17 August 2011

Republicans deep in the paradigm.

I express not a little disdain for the American voters who happily voted in a Marxist revolutionary with a questionable history (to the extent that he had a history at all that anyone could reconstruct). I still have that disdain but Jack Kerwick's point here highlights that there might have been a portion of that support for Mr. Obama that came from Republicans or independents who were so fed up with Republican politicians that they were willing to hold their noses and vote for Obama just to "message" them:
Beginning in 2000, with the election to the presidency of George W. Bush, the Republican Party enjoyed control over both the legislative and executive branches of government. Election Day, 2006, however, marked the beginning of the end of this era, and by November of 2008, voters had long since resolved to bring the Republicans’ reign to a decisive close.

While watching the Iowa Republican presidential primary debate, one could be forgiven for thinking that none of this had happened. With the sole exception of Ron Paul, there wasn’t a single other candidate on the stage who so much as signaled regret over, much less repudiate (as Paul did), the very Republican Party agenda with which Americans became thoroughly disenchanted three years ago — an agenda to which, judging from the candidates’ utterances, Republicans remain committed today.[1]
Because of Obama's bizarre and subversive associates and slobbering love for Islam, socialism and black liberation theology, I still find it inconceivable that any sane person not a part of the deranged left would have voted for Obama, but it's worthwhile considering that large numbers of voters had just had it with Republicans.

It's conceivable too that they wanted to see the disaster of our first anti-American president to play out. Perhaps they thought that there was still enough inertia or residual constitutional vitality in our politics to withstand a determined effort to turn the country into a third-world Marxist pit. (Back then, Col. Bunny himself would not have ruled out voting for Comrade Hillary -- and he knows a lot about Hillary -- due to his utter disdain for McAmnesty.)

Kerwick reminds us that feckless Respectable Republicans occupy center stage and that the core status-quo doctrines are still dominant. Exhibit A would be the surge of enthusiasm for Bush clone Mr. Rick "Open Borders" Perry. It's up to those candidates to show that business as usual isn't an option.

Americans – like all Westerners – are fish swimming in the sea but are unaware of the water. The Tea Party sprang to life because many of them did become aware of the water and they sensed that there was something decaying in it. Assuming the accuracy of Dr. Kerwick's analysis, I wonder if even four years of Obama are enough to wean Americans from the socialist, multiculturalist, open borders tit.[2]

There's talk of it's being a "close" election next year (which is astounding in light of what has come to light about Obama). I doubt that but it's not far from wrong. If Americans drew the correct conclusions from Obama's pal, "God damn America" Wright, and other evidence, Obama would be bussed back to Southside Chicago in disgrace. But he isn't and they haven't.

[1] "Republican Party Blindness." By Jack Kerwick, Ph.D., The New American, 8/17/11.
[2] Lawrence Auster has voiced a similar thought – that we're so infected with liberalism that only the full catastrophe of terminal liberalism will effect a real philosophical revolution in the minds of Americans. Russian Jews in Israel have the same difficulty that we do. They know what communism is about but vast numbers of Israeli Jews still don’t get it.

No comments: