- MADDOG10's Blog has 445 entries (1 private) and has been viewed 311,807 times.
- Lottery Post members have made 1525 comments in MADDOG10's Blog.
- MADDOG10 is a Platinum member
Yesterday, 3:39 pmImpeachment: Rush is wrong this time
Impeachment: Rush is wrong this time
Exclusive: Alan Keyes uses Hamilton quote to challenge 'waste of effort' argument
Among politicians and pundits who identify with the GOP, there are many who pay lip-service to the U.S. Constitution. Yet when push comes to shove they seem disposed by all means to avoid implementing its provisions. But left unused, the constitutional provisions intended to exercise the just powers of the body politic waste away. In this respect they are like the muscles of the human body, but even more so. They must be flexed to keep their fitness. If, in practice, their vitality and purpose are not conveyed to each new generation, they will soon be lost to memory and so, quite literally, cease to matter.
In this respect, Barack Obama’s rise to, and abuse of, political power has proven to be a litmus test. It has exposed the GOP’s protestations of allegiance to the Constitution for what they are: a hollow ploy, used to get votes from gullible conservatives loyal to the Constitution and its principles. Meanwhile, by action or inaction, many of the people they vote into office end up helping the would-be tyrants of the Obama faction cultivate the seeds of its destruction.
So when Rush Limbaugh says that “efforts to try to have Obama impeached or held personally responsible for these scandals is a bunch of wasted effort,” he is saying that, on account of the politics of our times, this fundamental aspect of the U.S. Constitution no longer matters. With all due respect to Rush Limbaugh (and my respect for him is sizable and sincere), I beg to differ. The judgment about “wasted effort” depends on what we’re trying to achieve. If politics is just a partisan game, with no goal but to score points for one side or the other, it may be reasonable to conclude that impeachment is a wasted effort. After all, the Democrats who control the U.S. Senate will never allow Obama to be removed from office. Doesn’t this make impeachment impossible?
Mr. Limbaugh is right to assume that impeachment is inherently political. In this respect his view accords with that of Alexander Hamilton, who wrote (in Federalist No. 65) that “… the subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed … from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
Insofar as they wish to preserve their constitutional self-government, can the American people have a greater common interest than to react against abuses of power that may threaten it? Before they can do so, however, mustn’t the facts be examined in order to be sure that the abuses in question are so extraordinarily malicious that they warrant the removal from office of the person or persons responsible? As Hamilton says of the impeachment process, “Is it not designed as a method of NATIONAL INQUEST into the conduct of public men?”
The difference between Limbaugh and Hamilton, however, is that when Mr. Limbaugh speaks of politics he is referring to the competition of partisan factions. But for Hamilton politics means the business of citizens, i.e., individuals characterized by their concern for the common good of their society as a whole, not just their own personal, factional, partisan interests. From Hamilton’s perspective, the way elected representatives handle such offenses is therefore a test of their concern for the common good. If they act, or refuse to act, based solely on whether by doing so they advance their personal or factional agenda, they show their contempt for the well-being of the nation as a whole. They thereby prove themselves unfit for the offices (duties) they hold, whether or not they are ever called to account for their dereliction.
But the challenge of holding them accountable has political implications that we have to think through before we rush to agree with Mr. Limbaugh’s conclusion that, in our present circumstances, impeachment is a waste of effort. The Constitution divides the authority for impeachment from the authority to convict and remove for good reason. It makes the majority needed to approve a bill of impeachment in the House no greater than that required for ordinary legislation. It thus provides an ordinary way of calling civil officers to account for what appears to be extraordinary misbehavior.
If those officers, at the behest of the president, cooperate with the NATIONAL INQUEST, and let the facts speak for themselves, they at least do nothing to confirm their contempt for constitutional constraints. If, with the open support of the president, they defy the constitutional authority of the U.S. House, both they and the president confess by this defiance their disposition to do what they are suspected of doing, defy and disregard the provisions of the Constitution. By itself this confession warrants a bill of impeachment. If, despite such open and palpable proof of their contempt for the Constitution, a factional partisan majority in the U.S. Senate protects them from the consequences, their action, too, is a palpable dereliction. For this it is up to the people to convict and punish them, at the next election.
In Federalist No. 65 Hamilton reports that the impeachment process in the U.S. Constitution is, in important respect, modeled after the procedures of the British government. This appears to be true of its political implications as well. Properly used, it provides an opportunity for the people, through their representatives in the House, to approve and publicly register a vote of no confidence in the president and all those willing to uphold his abuses in the U.S. Senate. Given the periodic elections provided for in the Constitution, an opportunity is never far off for the people to change the composition of either or both chambers of the national legislature. By what they do, they can signify their agreement or disagreement with the results of the no-confidence vote (or votes). Seen in this light, the purpose of impeachment is to inform and mobilize the citizens for their duty as the arbiters of constitutional integrity. They are the ones ultimately responsible for defending constitutional self-government, or letting it perish.
But the leadership of both wings (Democrat and Republican) of the elitist faction are working to overturn constitutional self-government in the United States. As I discuss in the most recent post on my blog, they have no use for the constitutional provisions that engage people in the exercise of their constitutional responsibility, thereby strengthening the responsible sovereignty of the people in every generation. Neither of these parties cares to practice government of, by and for the people. That’s why Americans who believe in it need urgently to construct a political vehicle that will.
