government assumed control of GM and its operations, and when they assumed control of AIG's operations, the government immediately removed the CEOs of both in efforts to "fix" the companies.  They knew without question that this was the first step on the road to recovery.  

How can the government now defend the notion that the guys at the top are barely, if at all, culpable for the IRS's actions, irrespective of the extensively large and impossibly cumbersome network of agencies that this administration and the government now oversee?

If government were a business, Obama would have already been fired.  If we lived in a sane world, impeachment proceedings against him and criminal proceedings against the IRS executives involved would begin forthwith.

And if sense applied prevalently in Americans' appraisal of this bloated and exceedingly powerful government, we would demand in unison that the government eliminate the excess by slimming it down, reducing the influence and reach of its agencies, and thereby making this necessary evil, as Thomas Paine profoundly reminds us that government is, a more efficient and less intrusive evil.

William Sullivan blogs at http://politicalpalaver.blogspot.com and can be followed on Twitter.

RECENT VIDEOS