Words can be powerful tools to convey information, an idea, or even an attitude. Our choice of words, the context in which they're used, and whether written or spoken, determine the entire meaning of a statement.

For example, I was recently in an email exchange with a buddy and ended a rather pithy comment with "Oh, go ahead and tell me what a [smart alec] I am." and the response was something to the effect of "No, I must to say it in person because putting it on paper doesn't have the same impact." She's so cute when she's mad ... but I'm still going to hide out for a while. Women are particularly adept with the unspoken word.

Some things call specific words and images immediately to mind. When ever I think of elected officials, the word "fiduciary" comes to the fore. A fiduciary, by definition, being a person to whom property or power is entrusted for the benefit of someone else. We, the citizens and tax payers of this great nation, entrust our elected officials with certain powers expecting they'll govern responsibly, that they'll be our fiduciaries." But are they?

Our elected officials, our fiduciaries, make claims of being leaders, especially when they have constituents climbing their sneakers about failing in their responsibilities.

I'm no leader, but know a bit about leadership. First and foremost is that a leader, a true leader, never has to state that he's a leader. A true leader is just accepted for what he is, the inspirational guide for those who come along. Neither will he ever ask those he leads to do something he isn't willing to do himself.

So how can any of our elected fiduciary leaders expect constituents not to rise up when they take more and more pay and benefits, spend ever more GringoBucks on frivolous and unnecessary items, at the expense of those who must pick up the tab while, at the same time, many of those constituents are taking cuts in pay or income, losing jobs, losing homes, and having to cut back on their own living expenses in order to get by? How can they expect constituents not to become outraged at more and greater expenditures, for which we must pay, while there is no effort to cut back on the part of those grabbing us right by the wallet?

There's another word that comes to mind when the subject of our elected fiduciary leaders and their appointed functionaries arises. It comes from our own Tennessee Constitution, specifically Article I, Declaration of Rights, Sections 1 and 2; Section 1. That all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement of those ends they have at all times, an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.
Section 2. That government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

Our Tennessee forebears made a profound, unspoken statement by putting the Declaration of Rights at the beginning of our Tennessee Constitution. Unspoken, but screaming loud and clear, is that the rights of the people come before all else. The statement "(t)hat all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority" speaks volumes in and of itself, especially that it's the very first statement in the document. "That government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind" does too.

Indefeasible ... something that cannot be defeated, revoked, or made void such as a basic right that can't be taken away. It's sort of like that "endowed by their Creator" deal our founders saw fit to plug into the declaration they made to the King of England two hundred and some odd years ago.

For our elected fiduciary leaders to attack their constituents, those who pay for their extravagance, their conspicuous consumption, when their attention to fiduciary duties and leadership skills are challenged, does nothing but cause one to stand back and ask "Dudes and Dudettes, like, what have you been smok...", uh, oops, almost forgot, kinder and gentler. Maybe that question should be more akin to "How does this fit our unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish the government that we don't agree with any more because you get the gold mine and we're getting the shaft?"

And to take it to court? One might imagine someone who truly believes he's absolutely in the right, truly a leader, would just tell his opponents to bring it on, that the citizens and tax payers will determine he's right about all the good he's doing with their tax dollars.

But one must also wonder if that lawyer dude has attended to his fiduciary duty to inform his clients, the ones suing the city of Red Bank, that if they lose, and there's a significant possibility they will, they'll have to pay not only their own attorney's fees but also those of Red Bank to defend against a frivolous lawsuit. If it was legal in Tennessee, I'd bet good money the commissioner who's encouraging them hasn't either. Bummer ...

I was raised to believe that the person paying the bills has a right to determine the rules, that the wishes of the payor take precedence over those of the payee. It appears that public servants have forgotten who works for whom and it's invoking an image from early in one of the Jurasic Park movies, the one where T-Rex is after the group and that belligerent, obnoxious guy hides in the can ... but T-Rex finds him, and eats him. In a figurative sense, that's probably what's going to happen here.

Royce E. Burrage, Jr.
Royce@Officially Chapped.org