This past week came another instance of the “eyes wide shut” syndrome that presently afflicts the GOP base. Ben Carson and Marco Rubio announced support for the egregiously anti-American trade agreement–the TPP or Trans-Pacific Partnership– that is to the formulation of America’s national economic policies what approval of the infamous Iran deal is for policies affecting our national security. A specious media generated furor involving allegations that Dr. Carson fabricated of misrepresented an episode in his biography conveniently engaged the “enemy of my enemy” effect in Carson’s favor at the very moment when, by supporting TPP, he belied his supposedly anti-establishment persona, imitating Sen. Rubio’s loyal service to the elitist faction agenda for the demise of the sovereignty of the American people.
The TPP’s provisions promise adversely to affect the jobs prospects and competitive position of American workers and entrepreneurs. That’s why many Americans oppose it, regardless of their identification with one or the other of the elitist faction’s sham Parties. But just as destructively- indeed more so- the process by which it was negotiated, and is being approved, surrenders the economic self-government of the American people. With Obama as the figurehead for their dictatorship, they are bent on using multilateral trade regimes to establish an international apparatus for administrative lawmaking (i.e., executive dictatorship) that denigrates and bypasses the role of the elected representatives of the America people, at every level of government. This apparatus will impose a wide range of laws and regulations affecting economic and social policy throughout the United States which the people of the United States mostly oppose, and for good reasons.
The American Revolution aimed to assure that there would be no taxation or other such legislation without representation. In the most literal sense, the rubber stamp procedures by which the TPP was negotiated and is being approved reverse this fundamental aim. Eviscerating the U.S. Congress’s powers to devise, approve, and oversee the economic rules and regulations that govern the American people, they surrender our self-government in its entirety. Control passes into the hands of self-serving elitist faction interests, acting by means of secretly negotiated arrangements with foreign governments that leave the American people with no recourse but to bleat ineffectually as we submit to what amounts to the restoration of elitist dictatorial rule, which our Constitution was meant to transcend once and for all.
This has broad and fundamental implications fatal to the way of life, conceived in liberty, which has nurtured the unique success of the United States. It is the counterpart, in terms of our constitutional arrangements, of the surrender of moral character involved in the purportedly “legalized” murder of our posterity; and the dissolution of social integrity invited by the denial and disparagement of the God-endowed right (read obligation) of procreation that is the basis of the natural family, antecedent to and transcending the prerogatives of other forms of human society and government.
I have on several occasions pointed out that Ben Carson’s decisions and reactions as a candidate have seriously contradicted his conservative sounding rhetoric. This is true on the pro-life issue. It is true of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, which denied and disparaged the antecedent rights of the God-endowed natural family, in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Ninth amendment. Now his embrace of the trade regime established by the TPP reveals his willingness to countenance a process and result that displaces constitutional government of, by and for the American people with a trade regime, of, by and for the elitist clique that is using Obama to consolidate their factional dictatorship.
Last week I wrote about the implications of Dr. Carson’s participation in establishing the corporate re-education regime intended to force people to accept the normalization of homosexuality, or face the loss of their livelihood. This hardly seems consistent with his campaign blather about opposition to “political correctness.” If this were simply a matter of inconsistency on one issue not fundamental to the survival of the nation, maybe there would be some excuse for ignoring it. But these issues are all of them fundamental to the elitist faction’s assault on the moral and institutional character of the American people. By itself, the betrayal of our interest any one of them involves is sufficient to precipitate the end of our liberty.
But taken together, they constitute evidence of a commitment to that outcome that entirely undermines Dr. Carson’s outsider claims. He’s not an outsider, he’s a ringer, brought in from the “outside” to gull and betray voters looking for a way out of the elitist faction party sham, but afraid to break with the ideal of a stable “two party system”, which that sham has now effectively replaced. I look at Dr. Carson’s contrary positions on these survival issues for America, and I ask myself- What will it take for Americans sincerely committed to restoring the foundations of our constitutional liberty to see past the façade, and ponder the implications of what is right before their eyes. Have they no eyes to see, no ears to hear? Or will they simply go on falling prey to the pragmatic trade-off represented by someone who more than incidentally resembles, in all but his expedient rhetoric, the very people by whom they have time and again been consistently betrayed?
I realize that many of us are desperate for political hope. It’s easier to delude ourselves with pretenders mouthing the right words than to admit they don’t really offer such hope. But surely it is better to store hope with our faith in the Lord, who made heaven and earth; and in Christ whose acceptance of God’s will secured the hope that does not depend on human “leaders”, however appealing they seem to our sense and feeling.
“If it feels good, do it” is not a pragmatic slogan, when considered in light of that faith. For in that light we are only getting something done when we act (and vote) to do right by the Lord. For our faith lives by way of the Cross. It has eyes to see that true good consists in getting along with God, not going along with the destruction of America’s reverence for His truth. “Not my will but thine be done” is our more likely slogan. But how does that slogan lead us to support someone who purports to stand for His truth, but has consistently comported himself in ways that deny the power thereof? (2 Timothy 3:5) This is especially questionable when he does so on the critical issues touching God’s rule for justice, as Americans have understood it since assuming “among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them”?
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.