This Is Unexpected

Alan Keyes has persuaded me to vote for Mark Kirk

Alan Keyes makes the argument I've been looking for -- and many more conservatives, too, I suspect:

...what I think needs to be the first objective in the November election for voters anxious to preserve constitutional liberty in the United States. ...I say bluntly that the very best outcome would be to vote all the Democrats
out. ...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. [Emphasis added.]