The DNC has tested the waters with a fundraising appeal using the prospect of a move to impeach/remove Obama to rally support for Democrats in next fall’s congressional elections. Did the appeal backfire, building the media profile and credibility of impeachment advocates?
A move to shore up your defenses may expose your vulnerability to an opponent’s attack. Yet and still, it won’t backfire until the opponent moves effectively to exploit that vulnerability. But what if good intelligence makes you reasonably certain that your opponent will forego the countermove? In that event, you may turn what is plausibly perceived as a weakness into a stronghold, from which to launch, at your convenience, a surprisingly successful attack against your enemy.
I think the Obama wing of the elitist faction can be absolutely certain that its GOP opponents will not exploit Obama’s impeachment vulnerability, even though his actions have merited a depth of public disaffection not seen since the year impeachment heralded Richard Nixon’s political demise. Far from using that public disaffection to go for an impeachment/removal majority in the U.S. Congress, the elitist faction’s quisling GOP leadership intend to war against the GOP’s conservative grassroots base during this primary season.
Like a poker player with deep pockets, the controlling power in the GOP mean to force the pace against their less well-endowed grassroots opposition. They winnow the field until either the will or the means of all but one or two players have been exhausted. In political terms means, this means spending big bucks against conservative opponents in the primaries. When the smoke clears, a few authentic conservatives may be left standing for the general election.
But most of the grassroots conservatives who carried them to victory will have exhausted their resources achieving victory in the primary stretch. This will leave their freshly nominated champions under the gun as they make the turn into the general election campaign. Their choice? Sell out to the quisling leadership’s money/media powers, or lose because they lack the resources to make themselves known to the general electorate.
The GOP’s quisling leadership is not authentically opposed to Obama’s socialist, anti-constitutional agenda. If it were, it wouldn’t waste resources in a vindictive war against its party’s grassroots voter base. Instead it would use those resources to mobilize the deep vein of anger and resentment that unites that base against Obama’s socialist push to overthrow constitutional self-government in the United States.
It would want the 2014 election to be a national referendum on impeachment/removal. In that context, it would draw up and widely publicize the bill of particulars that indicts Obama’s impeachable offenses. As part of that effort, it would call for support from all the individuals and groups fighting against the Obama faction’s tyrannical moves. It would help them to elaborate and publicize the threat in its respective areas of concern. It would channel all these different streams into one cleansing flood, a tidal wave of votes sufficient to elect an impeachment/removal majority. To this end, it would make a point of getting all its candidates to pledge support for impeachment/removal as the only way to end the Obama’s faction’s destructive socialist tantrum.
The DNC is banking on the fact that the GOP’s quisling leadership will make no such effort to galvanize the voters hugely disaffected by the Obama mess. It knows Barack Obama’s betrayal of the U.S. Constitution is the goal of the elitist faction, which the leadership of both so-called major parties now serves. They know Obama’s determined assaults against the decent character and good conscience of the American people are vital to the elitist faction’s goal of annihilating America’s attachment to the unalienable rights of the people. Moreover, the Democrat leaders know that, like themselves, the GOP’s quisling leadership hates and resents the provisions of the Constitution intended to constrain the abuse of government power.
I am still hard put to understand from whence arises the American elitists’ hatred of constitutional government of, by and for the people. Not only have America’s elites enjoyed a degree of wealth and personal power unexampled in human history, they have done so in the context of institutions that make their enjoyment of those advantages more secure than it has ever been. Not for them Macbeth’s wary apprehension: “To be thus is nothing, but to be safely thus.”
Only one thing has been required of them in exchange for this security: a willingness to acknowledge a measure of equality that assured every person in America a chance to reach for such success as they themselves have been able to achieve, and enjoy its fruits as they have done. In light of that assurance, America’s middle class developed to a point beyond the dreams of past societies. And that development came to pass on a moral and spiritual basis that made the esteem of the multitudes more genuine and savory than the enforced worship wrenched from oppressed, impoverished “masses” in other times and places.
Yet all my life the decent, growing middle class in the United States has been subjected to the sneering ridicule and contempt of the elitists who dominate the nation’s intellectual, media and entertainment culture. From the left spewed venom against middle-class morality, complacency and supposed suburban hypocrisy. On the right, supposedly conservative libertarians, of the Ayn Rand cult, worship the idol of a mad Nietzschean fantasy. Samson like, they feel impelled to pull down what they fancy to be the work of their superior merit, rather than accept a morally egalitarian idea of justice that leaves room for respect and community with the unremarkable masses.
And all the while, the mean spirit of envious, materialistic, self-idolatry stokes elitist resentment occasioned by an inescapable apprehension, an apprehension connected with the source and nature of human understanding. Such is the intuition that all their especially grand achievements depend on a capacity for thought that cannot logically do without the assumption of an all-seeing, all-knowing, preternaturally creative being. This ever-present observer, though elusively unseen, is incalculably greater in power and consequence than any human elite could ever be.
America’s founders made this assumption the keystone of the nation’s founding creed. Could this be the reason today’s elitists reject that creed, and are working concertedly to banish it, once and for all, from American life?
Media wishing to interview Alan Keyes, please contact email@example.com.