Erik Rush on Obama Administration Responses to Scandals "is Just Plain Desperate. It is the Desperation of Criminals." But Do Republicans Have the Guts to Impeach the First Black President?

Posted by Nicholas Stix

 

THE OTHER RUSH

Bringing Obama down: Race remains a factor

Exclusive: Erik Rush sees '1st black president' issue looming large in impeachment option

Published: 16 hours ago

WND

 

Erik Rush About | Email | Archive

 

Erik Rush is a columnist and author of sociopolitical fare. His latest book is "Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal - America's Racial Obsession." In 2007, he was the first to give national attention to the story of Sen. Barack Obama's ties to militant Chicago preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright, initiating a media feeding frenzy. Erik has appeared on Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes," CNN, and is a veteran of numerous radio appearances.

 

Among many things I discuss in my book "Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America's Racial Obsession" is the lack of accountability imposed and expected with regard to black Americans from the lowest to the highest stations. This is a device of the political left; in its inherent racism, it was only natural that liberals impart a lack of expectations for this "culturally inferior" segment of society. It also made blacks easier to manipulate as a group. Since blacks' socioeconomic progress had been stultified for so many years, the attendant propaganda was easier to sell to the public.

 

Thus, where blacks are concerned, Americans at large (and black Americans themselves) have been conditioned by politicos, activists and the media to overlook and even expect such things as high rates of poverty and crime, misfeasance in high places, nefarious tendencies, illegitimacy, and elements of general social instability and poor character. These expectations have been so thoroughly ingrained into our worldview that most Americans are not even cognizant of the fact that they have been so conditioned.

 

Given this prevailing perverted worldview amongst Americans, it is no surprise that one Barack Hussein Obama (or whatever his name truly is), having attained the office of president of the United States of America, expected to enjoy more latitude than his predecessors with regard to his actions. This was intensified by the fact that as the first black president, he immediately became an historic figure. Add to that the cult of inordinate deference and adulation promoted by various forms of media, and we had an individual with whom practically no one actually wanted to find fault.

So, in pursuing his diabolical Marxist agenda, Obama knew that he would be able to gain far more ground than a white individual with the same plan. He may not have known precisely how dedicated and effective the press would be, or how long Americans would remain asleep, but he and his Cabinet had a pretty good idea of how far they could go.

 

Or so one would think …

 

This year's summer blockbuster — a guide for Congress to draw up articles of impeachment — Aaron Klein's "Impeachable Offenses: The Case for Removing Barack Obama from Office"

 

Obama's political opponents – the GOP leadership – also knew that their more confrontational or controversial interactions with Obama would have to be handled with extra diplomacy for the reasons listed above. In analyzing Republican leaders' deportment with regard to this president, we must ask ourselves: How much of their reticence in holding Obama accountable was due to fear of political fallout? How much was due to their low expectations of Obama as a politician and a human being? How much may have been due to their approval of aspects of his agenda?

 

The impudence and tyranny of the Obama administration is indeed precedent-setting, as is the outrageousness and magnitude of the falsehoods it is willing to offer in defense of same. Claims that the Internal Revenue Service's singling out of conservative groups for inordinate scrutiny is not politically based is almost laughable, and akin to arguing that Jim Crow laws were not racially based. Singling out a political group because of its politics is politically based by definition. Press Secretary Jay Carney's charges that the Benghazi scandal is a Republican contrivance, and his comparison of the Associated Press leak investigation to "birther" conspiracy theories is just plain desperate.

 

It is the desperation of criminals.

 

The administration's ideology, though odious, is still not on trial – but its actions are. As a result of the inquiries focused on Benghazi, the IRS and the Associated Press, their abject criminality is what elements of the press and many Americans are beginning to perceive, even if they are late in so doing. These issues deepen and reveal more untoward goings-on daily; as I write this, evidence for at least three other potentially serious scandals has just broken the surface in the press.

 

Circumstances have indeed changed – but to what degree? Some recent polls demonstrate a startling percentage of people who believe Obama should be impeached, and it is safe to say that no past president would have survived the current spate of public indignities. Still, the final disposition comes down to this: Who in Congress wants to be known as having brought down America's first black president?

 

Suddenly, Obama's removal looks a lot less likely, yes?

 

Governing against the will of the people has been an increasing proclivity of lawmakers in Washington, regardless of party. So it is altogether possible that Congress will avoid initiating regime change for shallow and dangerous political reasons, even if a majority of Americans are clamoring for Obama's impeachment.

 

Our federal government has clearly grown increasingly corrupt, but this administration is one for the books. In the operative sense, ethnicity is irrelevant to Barack Obama having betrayed the trust of the American people. It is no consolation to me personally that I knew he would, and that the solemn responsibility of stewardship over this great nation was a joke to him from the start.

 

The question is: What are we going to do about it? Contrary to Marxists' rhetorical glorification of "the masses" (utilized only to manipulate them, naturally), historically the masses have never done anything. It is the inspiration and motivation of visionaries, whether individuals or small groups thereof, that initiates change in the world.

 

Evidently we need leaders, and they must be unifying ones. Though they will have to be followed with judicious discretion, we still have to identify them first – and we are running out of time.