Breaking Up is Hard to Do . . . But It's Time
by Bob Eschliman
You’ve really got to hand it to Fox News. For many years, they been able to dupe an overwhelming majority of the American conservative movement into believing they were on their side with the cover of “fair and balanced.”
In reality, they have been willing accomplices in the political elite’s effort to marginalize mainstream conservatism and those who adhere to it in an effort to make the Republican Party “more palatable” to the masses. This is the same kind of liberal social re-engineering they and the rest of those in the “conservative intelligentsia” have been blaming “the mainstream media” of engaging in for decades.
Their success is in many ways a byproduct of today’s Republican Party. “The base,” those folks who still believe in the core values of the GOP as enshrined in its platform and charter, make up a very small minority of folks in the party today.
The “establishment,” those folks who have the money and political power to ensure “things get done” — the very same folks who right now are telling us the party needs to drift leftward to remain culturally and politically relevant — make up only a slightly larger small minority of folks in the party today. The rest — the vast majority of Republicans — honestly don’t know what they stand for, so long as they keep voting for the guy with the “R” behind his name.
How else, then, do you explain George H.W. Bush (who got re-elected as Ronald Reagan’s third term and lost when he began charting his own direction), Bob Dole, George W. Bush (sorry to break it to you, but some — not all — of it was his fault), John McCain and Mitt Romney?
This is the result of years of conditioning by the “conservative” media (by the way, everything you really need to know about Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation can be summed up in the story — the whole story, not just the recent hacking scandal — of The Sun newspaper in the U.K. under his ownership). The end game has always been the replacement of “politics of principle” with “politics of identity.”
Exit polling? Extensive biographies of candidates and their personal lives that give no indication of their political resume? Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about.
So, recently a brand-new “Gang of Eight” in the U.S. Senate — now a staple of the World’s Most Exclusive Country Club as much as The Candy Desk — unveiled itself with most of the usual suspects (and a couple of new ones) with a plan for “sweeping immigration reform” (code word for “sweeping amnesty reform”). Among their four main goals: amnesty, codifying amnesty forever, political window dressing and more amnesty.
ADHD Moment: If the U.S. has a “skilled worker shortage” and can’t fill highly skilled manufacturing jobs it already has, much less those it will need in the years to come, wouldn’t that seem to mean we have a glut of low-skilled workers? So why on Earth would you allow even more low-skilled immigrants (they would no longer be here illegally) who will further put a drain on our economy?
Sorry about that. Back to my point.
Fox News, of course, weighed in on this effort (yes, I know it was Fox Business, but seriously, is there any difference in CNN and Headline News?) by rolling out their in-house Constitutional law expert, Judge Andrew Napolitano. But rather than give the constitutionally correct answer, he rolled out yet another defense of the Republican Establishment’s “go-along-get-along” political strategy, saying Republicans have to realize that if they don’t change their stance, President Obama will use powers he has been granted “under federal law” to make illegal immigrants legal, thereby circumventing Congress and creating a whole new army of Democrat voters who would otherwise be “more comfortable” with the GOP. A very strange answer indeed for a self-described, “libertarian.”
Napolitano continued, “Republicans need to resist that, not by kicking these people out, not by preventing them from becoming citizens, but by welcoming them with open arms into a party where they would feel more comfortable than the Democrats,” he added. Then he went on to explain that he favors open borders as a natural human liberty (very consistent with his libertarianism). “This is the natural law, a natural right,” Napolitano said. “Rights come from your humanity. It doesn’t matter where your mother was when you were born.”
Finally, a moment of honesty from Fox News. Of course, they and Napolitano are dead wrong, as usual. But they crafted the message in such a way as to make it sound like it would pass muster with our Founding Fathers.
If, in a Constitutional sense, “where your mother was when you were born” didn’t matter to those who forged our great nation, please explain the “natural born citizen” clause in Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
The truth is that every human being is endowed by his or her Creator with certain unalienable rights. Some of these are inherent (e.g. life, liberty, pursuit of happiness) and some have to be spelled out (e.g. The Bill of Rights). Whether they are inherent or codified makes them no less unalienable, nor any less a birthright based solely upon one’s “humanness.” “Universal citizenship,” the view of most open-borders advocates, is not a birthright. In fact, it’s wrongheaded.
A nation is defined by three aspects: 1) its language, 2) its borders, and 3) its culture and heritage. The United States of America is unique among the nations of Earth in that our nation did not swell up from a single ethnic culture, but it did come from a singularly special heritage.
Our nation was based on the rule of law, not just any law. Our nation, like it or not, was based on an amalgamation of both Reformed and Enlightened views that held our rights are God-given and that we must adhere to the laws of nature and nature’s God.
So, go ahead, read the Bible. And if you already have, haven’t you yet noticed how almost everyone is identified not by his or her race, but by his or her national origin? The Good Book is generally colorblind, but to provide context, the key players are almost always identified by where they were from.
If it was important to God, it seemed important to our Founding Fathers. It should be equally important to the rest of us.
If a nation is going to long sustain itself, it must vigorously defend its language, borders and culture/heritage. If our nation is going to sustain itself beyond the “here and now,” we must do the same.
Those who would hamper those efforts aren’t our friends or allies — they are our enemies. With that in mind, maybe it’s time the rest of you finally saw the light with regard to Fox News and the Republican Establishment it represents. It’s time to have that awkward “talk” over a nice dinner that starts off with, “We need to talk,” and ends with, “It’s not you, it’s me.”
Except in this case, it’s not us. It’s them.
Bob Eschliman is an award-winning journalist who has been covering government and politics for 15 years.