|
Following the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin was asked whether America had a republic or a monarchy. With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it." (1)
Well, have we? Have we kept the republic the Founding Fathers gave us? Or have we reached a point where an executive who has run a multi-billion dollar corporation is deemed not qualified to be the chief executive while a candidate who as First Lady was mired in the scandals of Whitewater, Travelgate and Filegate---is? A candidate who served eight years in the Senate and no one can name a single accomplishment---is? A candidate who as Secretary of State allegedly exposed a private e-mail server containing state secrets to hackers then lied about it to the people and the Congress---is?
A republic if you can keep it.
Prior to Donald Trump's entering the Republican primary, the tiger cat thought she must have gotten into the catnip one too many times because it looked to her like it didn't much matter how the American people voted because not much changed for Main Street and the average Joe and Josephine. Thus, voters could give Republicans the majority in the House of Representatives and be told nothing could change because the Democrats were in control of the Senate, only to be told after they voted the Republicans into the Senate majority that nothing could change because the Democrats still had the presidency. Were we not supposed to notice that when the Democrats held the House and Senate, they didn't need the presidency to accomplish their agenda?
Until Donald Trump appeared on the scene, the choice seemed to be Pete or Repete (sic)---Democrat or Democrat Lite, Globalism or Globalism, open borders or open borders, amnesty or amnesty, Souter or Sotomayor, Roberts or Kagan, invading the Middle East or having the Middle East invade America.
"While Europeans are accustomed to being ruled by presumed betters whom they distrust, the American people's realization of being ruled like Europeans shocked this country into well nigh revolutionary attitudes." (2)
So what were the "revolutionary attitudes" to which Dr. Codevilla was referring in 2010? Five years before Donald Trump would turn the GOP primary on its head and the pundits, Fox News, Wall Street Journal, National Review, Weekly Standard and establishment Republicans began pulling out their hair and tearing at their clothes?
It turns out 2010 was the year the Tea Party (3) set politics-as-usual on its head, and while the pundits, Fox News, Wall Street Journal, National Review, Weekly Standard and establishment politicians did not exactly pull out their hair and rend their clothes, none were especially supportive of the uprising. And although a few politicians rode the tidal wave into office, once elected, they either signed on to the establishment agenda or were sidelined by the party. This explains how Paul Ryan can be Speaker of the House when he is opposed to the policies which swept Donald Trump to the nomination.
"A republic if you can keep it."
So what happened? How did America change?
Dr. Codevilla posits that our ruling class "grew and set itself apart from the rest of us by its connection with ever bigger government, and above all by a certain attitude." He dismisses wealth as the sole criterion for membership in the ruling class. He points out that while the heads of the ruling class live in the priciest zip codes, they are no wealthier than many Texas oilmen or California farmers, or "with neighbors with whom they do not associate." (My emphasis). He observes that what distinguishes these (privileged) people is that their careers and fortunes "depend on government." He goes on to say professional prominence or position does not secure a place in the ruling class any more than does wealth. In fact, he concludes, "it is possible to be an official of a major corporation or a member of the U. S. Supreme Court (Clarence Thomas), or even president (Ronald Reagan), and not be taken seriously by the ruling class."
Dr. Codevilla's article finally explains why pundits and politicians can support a politician who has done nothing but screw up while a successful executive is huffily dismissed as unqualified.
"A republic if you can keep it," Dr. Franklin told Mrs. Howel (sic).
We'll find out in November.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) A conservative populist social and political movement that emerged in 2009 in the United States, generally opposing excessive taxation and government intervention in the private sector while supporting stronger immigration controls.
Note: If some links do not work try copying them and pasting them in your browser
*The Missouri Patriot LLC and RiteOn LLC have full permission to publish Growltiger's commentaries
| 
