The nation, at this point in time, sits two people away from a dictatorship.
Curious? With apologies for the length, read on. And stay with me — this is important.
First, some background and fair warning. For those of you who’ve followed my sometimes [or, rather, consistently] rambling rants here at America’s Right about all things liberal, by now you should know one thing: As noted in my brief “profile” (can we still use that term?), if any post appears at America’s Right with my name on it and which in any way is sympathetic to or complimentary of anything liberal, you may rest assured that the piece is a forgery.
Now, I’ve been around the block a few times and can say, with some authority, that even before the reign of The Guy from Chicago, the decades-long, incremental creep of socialism and liberalism into the national fabric, accompanied by their handmaiden enabling doctrines of “political correctness,” “capitalists bad – socialists good” and “redistributionist equity,” had so shoved the foundations of the country to the left and away from the original intent and labors of the Founding Fathers that they would likely not have recognized the place. And that is a sad truth.
However, if they would have been merely dismayed and saddened between 1789 and 2008, before the last general election, they would now in 2010 be clinically depressed if not outright suicidal. Check it out:
- a compounding of the nation’s debt in one year to a level four times greater than that aggregated in the first two hundred years of the nation’s history;
- the nationalization of one-sixth of the nation’s economy under the cynical guise of “healthcare reform,” the final costs of which remain unknown;
- the creation from thin air of scores of political “czars” unaccountable to the Senate or anyone other than the Charlatan in Chief;
- the populating of the Supreme Court with folks who think governmental policy properly emanates from the bench, not the Congress;
- a “commander-in-chief” who would rather bow to the Muslim head of Saudi Arabia than answer the pleas of the governor of Arizona to stop the invasion of the state by foreign forces, as required by the Constitution;
- a president who has counted among his acquaintances and role models Saul Alinsky and William Ayers – both fans of Karl Marx – Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones and Hugo Chavez;
- and on, and on, and on. [here, dear reader, feel free to insert your own personal favorite Obama outrage(s)]
Memo to the electorate: any time you see the word “reform” tagged onto a topic which the radicals now in charge have deemed to be in dire need of “change” – especially when accompanied by the adjective “comprehensive” – run for the hills, because nothing … repeat, NOTHING … good can come of it. This includes immigration “reform,” banking “reform,” Wall Street “reform” and education “reform.” All of these are liberal code-speak for the collectivization and eventual demise of the United States of America.
And here’s a scary one you will likely hear more about in the coming months: pension, 401(k) and IRA “reform.” That’s right, Virginia, the regime apparatchiks and their operatives in the Congress are now hard at work setting the stage and floating “trial balloons” for the capture and appropriation – as happened in Argentina – of millions of Americans’ private pension nest eggs. Government and public pensions are one thing; private pensions, until recently, are quite another.
First, The Guy creates the deficits and debt to drive the nation toward bankruptcy. Voila! The crisis! Then, in a concocted maneuver to “save” the system, his policies try to seize your private property — one “reform” measure at a time. But don’t bother searching for these stories through mainstream media sources: the mainstream press (save for, thankfully, Fox News Channel) is now, tragically and lamentably, little more than a propaganda organ for The Guy and his sycophants. Thomas Jefferson and his compatriots would not be pleased.
The electorate needs to understand, in clear and unequivocal terms, precisely what is at stake here. This regime has been able to get away with its accelerated radicalization and collectivization of the nation since it captured power in January 2009 only because (a) it controlled the White House; (b) it controlled the Congress; and (c) it enjoyed the sympathies of four-ninths (and sometimes five-ninths) of the United States Supreme Court. And it consistently received a pass from the press.
But as November 2, 2010 approaches, assume the worst case scenario and just do the math. The current composition of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate is 58 Democrats, including two Democrat-leaning Independents (Lieberman and Sanders) and one vacancy. It is a safe wager that the seat vacated by the death of Democrat Robert Byrd will again be filled by a Democrat (but let us hope I am wrong). If that happens, the Democrats, at 59, will need but a single additional senator to again “run the table” in that chamber, assuming they don’t lose anyone in the upcoming election.
