web analytics
≡ Menu

Will Romney/Ryan doubletalk stampede the conservative herd?

What  I called the Romney con is the culmination of the elitist faction’s strategy for using the GOP to carry American conservatives into oblivion. Apt word, oblivion; it means you’re gone and soon forgotten. This aim of the RINO (now Romney) Republicans has been clear at least since March, 2009. That’s when an article in the Washington Times reported Jeb Bush as saying that “it’s time for the Republican Party to give up its “nostalgia” for the heyday of the Reagan era.”  He suggested “stealing the winning strategy deployed by the Democrats in the 2008 election.”

What was that strategy?  A successful bait and switch.  The Democrats offered a hollow promise of change.  Only after Obama’s election did their actions make clear that the change they had in mind was to replace America’s constitutional republic with a socialist dictatorship of, by and for the elitists.

For this strategy to succeed the Democrats had to make sure voters didn’t focus on Obama’s record or background. This time around, the Romney Republicans face the same challenge.   The hollow change they want voters to focus on is change from Obama.  They have to make sure voters don’t focus on the record of Romney’s career.  That record shows that what he and his RINO fellow travelers have in mind is just a somewhat less obtrusive version of the same socialist elite dictatorship.

Today Sarah Palin endorsed the Romney/Ryan ticket, fulfilling the “judas goat” role that I predicted in 2010.  She was the main “tar baby” totem of alleged Tea Party outrage, meant to gather and hold as many as possible of the grassroots conservatives who are sick to death of GOP betrayals on every front.  Her endorsement is one of the loud reports meant to stampede the GOP’s grassroots herd behind the Romney/RINO (now spelled Ryan-O?) ticket.

Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan is of course a much louder report.  We’re meant to focus on Ryan’s credentials as a pro-life leader.  But in order to take them seriously we have to do for Ryan what we are asked to do with Romney.  We have to forget some of Paul Ryan’s significant actions and statements in the past.  We have to forget that, until not so long ago, Ryan boldly professed his admiration for Ayn Rand.  Rand and her works are the inspirational totems of the folks I think of as the godless libertarians.  Rand proudly professed (and lived out) her hatred for God, and for Christ and all his works and workers.  How does one reconcile that with Ryan’s now emphatically professed commitment to the pro-life cause? As a matter of public policy, the pro-life position depends for its political logic, on the Declaration of Independence principle that acknowledges God as the source of our unalienable rights.  Banish God and we still the beating heart of American pro-life politics.

But the reason for Ayn Rand’s hatred of Christianity is also instructive.  In her infamous interview with Mike Wallace she said “I am challenging the moral code of altruism, the precept that man’s moral duty is to live for others, that man must sacrifice to others…since I’m challenging the base, I’m necessarily challenging the institutions that are the base of that morality.”  She went on to say that love of one’s fellow man “is immoral if it is placed above love of oneself.  It is more than immoral, it is impossible.”

Ayn Rand’s so-called philosophy takes as its premise a deep contempt for God’s commandment of love. This hatred of unselfish love is the true heart and soul of the ruthless, self-worshiping elitism that has been the scourge of humanity’s governance from time immemorial.

Paul Ryan is well known (on the left, the right and in the elitist propaganda media) as someone who often expressed and acted on his passionate admiration for Ayn Rand.  To believe that this has now suddenly become irrelevant to his thinking and character is simply ludicrous. Indeed, no sensible person does believe it, and the Romney/Ryan-O election strategy relies upon this fact.

Just as Palin is the intended tar-baby totem for the Tea Party grassroots, Ryan is the totem for those Ron Paul libertarians who are Ayn Rand enthusiasts.  They hear Ryan say that he believes in “the laws of nature and of nature’s God”.   But they know that someone who believes, as Rand did, that we cannot owe love to our fellow man is apt to understand that we don’t owe him truthfulness either.  We do and say whatever services the debt we owe to ourselves, judged in light of a scientific rationality that rejects moral standards unrelated to the outcome that serves our purposes.  In scientific terms, such outcomes are supposed exclusively to constitute empirical proof. Put simply, truth is the last man standing.