May 23, 2013, 12:15 pmBringing Obama down: Race remains a factor
Bringing Obama down: Race remains a factor
Exclusive: Erik Rush sees '1st black president' issue looming large in impeachment option
Among many things I discuss in my book “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession” is the lack of accountability imposed and expected with regard to black Americans from the lowest to the highest stations. This is a device of the political left; in its inherent racism, it was only natural that liberals impart a lack of expectations for this “culturally inferior” segment of society. It also made blacks easier to manipulate as a group. Since blacks’ socioeconomic progress had been stultified for so many years, the attendant propaganda was easier to sell to the public.
Thus, where blacks are concerned, Americans at large (and black Americans themselves) have been conditioned by politicos, activists and the media to overlook and even expect such things as high rates of poverty and crime, misfeasance in high places, nefarious tendencies, illegitimacy, and elements of general social instability and poor character. These expectations have been so thoroughly ingrained into our worldview that most Americans are not even cognizant of the fact that they have been so conditioned.
So, in pursuing his diabolical Marxist agenda, Obama knew that he would be able to gain far more ground than a white individual with the same plan. He may not have known precisely how dedicated and effective the press would be, or how long Americans would remain asleep, but he and his Cabinet had a pretty good idea of how far they could go.
Or so one would think …
Obama’s political opponents – the GOP leadership – also knew that their more confrontational or controversial interactions with Obama would have to be handled with extra diplomacy for the reasons listed above. In analyzing Republican leaders’ deportment with regard to this president, we must ask ourselves: How much of their reticence in holding Obama accountable was due to fear of political fallout? How much was due to their low expectations of Obama as a politician and a human being? How much may have been due to their approval of aspects of his agenda?
The impudence and tyranny of the Obama administration is indeed precedent-setting, as is the outrageousness and magnitude of the falsehoods it is willing to offer in defense of same. Claims that the Internal Revenue Service’s singling out of conservative groups for inordinate scrutiny is not politically based is almost laughable, and akin to arguing that Jim Crow laws were not racially based. Singling out a political group because of its politics is politically based by definition. Press Secretary Jay Carney’s charges that the Benghazi scandal is a Republican contrivance, and his comparison of the Associated Press leak investigation to “birther” conspiracy theories is just plain desperate.
It is the desperation of criminals.
The administration’s ideology, though odious, is still not on trial – but its actions are. As a result of the inquiries focused on Benghazi, the IRS and the Associated Press, their abject criminality is what elements of the press and many Americans are beginning to perceive, even if they are late in so doing. These issues deepen and reveal more untoward goings-on daily; as I write this, evidence for at least three other potentially serious scandals has just broken the surface in the press.
Circumstances have indeed changed – but to what degree? Some recent polls demonstrate a startling percentage of people who believe Obama should be impeached, and it is safe to say that no past president would have survived the current spate of public indignities. Still, the final disposition comes down to this: Who in Congress wants to be known as having brought down America’s first black president?
Suddenly, Obama’s removal looks a lot less likely, yes?
Governing against the will of the people has been an increasing proclivity of lawmakers in Washington, regardless of party. So it is altogether possible that Congress will avoid initiating regime change for shallow and dangerous political reasons, even if a majority of Americans are clamoring for Obama’s impeachment.
Our federal government has clearly grown increasingly corrupt, but this administration is one for the books. In the operative sense, ethnicity is irrelevant to Barack Obama having betrayed the trust of the American people. It is no consolation to me personally that I knew he would, and that the solemn responsibility of stewardship over this great nation was a joke to him from the start.
The question is: What are we going to do about it? Contrary to Marxists’ rhetorical glorification of “the masses” (utilized only to manipulate them, naturally), historically the masses have never done anything. It is the inspiration and motivation of visionaries, whether individuals or small groups thereof, that initiates change in the world.
Evidently we need leaders, and they must be unifying ones. Though they will have to be followed with judicious discretion, we still have to identify them first – and we are running out of time.
May 22, 2013, 2:57 pmCheer up lil buddie.
I'm so sorry LiL spastic. If we knew you were going to take it so hard
we would have invited you to the wedding. I know you thinks I'm so cute
and you really miss your other buddies Mountain man & Wee Wee.
I'm so sorry LiL buddie of mine. I swear to you we'll never make you cry
again. Oh don't cry rabbid, we'll make it up to you over lunch duckie poo..
May 22, 2013, 9:33 amOh my, he ate the bones, speedo ate the bonzs.
Hey y'all, myz names is speednuts and Ize can't believez I ate the danged bonz.
Well what youz expects from a dropz out from Uga. I sit and playz in my weeds
all dayz, and after thatz i do grafeatiz on buildings as my professesions .
I tried to plays instrumentz, but I fails mizzerably so nowz i just say formerz wing hummerz
cause I ate the dang bonz. Ize have to tells y'all some peoples don'tz like me, and i cants
understandz why. maybeez its because i openz my mouths and tellz y'alls that i dontz like
many peoples whoz opinions are differents than mines. I is alwayz right.
What y'all thinkz.??
May 21, 2013, 11:52 pmDang, that's ugly. Who could that be?
May 20, 2013, 10:52 pmIt's very fitting... Semper Fi...!
May 20, 2013, 11:32 amPatriotism at it's BEST...!
May 19, 2013, 11:07 pmWe've had enough kool-aid.
May 18, 2013, 10:23 pmThis isn't just a theory...!
May 17, 2013, 8:49 pmThis would be a PERFECT ten...
May 17, 2013, 11:47 amI think her Botox retracted...
May 16, 2013, 7:43 pmEven Idaho Farmers honor Obozo...
May 16, 2013, 2:15 pmIt's funny how some things come back to haunt you..