In his guest post at JoeHoft.com, Jack Gleason argues that the Democrats have mastered the art of duplicity in politics. He asserts that, while they present themselves as champions for “the common man,” they often engage in rhetoric and actions that reveal a stark contrast to their proclaimed values. Gleason highlights how Democratic legislation often employs misleading language that obscures the true intentions behind these proposals. For example, legislation such as the Inflation Reduction Act and the Build Back Better Act has contributed to increasing financial burdens rather than alleviating them. He criticizes the perceived deception as a tactic to manipulate public perception while benefitting their own political agendas.
A central focus of Gleason’s critique is the “For the People Act” (H.R.1), which is positioned as a voting rights and election reform measure. Instead of enhancing democratic processes, he claims the legislation aimed to erode election integrity, facilitating voter fraud to the advantage of Democrats. The act’s failure to pass, primarily due to Republican opposition, allowed for the preservation of electoral integrity, though some provisions were still adopted at the state level. This incident exemplifies the broader issue Gleason identifies: legislation framed as beneficial often serves to advance partisan interests instead.
The post also addresses how Democrats utilize omnibus spending bills and continuing resolutions, especially when they avoid the formal budgetary process. Gleason criticizes the tendency to bundle various spending priorities, presenting them as urgent measures to avert government shutdowns. Instead of maintaining funding, he argues that these bills allow for the allocation of millions to projects that serve special interests, often without proper scrutiny. He lists various expenditures funded through recent bills, such as financial support for LGBTQ+ initiatives and other culturally-oriented projects, positioning them as misappropriations of taxpayer money amidst economic necessity.
Gleason further illustrates this point by dissecting the December 2022 government funding proposal. He highlights how this bill, while touting disaster relief, included substantial financial giveaways to pet projects of politicians, and he criticizes the lack of transparency and accountability in the legislative process. The immense size of these bills, filled with provisions that go unnoticed, leads to excesses, including increased spending on social and cultural programs rather than fundamental needs of the public. The author argues that such practices reveal a moral disconnect among politicians, who perceive taxpayers’ funds as their own to allocate without due consideration for the constituents who are adversely affected by financial mismanagement.
Moreover, within this extensive spending framework, Gleason touches on alarming provisions that threaten judicial oversight and the foundational principle of separated powers. He claims that hidden clauses, such as those providing immunity for congressional actions from judicial scrutiny, undermine the very structure of American governance designed to safeguard citizen rights. He denounces these encroachments on liberty as indicative of an overarching aim by some Democrats to consolidate power and stymie any accountability for governmental actions.
Finally, Gleason concludes with a call to action for citizens to become more vigilant regarding legislative matters and the conduct of their elected representatives. He underscores a growing awareness among Americans that the current political climate is characterized by betrayal and misrepresentation, underscoring the urgency for active civic participation, particularly during elections. This newfound resolve is a reaction to the duplicity displayed within political bills and proposals. He advocates for a more informed electorate willing to contest the status quo by holding politicians accountable for their legislative decisions, suggesting that it is imperative to scrutinize the fine print of policy proposals to ensure that they align with the public’s interests.
