But President Obama is not incompetent. How can he be incompetent when his own agenda is moving along swimmingly? What conservatives view as one scandal after another is but one step after the other in the President’s remake of America.
In spite of the recent victory of religious conservatives in the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby ruling, progressives (that is, liberals who are trying to adopt a more acceptable name) are still winning most of the policy battles, thanks to lower courts and the president’s pen.
There are two policy battlefields in particular that illustrate the President’s competence and success. On one of them — illegal immigration — he has been actively inactive. On the other — same sex marriage — he has been more direct and involved. Both of these battlefields are deemed pivotal by the president.
It is a weak nation that cannot protect its borders. It’s an even weaker one that has the ability but not the will to do so. There is another way beside weak or not weak, however, to view President Obama’s lack of leadership on illegal immigration.
For instance, is the pouring of children across our southern border —without a word from the president — a sign of incompetence and weakness or a sign of precise intentions on his part? The answer is his silence is thunderous. It is evidence he is achieving what he set out to achieve, namely a transformed America. With nary a word of serious, coherent outrage from the opposition, we might add.
In fairness to the president, he did say something last week about the Central America Children’s Crusades. He stated that immigration is part of America’s DNA. There should be no doubt about the meaning or purpose of that remark. Its meaning is “I have a chair and I will park myself in it and ignore illegal immigration.” Its purpose was to show his base and the rest of us that his game plan for remaking America is still on.
But as one movie ad puts it, “To remake America, you must first unmake America.” Given Obamacare, immigration inaction and the president’s change of heart on same sex marriage, the unmaking and r-making are in full swing. Coupled with his concurrent lack of leadership on the VA and IRS scandals, it’s clear that the inaction is intentional.
Yes, the president means business, and Congressional leaders are re-acting like Neville Chamberlain instead of Patrick Henry. Progressives view the children’s crusades in humanitarian terms only. Ignoring the practical concerns of disease, potential terrorism, and the economic impact on border towns and counties, progressives advance the President’s remake.
A more internal remake is the rapid redefining of marriage and its effect on the traditional role of families. Like Hillary Clinton, Mr. Obama has made a complete turn on same sex marriage. His flip-flop can probably be attributed to his supposed political capital got by virtue of his re-election.
The president and same sex marriage proponents still need to answer a couple of questions. One is how can you deny same sex marriage will lead to clamor for all kinds of “marriage” arrangements. If a man can love and marry another man, is it as great a leap for him to love and marry three women? At the very least, such a polygamous arrangement would not defy nature or biology as does same sex marriage.
Does anyone think there are no polygamy proponents standing in line to receive their “marriage equality” as well? I have a young libertine friend who is both playful and serious about the matter, awaiting his turn to marry multiple women with the government’s blessing.
Illegal immigration leads to nations within a nation, to “ethnos rising against ethnos,” to unassimilated pockets of citizens, to an underclass that could have been avoided. It constitutes remake from the outside.
Redefining marriage leads to familial confusion that tears at the very fabric of “home,” and safe haven — psychological as well as physical — for children. It constitutes remake from within.
We should expect the occasional speech from the president that sounds like a moderation of his transformational agenda, but beware: socialist/collectivist strategy has always been to take two steps forward and one step back, advancing all the while.
2016 will tell the tale. If Americans prefer to reclaim the ideas and policies that brought them to unprecedented freedom, opportunity, and social stability, we will know it. If they prefer that the transformation continue, we will know that as well.
Roger Hines is a retired high school English teacher in Kennesaw.