Thursday, June 23, 2016

The End of LIberal Thinking

Like many of you, I've been reading about the sit-in that some Democrats have staged in the House chamber for the past two days.  I understand that they ended it today, after a recess until July 5th.  Like petulant children, the Democrats are acting like spoiled brats, unable to make a substantial argument, they're willing to throw away due process to get their way.

I find it ironic that they're staging a sit-in in the People's House, a place where they have a full right to debate and legislate.  However, unable to make the argument, they act like spoiled children, demanding that due process be denied to US citizens so that they can have their way.

The erstwhile leader of this little demagoguery, John Lewis, was once a staunch advocate of civil rights.  He himself has been on secret government lists, and has fervently defended the rights of all Americans.  In this last act, he has squandered the good reputation he took so long to build.  He is now simply being petulant at not having his own way.  He's openly mocked across social media, and he's shown that he's willing to discard due process for transient political advantage.

As a minor student of historical liberal thought, I am reminded of the words of that great legal thinker, Frederick Douglass, who said that "the liberties of the American people were dependent upon the ballot-box, the jury-box, and the cartridge-box; that without these no class of people could live and flourish in this country..."  It is well that we remember these words.

We have the ballot box to select our representatives, the jury box to ensure justice, and the cartridge box to ensure freedom.  The government should be reminded that We The People are the government.  Our representatives serve at our pleasure and our prerogative.  The Congress is supposed to defend the liberties of all Americans, and is sworn to uphold the Constitution, which places limits on government.  It seems that the Democrats in the House have forgotten their oaths and their duty.

Today, Kevin D. Willaimson pens a wonderful piece over at National Review, and finishes with this paragraph:

The Democratic party in 2016 is not a liberal party. It is a party that is working diligently to rescind free-speech rights on one front and to undermine due-process protections on another. It has abandoned the notion of procedural justice in pursuit of substantive outcomes demanded by its supporters, the rule of law be damned. There is a term for the armed pursuit of justice, real or perceived, outside the rule of law, and that term is “lynching.” The Democrats have lynching in their political DNA, and they seem to be unable to evolve past it. Ironically, their abandonment of due process and their flirtation with tyranny are reminders of one of the reasons why the Founders believed it necessary to have an armed citizenry.
Go, as they say and read the whole thing.

The Second Amendment is about overthrowing tyranny, and the Democratic party had best remember that.  It's not about deer hunting, or even about sport shooting.  I still have the ballot box, and I pray that I won't have to resort to the cartridge box, but I have several of those too.


The Displaced Louisiana Guy said...

Between John Lewis' abysmal behavior and the Supreme Court's ruling in Fisher vs. University of Texas, I'm bumfuzzled. Jesus wept! I want to believe that we still live in a democracy, but crap like this had me at a loss. Both of the presidential candidates are repugnant. It just depends on your particular political leanings on which you find less repugnant than the other...

Are we still living in a democracy? I feel like it's more of an oligarchy these days.

Like I'm watching the decline of Rome, and I have no earthly idea how we got here.

Depressing, really.

Anonymous said...

The response to this hissy fit of immature brats was to adjourn the Congress. It occurred to me that this was staged to create the condition for recess appointments. Anything from the mouths of that ilk is the opposite of what they intend. So if, say Ojerk says he has taking his executive privilege as far as he can, we should loo for something in play right now. I think it will be a recess appointment of, o I don't know, a SCOTUS chair. Watch for something up the sleeve to be labeled exigent.