By Ted Lang
web
posted April 29, 2002
The seemingly imminent implosion after eight years of the vacuous, destructive and immoral Clinton regime has afforded anyone of either party the opportunity to return to the American people a resounding assurance of the legitimacy of American government. The golden baton of opportunity has been relayed to the Republican Party and its leader, George W. Bush.
This nation was founded upon that most virgin of intellectual terra firma; pure, unbiased reasoning unfettered by monetary or political advantage. Those considered as infallible leaders and champions of this unimpeachable founding philosophy, when confronted with the worldly, secular, opiate of entrusted power, often regress and yield to the seduction of political expediency. Such has been the case with respect to that greatest of American patriots, George Washington, when given the power to quell the Whiskey Rebellion. Such has been the case also with another great Founder, Thomas Jefferson, regarding his actions in terms of the Louisiana Purchase and imperialistic incursions involving North Africa.
Words publicly expressed often affirm a bloated ego or belie commitment to our Founding in terms of overt actions undertaken sacrificially for expediency. Thus Washington, in spite of demonstrating some human weakness, displayed that most courageous and selfless of actions in declining the opportunity to be king.
Eight years of Clinton have brought this eternal confrontation into the sharpest of public focus. For it was a most pronounced regression to worldly, secular, hedonism and wealth-establishing treason that characterized those most devastating years sacrificing the primary objectives of our limited government republic.
Into
this chasm of godlessness and morality lost, marches our new political
savior, Mr. Bush. We are urged by those counting on his character and
his understanding of our political heritage, that he is merely biding
time and strategizing his posture to set things right.
Those of us in the minority hoping and praying for deliverance are beginning to discount that any form of traumatic implosion will occur, and as time progresses and George W. Bush and his administration posture themselves relative to their priorities, hope is waning. Some, such as Chuck Baldwin, in his April 12th Food for Thought vehicle, asked the question: Is Bush the Antichrist?
In his piece, Dr. Baldwin offers: "During the eight years of Clinton's presidency, I was repeatedly asked, 'Chuck, do you think Bill Clinton is the antichrist?' (Of course I answered no.) Therefore, it is more than interesting to me that since G.W. Bush became president no one has asked if I thought he was the antichrist. Not one single person! Instead, many people attribute to Bush god-like qualities, which actually makes him a better candidate than Clinton was. You see, one of the chief characteristics of the coming antichrist is that he appears 'as an angel of light.' Therefore, an obvious reprobate such as Bill Clinton is immediately disqualified."
Offering an opposite point of view, Joan Nagy in her March 29th piece on NewsMax.com entitled, "George W. Bush, Dumb Like a Fox," presents the "wait-and-see" approach offering a comparison of Bush's political methods to the successful political wiles of Germany's Otto von Bismarck. Nagy offers: "Bush is fighting a war against the liberal media, who think themselves superior to him, and the liberal interest groups, who hate Bush because they can't get over the fact that they didn't steal enough votes to get Gore into the White house."
Nagy continues: "Yet we insist that Bush be free of guile at all times, or else we accuse him of abandoning his conservative roots. Unshackle Bush's cunning. Don't beat him over his head with conservative virtue. His arena is politics; let him be political. You've voted for him, now trust him."
Baldwin proceeds in his article to list expediency after expediency undertaken by Bush, likening his actions to those of Clinton's, yet pointing out the more effective and successful efforts of the former. Reference is made to homosexuals in government, legalization of embryonic stem cell research, support for the creation of a Palestinian state, opening borders to illegal aliens, etc.
These are both sides of a guessing game, and either view could be the right one.
The law of the land places restrictions on government ensuring the sanctity
of Man. As such, it saves us from agonizing over whether a single, solitary
individual need be assessed as to his moral or intellectual capacity as
regards his qualifications for office, and not as regards his ability
to rule. Should we choose to regress to the latter evaluation, then we
need for Mr. Bush to proclaim himself king. 
(c) Theodore E. Lang. All rights reserved.
 Printer friendly version |
|