For today’s article at WorldNetDaily I chose to share with WND’s larger audience the piece I posted here on Monday about what I think needs to be the first objective in the November election for voters anxious to preserve constitutional liberty in the United States. In it I say bluntly that the very best outcome would be to vote all the Democrats out. I also make clear that handing the Republicans an overwhelming majority will not by itself guarantee the failure of those who seek to overthrow the U.S. Constitution. It will simply put the GOP on the spot with no excuse for failing unequivocally to reject the socialist coup the Obama faction is determined to carry out.
People who insist on believing that the socialists and so-called liberals in the Democrat Party are alone responsible for the threat to American liberty may misunderstand what I have written as some kind of plug for the GOP. I would invite them to read (or reread) the articles I have posted on this site about the sham currently masquerading as a two-party system in American politics. I think the GOP and the Democrat party are two heads on the same body. The heads bicker, while the feet consistently move the nation toward socialist government dictatorship.
With that paradigm in mind the question we should ask ourselves about the midterm elections is this: What electoral outcome do the forces responsible for the consistently socialist orientation of the sham two-party system probably prefer? The Obama faction’s reckless drive toward government control is rousing a backlash among voters that actually threatens to make the eventual destruction of the American people’s sovereignty, (and open consolidation of elite control) more difficult. The Obama faction’s current unimpeded control of both the U.S. Congress and the White House must therefore be weakened. But the puppet masters themselves have no love for the constraints implied by authentic respect for the requirements of constitutional self-government. They do not seek to stop the advance toward socialism. They simply want to reduce or eliminate the frictional opposition being generated by the Obama faction’s reckless abandon.
The gray eminences manipulating the present sham two-party system would therefore logically prefer a November outcome that hands the GOP enough power to deprive the Obama faction of its capacity for unilateral action, but not enough to halt the open consolidation of elite control that will bring government of, by and for the people to an end. This implies a GOP majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, but one well short of the votes needed for a veto override. It could also include a slightly reduced Democrat majority in the U.S. Senate that would make it even more necessary for the Democrats to woo left-leaning GOP senators in order to advance their socialist schemes. The end result would be the ideal environment for so-called “bipartisanship”, which is to say, Obama faction socialism less recklessly (incompetently?) pursued.
Paradoxically, the backlash against Obama’s reckless leftist push may have created the ideal conditions for slipping left leaning votes into Congress camouflaged with a Republican label. People like Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and Mark Kirk, the GOP candidate for U.S. Senate in Illinois are good examples of this. Mark my words (already spoken where Brown is concerned, and already being proved true) given the chance, such GOP “conservatives” will time and again be the catalysts for pro-socialist “bipartisan” solutions to supposed legislative gridlock in the new Congress.
Their record over the twenty years since Ronald Reagan left office suggests that this “environment for bipartisanship” is precisely the one preferred by the GOP leadership raised up and sustained in power during the Bush dynasty’s years of preeminence. In 2012 they would probably like to fund and promote the man who represents another, similarly disposed political dynasty, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. The Obama faction’s preference for elite control is motivated by cultural Marxism. By contrast, these dynastic factions are motivated by a contemporary version of ‘noblesse oblige’ that signifies the longed for revival of an aristocratic elite. Unhappily, though sold with a gloss of Arthurian chivalry such an elite invariably ends up ruthlessly disregarding common humanity, as was characteristic of the European aristocracies that were upset by the modern surge of democratic resentment. (The surest sign that the RINO dynasties share this tendency is their support for policies on abortion and the rights of the natural family that discard the American principle of God ordained human equality and unalienable rights.)
All this suggests that America will be best served by giving the GOP leaders what they always profess to desire (victory for all Republican candidates) rather than what they really desire (just enough success to “force” them to pursue bipartisan compromise with the Obama faction i.e., not reckless but deliberate socialism.) A scant majority will leave them with the excuse that they cannot do what they otherwise would, push legislation that restores the Constitutional republic.
A veto-proof majority in the House of Representatives would deprive them of that excuse, and put pressure on them to offer legislation that embodies conservative, constitution minded approaches to the crises of our day. It would given them the power and therefore the clear responsibility to take decisive action to re-establish proper Congressional oversight of the czar ridden, anti-American dictatorship the Obama faction has substituted for limited government of, by and for the people as ordained and established by the U. S. Constitution.
Thus, though ‘throw da bums out‘ is the goal, by throwing the Dems out first we’ll get a clearer picture of who ‘da bums’ that remain really are.
Related posts:
![Recommend [loyaltoliberty]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/arkayne-media/img/badge/logo-recommend-badge-medium.png){kind=icon}
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Dr. Keyes, You are our Teddy Roosevelt; our Barry Goldwater; our Audie Murphy. You can undo all the harm the obamanites have done to our economy and our polity. Will no entity finance your crusade? Shall we just mew and whine as we are betrayed and surrendered to the satanic forces supporting the Commiemoslem messiah? Help!!
Dear Dr. Keyes,
Thank you for taking the time to answer my former inquiry regarding your article and the “lesser of two evils” debate.
Being a writer I realize the amount of time, energy, and thought it takes for you to formulate these articles. So your writing another to clarify your stance is all the more appreciated.
It is a blessing and honor to realize there are those loyal to liberty as you are. And in this day and age when it becomes more apparent one cannot trust so many of our fellow countrymen, it is good to know there are still those like you that are trustworthy in your unwavering faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
We did not know about your struggles. We also are struggling to make our rent. We will keep your wonderful family in our prayers. We appreciate you!
God bless you.
Alan, I have noticed among AIP (third party) members a bit of disagreement regarding what your article means.
