Opposition for Opposition's Sake?

Dan Pfeiffer, White House Communications Director, wrote on the White House blog that
Let's be clear: Sen. Shelby is preventing qualified nominees who will help protect the American people from being confirmed. He’s not alone, though. This is just the latest example of this kind opposition for opposition’s sake that the President talked about earlier this week.
Which is accurate, as far as it goes, but really just a symptom of a bigger problem.


You see, elected officials like Shelby have no interest in the qualified persons we hire and pay to carry out the tasks we assign them. That's because, in addition to having been groomed for office by special interests, they've been provided with their own shadow bureaucracy of lobbyists and consultants and think tank experts whose talking points they parrot. If that weren't the case, then instead of mouthing the "findings" of the Chamber of Commerce, the Heritage Foundation, the Aspen Institute and Project for a New American Security, our representatives would be making reference to the Congressional Research Service, the GAO, the Departmental IGs, the Bureau of the Census and other objective sources of data.


Of course people who have their own private tutors, trainers, groomers and speech-writers don't care that executive positions aren't filled, as long as the money flows into the pockets of their owners. It's what makes them a better investment than a stable of race horses. Horses don't feel beholden to their groomers or their riders.


Personally, I'd really prefer if instead of "protect" the Administration used the word "serve." We who govern do not need protection; we pay for and deserve to be served.