Year of Decision -- the high stakes of American politics

This is a brief overview from a friend of American liberty observing from Canada in a time that I have come to understand as being the most critical year for American freedom since the founding of the Republic.

My analysis will not really be "new" but I believe it is important to take a wider view and place the main elements of the chaotic social and political landscape in a clear perspective. I hope this may be of some small help in creating the necessary resolve to defend the liberty that is not only American liberty, but ultimately, the liberty of all free people around the world.

First, the economic situation -- it is the result of a convergence of two undesirable phenomena, one being unrestrained greed and speculation, the other, a noxious green agenda of misguided and unsustainable theories. In some ways, this is the perfect storm for capitalist free-market economics, because it both exploits the weaknesses of that system, and burrows deep inside it with destructive viruses designed to implode the system from within. The only answer to this economic crisis is to restore oversight from principled conservative government, and to sink the green economic agenda without a trace.

As to the president and the Democratic Party, they are opportunists who have decided to circle the dying body of this system, a phenomenon that they assisted in the first place, but also in the spirit of taking carrion where possible, and attempting to preside over the chaos that would inevitably follow. The president in particular is a very dangerous figure because he could yet capitalize on reserves of essentially demonic and anti-American energies that would place him at the head of some revolutionary movement.

However, there already is a revolutionary movement that has come out of many hiding places to establish a forward base in the cities, with the view towards pressuring the Democrats to become revolutionary socialists. They already are to some extent, of course, but not in an openly, formally declared sense. And what is missing from this revolutionary movement is charismatic Leninist leadership and the toughness of a Stalin type figure to back that up. One can see that in the American political landscape, the president is the main risk of activating that missing potential. He has the tools at his disposal. And one senses that he is just waiting for his best opportunity to strike, to clamp down on opposition and to sweep these activist forces firmly into one coalition in a make-or-break openly declared socialist revolution. If it sounds far-fetched, then ask yourself what was the view from the Czar's palace in 1917?

On the political right, you also have a chaotic mixture of accommodationists and unformed resistance. I call them unformed not because of lack of vigour or resolve, but because of lack of clarity. This is partly a function of the political ambiguity present. If the revolutionaries would fully commit and declare themselves, then the counter-revolutionary position would be defined into existence. At the moment, there is no such clarity, and frankly, no clear leader of the resistance.

Within the so-called blogosphere, figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Alex Jones are exercising degrees of leadership, but they tend to war amongst themselves (in multiple alternative groupings) to the point of almost dissipating actual resistance to what is currently more of a potential than an actual threat. The main potential threat remains the further erosion of the economy and the looming imposition of some form of draconian crackdown on free speech and real discussion of real issues. This of course has been building up over many years because of political correctness, the code that serves elites as an all-purpose distractor from reality and a filter through which the make-believe world of "diversity" and "sustainability" can be viewed. That world, of course, is the same make-believe world that Soviet citizens were asked to imagine for 75 years.

What is needed is the emergence of a real leader of resistance, by necessity the Republic nominee for president. Of the current contenders, somebody is going to have to "man up" to this task, because all to some extent fall short. It would take nothing short of a radical declaration -- that the Republic and its cherished liberties are under attack and that the current administration is at best doing nothing, at worst co-ordinating the attack, and must be replaced. There can be no alternative and no turning back from an agenda of complete overthrowing of political correctness, and the Tea Party must be seen as the "militia of free speech" that is "armed" with truth and justice. To some extent, this is also a renewed call to the Tea Party movement to renew its focus and its aims and to settle for nothing less than the full restoration of the Republic.

Elitist so-called conservatives who have turned against the Tea Party have chosen their elitist status over principle. They need to be dumped unceremoniously on the side of the road on this journey to restore liberty. They have beclowned themselves in full view and have nowhere to hide.

So who is it to be, this leader of an American resistance and to bring about the restoration of liberty?

That's beyond my ability to determine, I pray that it happens, rather than to whom it might happen. The short list of possible candidates appears to be Romney, Cain, Paul, Gingrich and Perry. If you could take one quality from each of them and create a new man from the parts, that might work. From where I stand, transforming any one of them into the next Reagan (and indeed a greater man than Reagan is needed) seems like a prodigious "ask" and against the political skills of the president (who otherwise is a complete dud) the challenge is doubled.