Some are speculating that you mean to throw the Democrats out at any cost, even if it means voting for the lesser of two evils aka RINO Republicans.
I interpreted your series about throwing the Dems out to say that you believe, if we fall for the stupidity of voting for the lesser of two evils again, all that would happen is we’ll realize the Republicans would fail us again and we’ll end up no better and probably much worse. Then we’d have to learn our lesson and finally give a third party the chanse we ought to have to begin with.
Another on the thread during our debate told us we ought to ask you right here for clarification.
My faith in your integrity was unwavering enough that I believe you to be above voting for the lesser of two evils. Was I wrong?
Hi,
I have often said that we must vote for those who stand without apology for what is right, as God gives us to see the right (as Lincoln put it.) That is what I will do. In November this will require that I exclude any and all Democrats from consideration. Any candidates still willing to identify with the Democrat label announce their complicity in the unequivocal, aggressive evil it plainly represents. I will also exclude any and all candidates who do not actively defend the unalienable right to life and the God ordained natural family as matters of fundamental national principle (this exclusion encompasses people who abuse the concept of ‘states rights’ to shield government violation of unalienable right at any level of government.)
In many parts of the country there are GOP candidates for House and Senate who would qualify for my support. I advise people to check them out, then vote for them. Where there is doubt, our present circumstances certainly allow people to give them the benefit of the doubt. But in situations like that of McCain in Arizona, Whitman in California or Mark Kirk in Illinois, there is no doubt. They are not lesser evils. Wearing the GOP label simply allows them to slip past the moral defenses of people whose ignorance or faulty logic leads them to rely upon it as an indicator of conservative views.
In such situations, voters of conscience should right now be actively looking to see if any of the independent or third party candidates qualify for their support. If they find no good choice for a given office, better to leave a blank, or (where the corrupt entrenchment of the two party sham hasn’t eliminated the possibility) write in the name of anyone they respect. They should not accept the calculus of evil, or let their choice be enslaved to the the sham two- party dictatorship.
‘But Alan,’ someone will say, ‘this may let some Democrats get through. This doesn’t guarantee the Republicans a veto-proof majority.’ So be it. In my article I do not say we can guarantee the best outcome, though by excluding support for any Democrat we can help to bring it about. Good may come of that. But if evil triumphs under any guise, let it be without our aid. The fate of this country is where is where it has always been, in the hands of God. Failure to appreciate that is precisely what has led too many Christian leaders and voters to destroy the integrity of their witness (and what would be the conversion effect of their trust in God) in pursuit of the camouflaged destruction of “lesser evil”. When will we simply do as citizens what Christ told us to do in all walks of life- serve the King of Heaven first, last and always, trusting in His righteousness and mercy for the result?
Even when we do our conscientious best to find and vote for the right people, events may prove us in error. If that were not so in this as in all things, we would not need the grace of God in Christ for our salvation. As a spiritual fact, America is under judgment. God may intend our actions to signify His mercy, or simply to bear witness to His truth. We shall see. But the path of lesser evil calculation is what brought the nation to this crisis, in which evil now reaches for total worldly dominion over us. Let us cease to do evil. Let us learn to do good (not lesser evil). Let us accept the invitation of the Lord to reason with Him, i.e., according to His will not our own calculation. Such is the faith that founded our nation. Only such faith will renew her true strength, and with that strength her true liberty and greatness.
Right now, as the nation faces the imminent loss of its liberty, I face the imminent loss of my home, my worldly goods and even my personal liberty. But sometimes faithful witness means that we must risk all to gain all. Should not our actions as citizens offer that faithful witness to our nation? In the crass political sense, we may lose all. But in this era, when the true face of destruction shows itself, many who do not share our faith may be driven by the growing evidence of that truth to receive and act upon the example of our witness against it. So, though the yeast be little, through its living influence the whole loaf is made to rise. We are the yeast. The nation is the loaf. And in November, if we be faithful- the electorate may rise to the occasion. So help us, God.
They’re ALL “bums” as far as I am concerned. The GOP gave up the chance to make a REAL difference under Bush’s first term, blowing it big time. I agree 100% about the corruption of the two party system, but instead of making them *heads* I prefer *two lungs* of the same body, to describe the situation. You need both lungs to survive, therefore the two party system NEED one another to help line their pockets on the backs of the hard working Americans, while keeping those who would better serve our country out of the club!
Im not a great writer, but I think you get my point ;o)
“Trust ye not in princes, in the sons of men, in whom there is no salvation” (Ps.145)
Perhaps you remember the Contract With America of 1994. Just like their contracted obligation to uphold and defend the Constitution, they failed miserably. And who was at the helm at the time? Yep, Newt Gingrich. The same Newt Gingrich who is now contemplating a run at the White House. Shouldn’t we have seen then just what these people are made of? Perhaps Americans are not as dumb as we used to be and we’ve learned from experience. Or not.
Fool me once…
A coincidence? Me thinks not. I’m referrring of course to the Sen Shelby youtube video above. More blah blah blah. When asked what the people can look forward to should the GOP gain significant seats this November more blah blah blah. But not one mention of overturning Obamacare. Just another puppet.
I still believe we have 3 more elections left to save our republic. This one to give the GOP their chance to show exactly who they are (we already know, but they will have to show their hand); the 2012 election to chip away at the establishment and give a second party a foothold; and the midterm after that to establish this new party as the party of the future. If not by then we’re doomed.
If the dumbed-down public can grasp the seriousness of the one-party system, that solves one problem. The other, of course, is the issue with the electronic voting machines. We need to get rid of them, or else what’s the point in voting at all?