We must hope they lose at least ten seats, with the Republicans losing none, removing Harry Reid and his pals from the majority. But we should not bet the ranch on that delicious potential. Translation: as of today, one more Democrat in the Senate and it’s “Katie-bar-the-door.” Or, perhaps better stated, it’s “Karl-bar-the-door.” After all, we can’t let those “rich” taxpayers escape, can we?
The current composition of the House – 253 Democrats and 178 Republicans – might well change, such that Nancy (“Partnership not Partisanship”) Pelosi will be returned to the House basement broom closet from whence she escaped in 2007. On the other hand, unless the Republicans can hold all of their present 178 seats and gain at least 40 seats now held by Democrats to regain the majority, the House will remain a part of The Guy’s “team.” So, if the Senate gains one net Democrat in this coming November and the House stays under Pelosi’s “stewardship,” the Congress stays aligned with Obama’s “vision” for the nation.
Which brings us to the Supreme Court.
The Guy has already succeeded in replacing a liberal with a liberal. Associate Justice David Souter leaves, Associate Justice Sonia (“Policy Comes from the Bench”) Sotomayor arrives: it’s a lib-for-a-lib wash. But now, Justice Stevens has announced his departure and The Guy has nominated Elena Kagan, his Department of Justice Solicitor General. (More about the DoJ in a moment.) Anyone who believes that Kagan, if confirmed, will line up with the conservative wing or even “moderate” seat of the Court is likely indulging in a controlled substance — not that the liberal wing of the Court thinks that’s all bad, of course. So, again, Justice Stevens leaves, Elena (not yet a Justice) Kagan arrives and it’s another lib-for-a-lib wash.
Ah, but if before January 2013 – when, hopefully, America’s nightmare will be ending – any of the conservatives on the Court (Chief Justice Roberts, Associate Justices Alito, Scalia or Thomas) or the “swing vote” moderate (Justice Kennedy), decide to retire or otherwise depart the bench, The Guy will have an opportunity to, yes, nominate and with Senate approval install a replacement. Heck, he could even bypass the Senate and Congress altogether and attempt another “recess appointment,” as recently done with Donald (“Healthcare Rationing is Good”) Berwick if the timing were right. Odds are that a recess appointment would not be made to the Supreme Court, but odds are also that such a replacement on the Court, however it happens, would not be a conservative. Just a wild guess.
And that’s two.
And remember, the Supreme Court has the final say on what is, and what is not, constitutional. That much we know from the 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison. Ironically, Marbury is generally also recognized as the decision confirming the protections of the Constitution as implemented through the “separation of powers” doctrine.
And so, under the “worst case” scenario, the nation would then have (a) the Executive branch controlled by The Guy; (b) the Legislative branch controlled by people as radical as, if not more so than, The Guy; and (c) the Judicial branch “likely” controlled by judges philosophically and intellectually aligned with The Guy. And with that, the nation can kiss the separation of powers doctrine, brilliantly conceived by the Founding Fathers and designed into the Constitution, goodbye. Remember: when there is no longer any “separation,” there is no longer a “doctrine.” There is only one thing left: power.
Sooooo, to recap: if between now and January 2013 the Democrats gain but one net seat in the Senate, hold their death-grip on the House and limit Republican gains to less than 40 seats, and a single “conservative” or “moderate” vacancy arises at the Supreme Court before then … that, Virginia, by definition could easily lead to a classic dictatorship. To use a meteorological term, a “perfect storm.”
Accordingly, when you go to vote in November – and please do so while you still have the chance, lest “comprehensive election reform” thereafter raise its head – keep these facts in mind. And if you succeed in running the gauntlet of “poll watchers” there to ensure that “security” is provided and that the voting process is proceeding according to plan, rest assured that The Guy’s Department of Justice will be looking out for you as you vote. Assuming you’re the right color, of course.
Oh, and be sure to ignore former DoJ attorney J. Christian Adams’ sworn testimony regarding what he and other Justice Department attorneys had been told by their superiors there regarding how the laws concerning voter protection and civil rights were going to be “enforced” following the dropping of charges and abandonment of a default judgment (that’s right, a default judgment) against a couple of New Black Panther Party members who were providing “security” at a Philadelphia polling site during the 2008 election.
Above all else, though, remember. Two people, folks. Two.