American Spectator has an important article by Peter Ferrara detailing Obama’s lawlessness, making no bones about the many blatantly impeachable offenses. The article is a compelling indictment that provides a litany of major offenses where Obama circumvented the law and his constitutional responsibilities. While serious in its comportment the article provides red meat stuff for anyone with an ounce of respect for the rule of law. But in spite of the seriousness of the charges Ferrara does not call for impeachment, just outrage focused on Democrats as enablers.
While he does not elaborate, the importance of Republicans lambasting Democrats, “Party y Party” is well taken by this publication. Unfortunately it is a concept totally lost on the much of the Republican Party “leadership” including its local personages. Actually criticizing the other party’s political philosophy, performance, scandals, . . . give people actual reasons to vote straight Republican . . . wow what a concept!
What do we get, a hollow plastic elephant paraded about.
Web site communications, press releases, Internet links, literature, as far as what emanates from the Scott County Republican Central Committee (SCRCC) leadership there is little or nothing instructive, compelling or dare say directly critical of Democrats. The Democrat Party is a mere rival, not an existent detriment to the republic based on its policies.
The “compelling” message to low information voters . . . heck just pick our really neat club elephant as opposed to the donkey. That is about as deep as it gets, and obstinately so, with the SCRCC “leadership” . . . as they steadfastly refuse to engage Democrat’s policies as such or provide the tools or access or bonafides to others.
Where are the lit drops, the bill boards, the radio, TV, or Internet ads, the press releases, the public speaking events, the earned and unearned media necessary to inoculate people to the Democrat siren song, outside of the pathetic efforts during the din of four months every two years?
Of course an important question is whether they are up to it anyway. Leadership is not picked for their demonstrated ability to articulate principles of the party, indeed they reject any responsibility in that regard.
Re: Impeachment
The last line of our first paragraph herein was intended to allow for sadness and understanding of the sense of resignation Ferrara conveys that impeachment of Obama would be counterproductive to Republican interests. First of all what of the republic?
Regardless, we do not buy into an analysis comparing the Clinton impeachment to the totality of what would happen as regards Obama. Ferrara says himself that the issues are far more serious and damaging to the Constitution, democracy and the republic. Where did his sense of perspective go which was so clear in the bulk of the article?
We cannot depend on the courts to save the Constitution. So the aggravating danger is that Obama’s actions become precedent, and not for just his remaining term. While it is all theoretical, impeachment and conviction puts Biden in charge, but he would be constrained as a result, he would have to revert to abiding by the law or be impeached himself.
Ferrara makes, we hope, an offhand remark about even mentioning impeachment as creating a 250% increase in Democrat voter turnout next year in response. That is silly from several perspectives unless he really can provide evidence that Democrats are that demoralized now, or have that comparatively much room to grow vis a vi Republicans.
Besides the problem of getting our weak House leadership to commit to their part in the process, that the Senate would not convict is likely given the overall Republican machine’s capabilities of applying intellectual and political pressure to do the right thing. But if the House would vote to impeach (send the matter to the Senate for trial) it could still be a useful way to expose Democrats as a party, something Ferrara calls for.
And what is the alternative to Congress asserting its own prerogatives — another law with the precedent of a President ignoring them or subverting them at will left intact? There is no doubt much more analysis to go into this, including effective answers to the question we pose. But Ferrara’s fairly weak close does not live up to a very strong, very useful article otherwise. R Mall and DLH
