Friday, March 20, 2015

The cowardly soul of American leaders.

Diana West, one the most perceptive thinkers of our time, published a piece[1] yesterday that merits attention.

She argues that beneath the layers of (1) poisonous Obama initiatives such as third-world replacement of the American majority (and black minority), appeasement of Iran, and pursuit of transnational elite rule and (2) terrifying Supreme Court decisions, there are even more ominous "root crises":

  • congressional abdication of its responsibility to remove a president who is contemptuous of constitutional checks and balances;
  • the failure of American political leaders to address the insult that Obama's forged birth certificate is;
  • Obama's reaching for yet more power through the United Nations, the purpose of which is suspect having been fostered and presided over by traitorous State Department official, Alger Hiss.
The failure to address these subterranean issues shows, as West says, "the cowardly soul – the most serious root crisis there is" in American leaders.

No better example of that cowardice is the fact that the Congress did not immediately impeach and convict Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg when she publicly advised the Egyptian government not to follow the U.S. Constitution as a model for drafting a constitution. A Supreme Court justice with no reverence for the constitution of her own country was left in place. She emphasizes "basic human rights" over liberty – without which all other "rights" are but temporary indulgences on the part of the ruling class. This woman has no business offering her opinion on the spirit and letter of our Constitution.

So there you have in place today two of the highest officials in the United States, for whom the Constitution is meaningless, still in office, still respected officials, and still able to do damage untouched by a spineless Congress. The perfect example of our most serious root crisis -- a Constitution that is no big deal.

[1] "Crises and 'Root Crises.'" By Diana West, 3/19/15.


AuricTech said...

To be fair to Justice Ginsburg, Egypt is a "unitary state"; expecting such a state to devolve its intrinsic authority to its "goverornates" is, at best, wildly optimistic....

daniel_day said...

Keep them coming, Colonel. I look forward to your posts.

Ronbo said...


No, just part of the plan by the Obama Regime to seize Total Power over Americans.

Col. B. Bunny said...

@AuricTech -- That's true. Just gluing the Constitution on top of Egypt as it is now would an unworkable approach, much like gluing a brain in the head of Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz. But isn't that just an issue that could be addressed in the context of the larger question, What kind of government does Egypt want for itself? I think Pres. Sisi is a brave man and his willingness to look at the Islamic "solution" with fresh eyes is what the times require. I like to think of our times as ones requiring a monumental rethinking of accepted truisms, everywhere in the world, let it be said. The damage that has been done by humans' pursuit of "progress" has been enormous and one of the most tragic things in the "modern" world has been the indifference of the left to the issue of human freedom. So that's the gravamen of my objection (!!!) to Ginsburg (I had to work in the word "gravamen" somehow). In what way did she show, as one of the highest judicial officials in the American government, that she treasures liberty? Nowhere. All she focuses on is the fatuous progressive vision of government as the purveyor of the "right" to housing, medical care, food, and flat screen TVs.

Thank you, Mr. Day. I am not sure why I believe that the world is entitled to my opinion but I appreciate feedback like yours. It's interesting to try to pierce the lies and the general media fog to try to sketch out some small aspect of reality. Reality is indeed waiting in the wings for Westerners. It is the firstest of First Principles which we better get a grip on sooner rather than later.

Mr. Barbour, that's a correction that gets my vote. This open borders and "multiculturalism" stuff is just vicious. No other motive is at work. It goes hand in hand with a hatred of all that made America the great nation it once was. We are just witnessing the mop up operation. Perhaps the historic people of America (aka white people) will wake up in time to defeat this assault.

Reg T said...

I think it should be mentioned that Obama and Kerry are outright traitors to the United States. They are arranging a back-door deal with Iran that will allow that country to reach its goal of developing nuclear weapons.

Given the fact that Iran has stated, openly and loudly, that it intends to destroy Israel _and_ America, it is obvious that Obama and his brain-dead Sec State are aiding and abetting (giving "aid and comfort to") our enemies.

Congress doesn't have the balls to impeach Obama, but it would be good to at least see Kerry tried for treason.

Col. B. Bunny said...

@Reg T

Medieval English kings were very sensitive on the issue of treason. Some safeguards were built into the law of treason to try to forestall abuse. Now, it's treated as a medieval concept, as in troglodytic. ("Medieval" isn't necessarily a synonym for "stupid" for the Colonel, any more than "modern" signifies "enlightened.")

Apparently it's just not something that happens any more in our enlightened "borders optional" times. Anyone who calls for uncontrolled mass immigration is guilty of treason in my view but that brings to mind that wonderful quote: "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason." John Harrington (1561-1612).

Your Iran example works for me, too.

As for my example, where there are First Amendment issues we can survive private citizens advocating mass immigration. Where Congressmen and judges are involved, however, we need to use impeachment at the drop of a hat. We act like officials have to commit crimes on the order of choking your grandmother before what they do can be considered a high crime or a misdemeanor. At a minimum, a misdemeanor should be simply what displeases Congress. Period.