Since I do revere the words and example of Christ (who will stand in the latter day), I am often put in mind of his wisdom.  As I ponder the Romney/Ryan-O deception, what comes to mind are the words Christ spoke about the archetype of evil, who “does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44)

In a nutshell, that’s the problem with the Romney/Ryan-O deception.  Those who back it are forbidden to look back.  They are forbidden to think too much, or scrutinize all the things that just don’t fit with the Party line they’re being forced to swallow.   They have to forget too many evident truths and accept too many likely lies.  But like all the works of the father of lies, this ultimately means forgetting God, and by doing so to accept oblivion and death.  In this case, it is the oblivion and death of the conservative cause, insofar as that cause means to uphold America’s God-acknowledging constitutional self-government.  More on this shortly.

{ 5 comments… add one }
  • Rick Ponder August 13, 2012, 2:31 am

    Dr. Keyes, thanks for the great words of wisdom. Because of Ryan’s association with Ayn Rand, Obama doesn’t have to worry about his association with Rev Wright. Now Obama’s past is no longer an issue. Couple that with Romney Care and the two biggest advantages the GOP had over Obama are Null and Void!

    We need an Alan Keyes / Gregg Jackson ticket to save our Country!
    Rick P

  • Richard McIntyre August 12, 2012, 5:42 pm

    I am not Catholic; rather I am a member of the church as I believe it was established by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and attend a non-institutional congregation of the Church of Christ. We differ in several areas, but where politics are concerned, we are in lockstep with each other. You Dr. Keyes, are the only person I can in good conscience vote for and you will not be on my ballot. Oklahoma doesn’t accept write in candidates. Where can I turn? Only to prayer. The only thing that gives me hope is faith in the providence of almighty God. I believe that He raises up and brings low all governments based on His eternal plans. I can respect the office and authority of the president without always agreeing with the man (or woman) who holds that office and authority. But I fear for our nation, because I can no longer see any reason why God would wish for us to prosper – being as we are too often an example of all that is unholy and unrighteous. Why should we be set a a prosperous example before the rest of the nations? This year neither Democrats or Republicans can make any claim to real moral high ground.

  • SB August 12, 2012, 3:05 pm

    Thanks for your insight Dr. Keyes. Always the truth, always refreshing. Still tell people today, that you and Reagan were the only two men with whom I shared nearly 100% of ideals. When I heard Ryan’s V.P. acceptance speech – ‘Our rights come from nature and God…’ – it was creepy/unsettling. I now know where that code word came from. Looks like I am back to agonizing whether or not to check any box on the Pres/V.P. ballot.

    • genomega August 13, 2012, 10:45 pm

      “Our rights come from nature and God.” Thats what our founding fathers believed. Perhaps you are living in the wrong country?

      • Gregg Jackson August 20, 2012, 9:33 pm

        No, our main Framers got it wrong because they were Theistic Ratioalists (Neither Deists nor Christians) as documented by author Gregg Frazer in his new book “The REligious Beliefs of America’s Founders”. Our rights don’t come from “nature.” They come DIRECTLY from God. Ryan was incorrect.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Copyright Regulations

All original material on Loyal To Liberty is copyrighted and you will need to observe these regulations when you plan to distribute or use content from this blog. Copyright Regulations for Content on Loyal To Liberty You are free to share, distribute or transmit any work on this blog under the following conditions: * Attribution: You must attribute any content you use to Loyal To Liberty by including a link back to the specific content page. You must not suggest that Loyal To Liberty endorses you or your use of the content on this blog. Even with attribution, you do not have permission to republish the entire blog post on a website. Only excerpts of less than 500 words from each blog post may be published on other websites. A link back to the specific blog post must be included. * Noncommercial Usage: You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless authorized to do so by Alan Keyes. * Derivative Works:Within the limits heretofore specified, you may build upon the contents of Loyal To Liberty as long as proper attribution (see above) is made. If you want to syndicate or distribute the full blog post on your website, permission must be obtained before you do so. For permission, please email alan@loyaltoliberty.com.
%d bloggers like this:
z-library zlibrary books download project