Alan Keyes
December 9, 2014
Dare we call it treason--on part of Republicans?
By Alan Keyes

Recently, I read this headline at WND: "Source: Senate GOP 'refuses to strategize' against Obama." It linked to a story about the approach being taken by the GOP's quisling leadership in the aftermath of Obama's unconstitutional executive orders on immigration, an open (and pretty plainly declared) attack on the U.S. Constitution.

The vestment of power in the branch of the U.S. government entirely composed of elected representatives of the States respectively, and of the people is the key to understanding why the "separation of powers" is not just an administrative arrangement. It is essential to maintaining the republican form of government (of, by, and for the people) the Constitution explicitly requires the U.S. government to guarantee in the United States (Article IV.4). By his usurpation of legislative power, Obama makes war against that form of government.

As I have often pointed out to people, the word "strategy" is rooted in the ancient Greek word for the general in command of an army at war. A strategy is a war plan. With this in mind, one is led to wonder why the GOP's quisling leadership is reluctant to consider a plan for the war Obama has unleashed against the people they are supposed to represent.

One possibility is that they have made and are implementing such a plan. In that event, their reluctance to discuss it in times and places likely to be open to their adversary would be understandable. War plans are best made in secret. Once people accept the leadership of a general, they must also show confidence in their choice, trusting that the lack of public discussion is evidence of prudence, not bad faith.

A problem arises when the one chosen as general has repeatedly surrendered to the enemy in the battles and skirmishes that preceded the enemy's open assault. Up to now the GOP's quisling leadership has blustered and fussed over Obama's probing assaults on the Constitution and sovereignty of the American people, but each and every time they have given way to him. Distrust is the natural result of this record of bad faith.

The GOP's grassroots constituency failed to overturn this leadership during the 2014 election cycle, though some were strongly disposed to try. This failure was, as we know, partly the result of openly treacherous tactics, employed as part of the quisling leaders' openly declared war against the conservatives who mainly account for their party's political strength. But their continued hold on power is also the result of the fact that many of the GOP's remaining constituents refuse to acknowledge the proven treachery of the party's quisling leadership. They continue to speak, write, and act as if incompetence and cowardice (political and physical) explain the leaders' continual surrender to Obama's relentless assaults.

Of course, if the defeats the quisling leaders have suffered at Obama's hands were the result of incompetence, it makes no sense at all to leave these leaders at the helm. They should be replaced, without rancor but also without hesitation.

Likewise, if it is the result of physical cowardice – i.e., they are afraid of a reaction from Obama's base among blacks, particularly in the urban areas (where his supporters are analogous, in America's present circumstances, to Hitler's brown shirts; at the moment, the Obama's faction's orchestration of a nationwide reaction to events in Ferguson is a case in point). If the quislings' disposition to surrender was the result of political cowardice, the results of the last election should have altered their disposition.

If we assume that this is the case, we would expect the GOP leadership in Congress to a) seek a result for the lame duck session that avoids any definitive or conclusive results on issues directly arising from Obama's offensive against the Constitution; and b) do so using maneuvers that place the blame for inaction squarely on Obama's shoulders. This suggests doing nothing that makes resources available for Obama's implementation of anti-constitutional activities during the lame duck session, whatever his threats and blustering.

It's telling that when a Republican sat in the Oval Office, we were supposed to accept the notion that the exercise of the veto placed blame squarely on the president's shoulders. Yet, now the GOP's congressional leadership wants us to believe that legislation that draws a presidential veto places blame squarely on their shoulders. This despite the fact that the recent elections clearly prove that the voters want to put the brakes on the Obama faction's destructive agenda.

If nothing important happens during the lame duck session, the GOP would benefit from the perception that they heard and are responding to that desire.

Instead, they persist in purveying a false interpretation of the election's outcome. They are claiming that voters want them to work with Obama, which is a palpable lie. It would have some truth in it only if the GOP had won or lost its bid for U.S. Senate control by a razor thin margin. But despite everything the quisling leaders did to enable that outcome, voters' revulsion against Obama exceeded the quislings' capacity to bumble, lie, and openly defraud their way to such a result.

The quislings are not only refusing to strategize a result that stymies Obama's anti-constitutional action, they are going out of their way to make it clear that they will not use, or even threaten and prepare to use, any of the means at their disposal (budgetary restrictions, censure, impeachment) to force Obama to confront the reality that his agenda has been rebuked and will not be served. Strangely, the GOP quislings speak and act as if something went wrong for them last Election Day.

But this would be true only if their purpose in the last election was to contain or traduce the voters outraged by Obama's war against the Constitution. If so, the quislings are not incompetents; they are not cowards; they are purposeful traitors to the Constitution they are sworn to uphold, and to the true small "r" republican constituency they exploit and still pretend to represent.

To see more articles by Dr. Keyes, visit his blog at LoyalToLiberty.com and his commentary at WND.com and BarbWire.com.

© Alan Keyes

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Alan Keyes

Dr. Keyes holds the distinction of being the only person ever to run against Barack Obama in a truly contested election – one featuring authentic moral conservatism vs. progressive liberalism – when they challenged each other for the open U.S. Senate seat from Illinois in 2004... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Alan Keyes: Click here

More by this author

 

Stephen Stone
'The fervent prayer of the righteous'

Siena Hoefling
Protect the Children: Update with VIDEO

Wes Vernon
The hate America left and Russia: Not just unfit – actually dangerous? (Part 3)

Bryan Fischer
Judges commit impeachable offense, rule against cross

Jerry Newcombe
Pro-life videos garner 85 million views

Tabitha Korol
Good morning, little comrades

Toby Westerman
The New York Times strikes again -- says Russian propaganda war 'may be impossible to stop'

Lloyd Marcus
Congressional Black Caucus Prayer Breakfast: The great black deception

Judie Brown
Babies and human kindness

Rev. Austin Miles
MilesTones – keeping us totally confused

Linda Goudsmit
#12 the humanitarian hoax of socialism: Killing America with kindness

Alan Keyes
Does the NFL defame America's creed, or act on it?

Cliff Kincaid
Open a criminal investigation of Barack Hussein Obama

Lloyd Marcus
NAACP attacking Jones confirms betrayal of its people
  More columns

Cartoons


Click for full cartoon
More cartoons

RSS feeds

News:
Columns:

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Jamie Freeze Baird
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites