~”I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.”~
-George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19th, 1796-
Washington goes on in his farewell address letter to elaborate further his disposition of the various banes political parties posed to government, in which ultimately all paths evinced towards his assertion of despotism:
~”But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty. Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischief’s of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.”
“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
“There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
“It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”~
When you look around our beleaguered country today, it goes without saying that our national landscape would be unrecognizable, in many respects even hellish to those early, post-revolutionary citizens who had the distinct privilege of being recognized in the eyes of the world as the first Americans. Yet Washington, being the man of scrupulous character and wisdom that he was, endowed by astute discernment, would recognize every potential threat his warning of 218 years ago conveyed as having manifested and metastasized throughout virtually every appendage of government as it exists today. Even those threats of a nature inherent to our own times which, consequently, he could not have conceived of in his day.
Upon examination, Washington would ineluctably derive at the conclusion that this government he risked everything to lead a revolution for independence against the dominating might of King George’s British military superiority, a government he and his peers had intended and designed to be one of the people, by the people and for the people, is anything but in its present-day incarnation. I would go so far as to say that if Washington, or any of the founders could see what their beloved country and government has evolved (or devolved depending on your point of view) into today, their reactions would be visceral in their shared abhorrence and heartbreaking dismay.
Rampant, spiraling debt, epidemic entitlements, foreign entanglements, absolutely no regard for our national sovereignty by a gargantuan government oligarchy of a political ruling class who heap the yoke of their legislated abuses, one after another, squarely on the backs of we the people. To those founders, our nation’s current plight as represented by this inveterate party system we’re constantly divided and at odds under today would be intolerable. Especially in the matter of religion and the national morality it propagates and Washington’s unequivocal belief in its indispensability as a primary means for our country achieving political prosperity. To say Washington would be appalled by this vigorous assault in our day and age upon God and the Christian faith would be an understatement. I imagine Washington would credit our sequential decline as a nation in general by citing a direct correlation between our declivity and this growing abandonment of and disobedience towards our Creator as a starting point for his addressing the cause of many if not all of the adversities we’ve allowed ourselves to become stricken with.
Yet the most salient aspect emphasizing the reality to this morbid deterioration of our country and collective precocity as a people came with the election of Barack Hussein Obama. An obscure, apocryphal candidate short on qualifications or ability, but long on radical associations from his provenance of Chicago that alone would see any white politician or citizen ranking high on an FBI terrorist watch list. Obama is the defining derivative by which I’ve come to assess this gross abnegation to any semblance of reason or common sense our nation seems now conditioned to embrace under the inverting, entropic precepts of political correctness.
I’m loathe to make any reference of Obama in comparison to the stature of the character, honor, dignity and integrity of George Washington. Given these last 6 years of this mans lawless subterfuge, a snowballing compilation of sinister scandals and a casual pathological forte of lying through his teeth to our faces, Obama is in every respect a proven antithesis to everything Washington believed in and stood for. Not to mention the indignant vulgarity we’ve witnessed with every other previous comparison of this historical pockmark to such antecedent presidential icons as Lincoln, Kennedy and Reagan.
Under the malign ambitions of Barack Hussein Obama, we as modern day Americans have presided over the most accelerated period of coercive attrition to ever be wreaked on our country by a sitting president than at any time previously in our combined history. The sum of this mans violations compressed into these past 6 years is breathtaking when you try to catalog each and every one of them. The scope of his deleterious dereliction’s are replete with larcenous abuses, racial division, constitutional violations and even homicidal negligence. People have lost their lives to this charlatans duplicity, yet this faux opposition party that Republicans appear to have decayed into have proclaimed to us that impeachment is off the table. How do you wrap your mind around that reasoning when even we as average Americans can see for ourselves the corruption Obama is allowed to perpetrate with such carte blanche arrogance?
One of the more conspicuous aspects in the expansive trail of debris and wreckage Obama’s presidency has wrought has been the expeditious rise and intensified surge of radical Islam. As Obama has waged an unprecedented political onslaught against christianity across our nation, at every opportunity Obama has elevated and praised the state of Islam, crediting them for their many contributions and achievements to American democracy. Meanwhile, evangelical Christians and Catholics somehow found themselves listed as religious extremists and likely terror threats by the U.S. military under Obama as detailed in the following excerpt:
~Soldiers attending a pre-deployment briefing at Fort Hood say they were told that evangelical Christians and members of the Tea Party were a threat to the nation and that any soldier donating to those groups would be subjected to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
A soldier who attended the Oct. 17th briefing told me the counter-intelligence agent in charge of the meeting spent nearly a half hour discussing how evangelical Christians and groups like the American Family Association were “tearing the country apart.”~
“On the very base that was the site of mass murder carried out by a radicalized Muslim soldier, it is astonishing that it is evangelical groups that are being identified as a ‘threat.’”
– Tony Perkins, Family Research Council president~
Never mind that shortly after the onset of Obama’s presidency, America began witnessing efforts by Islamic radicals to recrudesce their scourge of terrorism again on American soil. Not since September 11th, 2001 had there been a successful strike on our home front, but that all began to change in 2009 with the all but forgotten June 1st, 2009 drive-by shooting death of Army Private William Long outside of a Little Rock, Arkansas Army recruiting station, leaving his colleague, Army Private Quinton Ezeagwula, wounded. Arrested, charged and sentenced to life in prison for this crime, Muslim convert Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad had explained during his police interrogation that the shooting was a holy war and that he was not guilty of murder. “It’s an act of retaliation,” he said. “There’s a war going on.”
Later in that same year we had the November 5th, 2009 Ft. Hood massacre during which, while shouting allahu akbar, Muslim Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan shot and murdered 13 people and injured over 30 in what had been and continues to be wrongly described by the Obama administration as an act of workplace violence. Then we have the April 15th, 2013 Boston marathon bombing that remarkably claimed only 3 lives given the number of bystanders in the blast radius, while injuring an estimated 264 others. Then there’s the September 24th, 2014 Norman, Oklahoma decapitation of 54 year old Colleen Hufford at the hands of 30 year old Muslim convert Alton Nolen at Huffords place of employment.
Two hundred and thirty-eight years of history and this is where we’ve arrived at. Washington’s prognostications to the jeopardy a party system represented to government and those men who would exploit it by fomenting dissention and division through a process of systematic usurpations appears to have reached attainment in the person of Barack Hussein Obama. Washington expresses it much more eloquently in the next excerpt from his farewell address letter:
~”All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
“However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”~
Obstruction, subversion and usurper, thy name is Obama. The culmination of Washington’s premonitory warnings manifested in our midst. A clear and present danger whom many in this diminished government seem impotent to act against in direct opposition to these usurpations Obama has implemented. Despite the outcries of political rhetoric we keep hearing constantly that label his actions as ‘lawless‘, no one seems willing to make Obama accountable in the enforcement of those laws he violates at the impulse of his arbitrary vagaries. An austere illustration denoting this permitted decrepitude we’ve prolapsed into as a nation.
Some might question how our founders would have dealt with a similar situation in their era, speculating on what political hazards they might have essayed to prevent the sort of political jihad to our then fledgling nation as this one we’re experiencing today under Obama. The factor of race aside, any individual analogous to Obama, who posed such comparable calamity to their frangible government, would have been recognized immediately for the malefic iniquity such a man embodied. Our founders would have made no ridiculous concessions to, much less tolerated, any absurd semblances of political correctness or deviants who would promote such a deranged ideology. Indeed, the cultured acumen hereditary to their natures would doubtless regard our political correctness with articulated contempt and ridicule.
So I think it’s safe to assume our founders in their judicious wisdom, would have been swift and severe in their abrogating any cognate threat such an usurper as Obama would have presented to the continued survival and preservation of their country.
More than likely dispatching said aspiring despot to greet eternity doing a discombobulated jig on air at the end of a rope.