Perhaps this is also a time to ask whether the retirement from the field of Governor Sarah Palin is a final act, or whether she might have what is required in greater degree than any of the five pretenders?

But whatever the situation today, realism says that one of the five men named must rise above what is currently a rather low ceiling. And the rest must follow his lead and become ready to serve in an administration that will be tasked with a monumental task of restoration and renewal. Perhaps it is a time for a real two-man ticket in which presidency and vice-presidency are mainly designations of where to unpack. The task certainly is large enough for the full-time attention of two groups, let alone two men, and these two tasks could be divided into domestic-economic, and international-security. From that perspective, I could see the merits of perhaps a Cain-Paul ticket with Newt Gingrich to serve in a Cabinet role. That might restore a lot of confidence in both the economy and in America's necessary leadership role. Ron Paul is too isolationist for the times, but otherwise has probably the best grasp of the severity of the economic challenges. Herman Cain is probably best positioned to project the required assurance of American strength. Newt Gingrich has the experience but that is combined with a certain amount of baggage, better that he advise than rule perhaps.

Mitt Romney could still rise above limitations, but to do that, he needs to come to grips with the full requirements of the times. America cannot risk a partial solution, a gentle transition from the Obama disaster back to the ambiguity of the Bush approach. If Romney wins the nomination, then he has the vast responsibility to become the president that America needs, and not just the chief executive that he himself desires to become.

I have to say that I don't believe that Governor Perry has the gravitas to be the man, or even one of several, at the heart of power in the free world. There is a danger that the unseen powers that try to control events might see him as their puppet and try to smooth the way, in part to guarantee the victory of their real choice, but also to give them insurance. This cannot be tolerated by the conservative movement.

So in conclusion, I wanted to say, with prayer and reflection, freedom and liberty can be restored. But each of the contenders needs to be reminded, it's not about them -- it's about you, and us; if I were American in fact and not just in spirit, I would say, it is about we the people, and our inalienable rights. They must remember that they are but humble servants of those rights. The man in the White House today has no concept of those rights, he is too busy with other projects.

Good analysis but not quite complete. Something is missing but I can’t put my finger on it.

These tumultuous times are only going to get worse, not better, for a few years to come. I’m appalled that the Republican candidates are so lackluster and colorless, when force and strength are needed. Sorry choices indeed.

A large portion of the population is furious and the Second American Revolution could start at any time. All that is needed is real leadership, a “man on horseback” to muster the militia that lives within us all. But no such leader is visible.

The author touched on a suspicion I’ve held for awhile now — that Sarah Palin’s final act has not yet played out. History has shown that Third Party candidates always fail miserably ... but what if Sarah took the shot, under a Tea Party banner?

Thanks, it’s actually my opinion piece, so I could take a shot at answering.

I also think there is “something missing” and it could be a Biblical event, or as you suggest, a more dramatic breaking out of revolutionary (and therefore counter-revolutionary) political action.

A point that I failed to develop adequately, on reflection, is that Obama stands poised to take over the partially-failed occupy movement’s agenda under the disguise of “reforming the economy” but in reality, accelerating what has already been widely seen as the development of a socialist and globalist type of economy for the U.S.A.

Canada was until 2005 or so, further down that road, but we have been retreating and to some extent enjoying the temporary benefit of being a resource-based economy, but for certain, North America is being pulled into the bottomless pit of a global socialist economic paradigm that can only fail at some intermediate if not early point in time — it could only go perhaps five years before imploding. Part of the justification for it would be to “save the earth” from climate change, a preposterous goal for human beings in any case, but doubly ridiculous if climate change is, as many of us believe, partly fiction and otherwise natural variability at work.

I would repeat my original statement that the challenge to Obama needs to come from principled rather than pragmatic-accommodationist conservatism. Newt Gingrich seems to be trying to dump his globalist baggage, and it’s never too late to see the light, but I would rather see certainty in the nomination, and some combination of Cain and Paul provides the most certainty available, add in Palin and perhaps you’ve got the winning mixture.

I certainly pray that it works out this way, because freedom-loving people around the world tend to agree on one thing — a strong and independent America is the only guarantee of strong and independent nations from A to Z, whoever chooses that path is in peril without a strong and independent America, free from the socialist, globalist agenda.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.