Task: A Last Chance For The Republican Party | Jen Kuznicki

A Last Chance for the Republican Party

by Task

Throughout America’s pre-constitutional and post-constitutional history, people fought and died to preserve freedom. Of course they did so in many other countries as well but America’s Constitutional liberty was forged by the perfect storm. Our constitutional government was no ad hoc government afterthought as a re-write of the Articles of Confederation. From inception it had liberty from government as its rationale for government itself. We had just fought a war with England and as victors the people wanted a King by the name of Washington. But General Washington and others, comprised of the original radicals who fiercely fought for emancipation from British authority, wanted no future reenactment of the war that had just transpired. In fact they wanted a Government that Lincoln characterized years later, in his address at Gettysburg, as of the people, by the people and for the people. When the Founders created a Federal system, what was then a nation poorly unified under the Articles of Confederation that consisted of many states, those sovereigns had no intention of giving away their sovereignty to any central authority, so they, the Founders, did so with a very limited federal government in mind. Our Constitution, the Federalist papers and early writings are not about Federal authority but about individual liberty preserved and protected by government with otherwise limited responsibilities. The Constitution consists of positive rights for individuals and no rights or negative rights for government. It fact it places obligations and demands on government to perform so as to enhance the precepts of individual and state liberty under the umbrella of a civil society. Would a state such as Maryland or Oklahoma wish to join a union where their citizens and interests could become secondary to the interests of the large population centers of New York or Massachusetts? They had no intention of becoming de facto colonies. Yet by today’s standards that is exactly what has unintentionally transpired. There are many red states with blue senators. Without the 17th Amendment Harry Reid would not be the majority leader in the Senate. And without federally funded organizations, such as ACORN and AmeriCorps, designed to influence local elections so as to increase the power and scope of Federal statutes over localities that would otherwise only vote with State and local interests in mind, the Federal government and its’ Administrative Agencies would be far less powerful and authoritarian.

Today we have a two party system. A centrist party counters the socialist party with the Marxist at its helm. The Republican Party has the status quo as its mainstay agenda. Yet the people want otherwise as evidenced by the 2010 House victories and local elections nationwide. There are a lot more red states than blue states. The people are more conservative than their elected representatives and it is they that have the 9th and 10th Amendments in mind, as originally intended. How can you look at a poll and not realize that the majority of opinions are harvested from large blue states that will not be voting for every senator and representative? Ted Cruz was elected in Texas and not New York so who cares how New Yorkers respond to a poll?

The Country is rapidly heading towards fiscal insolvency. Two or three decades are not that far away. In fact just look at what has transpired in the last 5 years without much military spending as an excuse. The Great Entitlement Society has run amok with our credit and future debt obligations while simultaneously gaining more and more authority beyond way our economic liberty, which, itself, is certain to become even more compromised than it already is.

For the short term, absent an Article Five push, the House of Representatives, which has great power, could do wonders; but you would never know that. They vote with their future political careers in mind. That is not what this nation is about. Did Washington and the Colonists fight battles thinking that life was preferable over victory? Patrick Henry exclaimed that he preferred death to the absence of liberty. Did those who fought in our Civil War and in the World Wars not lose their lives to hold the lines?

The ACA (ObamaCare) needs the individual mandate, for the entire following year in order to survive. The House republicans need but hold the line to seriously harm or kill it. The President, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat Senators along with pseudo conservatives such as Rubin also know this. The House Republicans have the people backing them despite the media propaganda. The public does not need an elaborate explanation regarding an inequality that demands that individuals support the system while so many insiders receive elaborate exemptions. It is not about the government shutdown anymore. In fact the longer that persists the easier it is to tolerate and the more the Administration becomes culpable for not passing small tight bills to deal with specific issues. Many presidents have attempted to secure and use the line item veto and most of us know that it is unconstitutional to do so without an Amendment. Why do we need such and Amendment? Why did the Framers not consider this? Because they never thought that Omnibus Bills would become the rule. All bills were small and thoroughly read before passage and yet despite how bills were intelligently submitted, during those early times, Jefferson still wanted a year to review them without any additions attached at the last moment before passage. How would our Framers ever tolerate, or even imagine, a 2700 hundred page unconstitutional bill attached to a budget bill that was not sent back to the House for review and quickly passed without a single member of the other party involved and never read by any member of either party so as to comment upon? And yet when the opportunity now arrives to defund (using Constitutional legal procedures and supported by the public) this liberty robbing new administrative branch of government, designed to grow even larger than all the other administrative branches combined, the House becomes timid and unsteady and some of its members, along with their quisling Senatorial counterparts attack Senator Cruz. I heard Mark Levin’s interview with the Republican Tea Party elected Senator on Wednesday evening and wondered what was the purpose behind Senator Johnson’s animosity towards Cruz. I know he had an alternative strategy but besides that exactly what was the down side of a 22 hour filibuster using the pulpit to educate the public about the absurdity of a bill that is now becoming the reality that he so prophetically elaborated upon? He actually enhanced public support of the nervous GOP House majority and that is what emboldens them.

The longer that House Republicans hold the line on the debt ceiling and address only what needs to be addressed with small well designed bills the better it is for the nation. Even if they lost the next House election (members won’t but democrats will) the ACA will have so withered it could never sustain itself minus huge financial support. You can now see why Harry Reid wants an extra trillion dollars added to the debt ceiling. If he does not get it the ACA does not survive. There is no Fisher, or other private Institution, that will save it. The republicans will survive and the party will grow in numbers because they will have assumed a conservative mantle and the people will be generously supportive as a result of having their representatives do their will and aggressively attack to mortally wound the enemy they are growing to despise despite the media forecasts of the opposite. The shutdown can continue for far more than a year while the ACA remains starved for funds and life will go on and actually improve as we fix this and that and kill what never should have been brought to life in the first place as so many people are now glaringly comprehending. The Republican Party, along with the nation, has been thrown a life rope as a result of the incredible incompetence of liberal progressive overreach. In one moment they can save the nation and themselves. Washington did it at Valley Forge, Americans did it at Normandy and allied forces did the same at Guadalcanal and at so many other critical places that resulted in the salvation of liberty minded people.

What does it profit a man, or a party, if it survives (which it will not if they stand for the same as the opposition or for nothing at all other than the status quo) and in the process loses its’ soul and the nation that they took oaths to Constitutionally defend? ObamaCare should have never have been brought to life and it must, by any means possible, be wounded, killed or overturned. This is not about one man and his signature achievement or one party looking at their political careers. It is about a nation, taken over by statists whose intentions are clear and which affords not a scintilla of the liberty that that we previously all enjoyed. Not one republican supported its passage so let all republicans also contribute to its’ demise. That is why republicans, in just one election cycle, won overwhelming majorities in 2010 and why they will just as quickly experience only tepid support in 2014 (a long time away) unless they do what Judge Roberts never did and for which they will quickly suffer the same disrespect as a result. Let Mr. Boehner keep his troops in line and keep his and their mouths shut. The other side is committing political suicide. Why would he and republicans help them turn the scenario upon themselves?


Leave a Reply