Archives
Monday, July 12, 2010
Holding Our Fire...
He is The One. Or is he? You tell me.
JEFFREY.24.1-23. All of us here at InstaPunk have been deliberately avoiding in-depth political commentary of late because things are happening under the surface on many fronts, and it's impossible to make sense of therm on a day-to-day basis. It's very easy to outsmart yourself by drawing inferences from the movement of individual grains of sand. When it comes to sand, the question becomes: When do we reach a tipping point at which some variation on an avalanche occurs?
As far as I'm concerned, we're still building to the next tipping point. But a lot of sand grains are shifting.
Our incompetent congress is about to approve an Associate Supreme Court Justice whose career has been exclusively political, with experience in neither litigation nor judicial opinions. And regardless of spin, she is a radical lib, anti-military, pro-partial-birth abortion, and lefty elitist in all her associations. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice is in the process of trying to reconfigure the balance of powers under the Constitution by ramming its political agenda down the throats of individual American states and citizens in three different arenas:
1) Bringing a preemptive suit against
the State of Arizona to prevent that state from protecting its own
imperiled borders.
2) Mandating the non-enforcement of civil rights laws if the infractions are committed by blacks against whites.
3) Defying the rulings of its own federal courts by using the legal process to ensure the rnd of all offshore drilling in the Gulf.
2) Mandating the non-enforcement of civil rights laws if the infractions are committed by blacks against whites.
3) Defying the rulings of its own federal courts by using the legal process to ensure the rnd of all offshore drilling in the Gulf.
All of these initiatives represent an anti-democratic opposition to the will of the American people as a whole or to the will of Americans in specific regions of the country. Overwhelming majorities of American citizens favor the Arizona law the DOJ can't even wait to go into effect before trying to preempt in a raw judicial power play. Overwhelming majorities of people in the Gulf states oppose the removal of a key high-employment industry from their local economies in a time of severe economic recession which for them, given the poorly managed spill response, threatens to become a long-term depression. And I will make the point, if it needs to be made, that a poll I haven't seen taken yet would also show the American people opposed to a federal legal policy of giving a total pass to black racism, intimidation, and registration fraud at the polls.
[Throughout, the administration, led rhetorically by this same DOJ, continues to pretend Islamic radicalism is not the source of terror attacks against the U.S., even while the normally amoral Euro-World exhibits a becoming frisson of distaste for the "death by stoning" sentence imposed on a muslim woman by nuclear-weapons-bound Iran.]
But the administration plows on, almost naked in its contempt for the Constitution and the citizenry. The president himself seems to become more acidly superior to any and all opponents of his will in his public utterances. He's taken to challenging reality itself by claiming economic improvements no one believes are occurring, His tone gets more scornful the farther his assertions get from reality. Why? I don't think there are any "conventional" political explanations that work. Which is why the typical pundits are at a loss. (Note that Newt Gingrich and Charles Krauthammer are finally arriving at conclusions articulated here before Obama even became president {not to mention after.}. In this respect, they're late to the game and probably falling further behind what's really going on.)
I hesitate to say what I'm thinking because I'm still waiting, waiting for more shoes to drop. But I also feel an obligation to share an outlandish hypothetical I haven't come to any decision about yet.
What if the Obama administration is pursuing a two-pronged strategy contrary to all previous political machinations in the history in the United States? What if it's seen as a PLUS by his minions that the Democrats lose both the house and the senate in the midterm elections? Even the worst case predictions give the Republicans nothing more than scant majorities in both houses of congress. Nothing that would amount to a threat to the president's veto power. Clinton used Gingrich's ascendancy after the '94 elections to make him the villain of contemplated government shutdowns. In fact, he used Gingrich's political success to destroy Gingrich's career. That was inspired defense. What if we're looking at now is inspired long-term offense? Obama might actually prefer a Republican congress he can depict as paralyzing, obstructive, and an irrelevant posturing distraction from the needs of the nation. Their majority, made impotent by his noncooperation and thunderingly self-righteous vetoes, might serve to demonstrate that the constitutionally equal branches of government are (and hence the Constitution itself) permanently broken and therefore obsolete.
Which leads us to the second prong of attack, already in motion. The courts supersede legislative functions at both the atate and federal level. They can rewrite the Constitution on the fly, overrule legislation (or rewrite it from the bench), ratify regulations written by bureaucrats who never have to receive congressional approval, and ultimately merge the executive with its handmaiden in beneficent black robes, even to the point of deciding an ugly, racially nasty, and automatically contested presidential election in 2012, when the prospect of an Obama defeat can be spun as an anarchical danger to the long U.S. tradition of smooth (non)transitions of power. "We can no longer trust the archaic constitutional process to serve us in a time of such immense national crisis." [No need for martial law or any appearance of a coup.] "The Department of Justice will investigate and make its determination of applicable law," said Robert Gibbs, as seconded by editorials in the NYT and WAPO and the anchors of CBS, NBC, and ABC. Everybody happy now?
Toss in the chaos of a deliberately provoked unilateral strike by undefended Israel against Iran -- and the resultant shock to the 'oil-addicted' economy of a U.S. more dependent than ever before in its history on muslim oil, and what do you have? The opportunity for more reforms, transformation, and CHANGE than anyone in the U.S. ever dreamed possible. Hell, we could even begin to achieve something like social justice (with an asterisk called Sharia).
But that's why we haven't been analyzing the drip-drip-drip of current events. We don't want to get ahead of ourselves.
We're thinking about it all, though. Just so you know.
