The ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, says that, when it comes to enforcing border security and U.S. immigration laws, Obama "remains committed to escalating – rather than ending – the lawlessness." He goes on to claim that "Republicans...are the last bulwark for the rule of law." Yet and still, the GOP leadership in Congress refuses to implement the Constitution's provisions for calling a lawless executive to account for his offenses. As I noted in a recent article on my blog ("GOP leaders – a craven of cowards?"), their refusal to do so raises trenchant doubts about the outcry against lawlessness and dereliction being raised by Sessions and others:"Are these matters as serious as the outraged cries of Obama's GOP opponents make them out to be? Or has the outcry against Obama on all these matters been nothing but partisan posturing, for political effect? Are GOP criticisms the dutiful work of serious patriots, or deceitful posturing from self-serving politicos who are actually convinced that Obama has done nothing that deserves a serious response from Congress or the electorate?"According to the story I discuss in my blog post, GOP leaders are afraid that carrying out their constitutional duty to call Obama to account will interfere with their plans for the November election. Apparently, they are utterly enthralled by the self-serving, power-mad, Machiavellian political culture they have substituted for representative government. So, while Obama attacks the security and sovereignty of the nation, they refuse to embark upon the path the Constitution provides, all because they fear to lose elective offices that, by this dereliction, they degrade to shameful sinecures. Because they have no sense of the deep betrayal involved in thus abdicating their sworn duty to God and their fellow citizens, they foolishly assume it will not disappoint, disgust, and anger the very voters their connivance aims to win.But instead of winning, this self-seeking dereliction may set them up for a breathtaking defeat. For if the allegations against Obama have merit, common sense and fairness demand that constitutional due process be respected. Defaming Obama from the election stump, while refusing to implement the Constitution's provisions for a serious national inquest into his conduct and that of his collaborators, suggests that the GOP leaders "believe they can only score political gains in November by lynching Obama from the election stump, because they lack sufficient evidence and constitutional justification for the accusations they have made against him."Thus, in addition to alienating habitual supporters, disgusted by Republicans' tolerance for Obama's outrages, reports of the politically motivated fears of GOP congressional leaders also lend credence to Obama's supporters, who contend that GOP allegations against him are entirely motivated by partisan and/or racial bigotry. The GOP's sharp criticism of Obama takes on the appearance of a scheme to prejudice public opinion, using unsubstantiated allegations while slyly depriving him of the right to a solemn constitutional inquest and a trial in which judgment would be guided by facts and constitutional reasoning. This is what both common sense and common decency require.Given present circumstances, this refusal to respect the Constitution's provisions for enforcing executive branch accountability also shows the utmost contempt for the constitutional sovereignty of the American people. If the impeachment/removal process is conducted with due propriety, the fall elections will take place while the investigative stage of the impeachment process is still under way. This timing will allow voters to have a say in the composition of the U.S. House and Senate, before those bodies formally act upon the results of the investigative process. But instead of facilitating the participation of the American people in the impeachment/removal process in this way, the GOP leadership seems anxious to cut them out of it.Their politically calculated refusal to do their duty suggests that they are anxious to make sure that what they claim is Obama's lawlessness – his reckless endangerment of border and national security, his dictatorial abuse of executive orders, and the dealings with terrorists by which he seems to offer aid and comfort to our enemies – do not become the focal points of decision-making for voters as they make their choices for national office in the fall elections.Apparently, the GOP's congressional leaders would rather hand Obama a rhetorical stick with which to beat them into silence about his egregious offenses than call him to account in a way that makes those offenses the galvanizing national issue on which the 2014 election turns. Are they really afraid that the constitutional process will spoil their plans for victory in the fall? Or does their real concern have to do with the possibility that focusing on Obama's clearly impeachable conduct would produce an election result that would:a. Spoil their plans for continued collaboration with Obama on the elitist faction agenda for issues like amnesty for illegal immigrants; fixing (rather than repealing) Obamacare; massive infringement of the right to keep and bear arms; and increasing taxes and government debt; andb. Result in GOP majorities in Congress that cast doubt on their excuses for refusing to proceed expeditiously with the impeachment/trial of Obama and his cohorts.This fog of self-serving, self-defeating "fears" and sly intentions would dissipate if the GOP leadership simply gave up the Machiavellian effort to advance the treacherous agenda of the elitist faction forces they presently serve. Instead, they should take up their sworn duty – to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof – and frankly represent the people who vote them into office. Sadly, I doubt that they will ever do this on their own. But a strong expression of the political will of the people could make the difference.The Pledge To Impeach mobilization aims to gather and make manifest this political will. Have you taken the pledge? Are you encouraging others to do so?
Dr. Keyes holds the distinction of being the only person ever to run against Barack Obama in a truly contested election — one featuring authentic Declaration-based moral conservatism vs. progressive liberalism — when they challenged each other for the open U.S. Senate seat from Illinois in 2004.
During the Reagan years, Keyes was the highest-ranking black appointee in the Reagan Administration, serving as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations and as Ambassador to the United Nations Economic and Social Council.
He ran for president in 1996, 2000, and 2008, and was a Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate from Maryland in 1988 and 1992, in addition to his 2004 candidacy in Illinois.
He holds a Ph.D. in government from Harvard and wrote his dissertation on constitutional theory.
His basic philosophy can best be described as "Declarationism" — since he relies on the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence to define the premises on which our country was founded, and to which it must return if it is to survive. To Dr. Keyes, the Constitution itself cannot be faithfully interpreted, understood, or applied apart from the divinely-premised principles of the Declaration.
When Keyes ran for president in 2000, the media generally considered him the winner of the Republican primary debates, due to the persuasive eloquence of his defense of the unborn, opposition to unfair taxation, advocacy of school choice, promotion of family values, and focus on what he called "America's moral crisis." As a result, he became the host of MSNBC-TV's "Alan Keyes Is Making Sense" in 2002.
He is best known for thrusting the evil of abortion — which he considers our nation's "greatest moral challenge" — into the national spotlight.
Keyes is also a strong supporter of Israel, and in 2002 he was flown by the Israeli government to the Holy Land to receive an award for his staunch defense of Israel in the media. He is the only American ever to receive such an honor from the State of Israel.
When Keyes ran against Obama for the Senate in 2004, he did so because he was incensed the Democrat "community organizer" refused to support the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois on several occasions — a measure approved not long afterward by the U.S. Senate, 100 to 0.
Dr. Keyes blogs at LoyaltoLiberty.com, and writes commentary for WorldNetDaily.
An archive titled "Alan Keyes' Pro-life Advocacy" is available at Faith and Freedom Foundation.
Alan is available to address interested venues of students, educators, civic groups, professional organizations, public servants, political advocates, churches, and others who are interested in preserving our nation's institutions of liberty.
To arrange a speech or special appearance by Dr. Keyes, contact his scheduler, Carla Michele, at 469-301-0776.
© Copyright 2014 by Alan Keyes