By DEXTER DUGGAN
Sometimes people talk about the “political roadmap,” but politics and a roadmap may be polar opposites.
The straightforward map shows the plain paths to get you from one city to another. No emotion and no deceit involved. It’s like being a math major in school. (Unless you’re not good at math and suffer emotionally over it.)
Politics, on the other hand, maybe doesn’t even want you to get where you want to go. You think you want Key West, Fla., as the destination, but if you really knew what’s good for you, as decided by Washington, D.C., you’d want to choose Boston. It’s like being a psychology major.
And if the political plotter can keep you driving in circles long enough, maybe you’ll even think private car ownership is too troublesome and decide that he should take over the steering wheel and expand mass-transit spending.
Certainly Barack Obama wasn’t elected by being frank about his ever-amazing agenda, from throwing open the border to throwing open bathroom stalls. Let’s give Obama an honorary A.R.C. degree, for Accomplished Ringmaster of Chaos.
And when Hillary Clinton boasts of her goal of something like ever-increasing permissive abortion, her news-media acolytes know this wouldn’t be popular with most voters, so they keep it muted in the background.
It’s not as if the dominantly leftist media are out to destroy Hillary, as they are Donald Trump with his every breath.
And what about Trump? He bluntly laid out goals hated by the elite but popular enough with voters to win him one primary plurality after another. No secrecy there.
The continuing question is whether he can be counted on to stay true to them. That’s, for instance, why he had to issue a list of potential justices he’d appoint to the Supreme Court. It turned out the names were encouraging. But would he deliver the good things when the time came?
Consider the case of North Carolina Republican Cong. Renee Ellmers, strongly opposed by conservatives as having betrayed her alleged conservative principles once she got into the Washington crowd.
Ellmers was in a tough primary-election race this year when Trump jumped in with his personal robocall endorsement shortly before the June 7 vote. Trump didn’t do her any good, however, because Ellmers still went down to resounding defeat.
Trump didn’t do himself any good, either, showing that his bigger-than-life bluster couldn’t pull her over the finish line, not at all. Trump thereby raised still more doubt about his political allegiances and judgment.
A June 5 post by Daniel Horowitz at the Conservative Review site noted that Trump stayed away from GOP primary contests where he could have made a positive difference for conservatives. But he jumped right in for Ellmers, even though he used typical Washington duplicity to misrepresent her record — claiming, for instance, that she was tough on border issues.
Wrote Horowitz: “Whether it’s opposing her state’s marriage amendment, fighting against pro-life legislation, or voting to support Obama’s amnesty even for convicted child molesters, Ellmers was always with the far left.”
As for the excuse that Trump’s endorsement was only returning the favor because Ellmers had backed his presidential candidacy, this appears to mean that Trump plays by the same back-scratching, sell-out politics as the rest of the establishment. This isn’t the way to shake things up that Trump’s supporters demand.
On June 7, basically conservative syndicated columnist Debra Saunders posted that she still wasn’t boarding the Trump train, but she wasn’t refusing the possibility. With Hillary and The Donald as the distasteful but probable big-party foes this November, “I’ll give Trump time to improve or implode. And then I will decide,” Saunders wrote.
The problem is, we’re being allowed to decide less and less while ever-expanding government decides more and more. Not around the edges of life, but at its core.
How much of a difference does even a defiant-sounding Manhattan billionaire intend to make as the world is turned upside down around us — from the lavatory to the laboratory?
Shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 invented and imposed on the nation the previously unknown constitutional right to permissive abortion throughout pregnancy, pro-lifers read about some medical research that already was possible elsewhere. The severed heads of aborted babies, a medical article said, were being used in carotid-artery research.
Planned Parenthood and baby-parts procurement specialists these days, who demand a constant supply of innocent flesh, are only carrying on a decades-old tradition of dissecting the victimized bodies of the defenseless. As Dr. Josef Mengele would have said, the intention is good, and the bodies would be wasted otherwise.
It seems the surprises never end in an ethically battered U.S. whose “science” increasingly appears a reflection of the compromised medical and legal professions in National Socialist Germany.
Introducing human cells into lab animals to produce “chimeras” isn’t even new, but moves ahead to further frontiers.
On June 6 the UK Guardian posted that researchers at the University of California, Davis, “trying to grow human organs inside pigs in an attempt to tackle a shortage of donors, have successfully created part-human, part-pig embryos.”
Even the National Institutes of Health last year said it wouldn’t back research into these chimeras until it knew more about the implications, the story said.
“It cited fears that the presence of human cells could affect the animal’s brain and behavior, potentially making it more human,” the Guardian said. “Prof. Pablo Ross, the reproductive biologist leading the research, sought to calm those fears, saying there was a ‘very low potential for a human brain to grow’.”
Not “impossible.” Not “out of the question.” Just a very low potential.
Like, maybe to a researcher in the 1850s, it would have seemed a very small possibility that science ever could make flying machines weighing up to hundreds of tons routinely soaring through the upper atmosphere for thousands of miles, at hundreds of miles per hour?
At least, research into achieving the ancient dream of flight wasn’t morally compromised, as creating human-animal chimeras is.
The Guardian story quoted a geneticist: “The whole idea of making chimeras, mixing different animal species or human-animal, has been around for decades.”
As Germany’s National Socialist doctors of death were having their own experimentation forcibly shut down in 1945, Christian writer C.S. Lewis published a science-fiction novel, That Hideous Strength, featuring a British National Institute of Coordinated Experiments (N.I.C.E., of course) that did unthinkable things.
Eight years ago, in 2008, Hilary White wrote a commentary for LifeSiteNews.com recalling that “the ironically acronymed N.I.C.E. takes over Britain and attempts to create an anti-human totalitarianism in which human rights are abolished and people are used as disposable tools in medical and social experiments.
“The guiding principles of Lewis’ N.I.C.E.,” White added, “are immediately familiar to people on the pro-life side of our current Culture Wars: a mechanistic and ultra-utilitarian, anti-life philosophy that regards human beings as merely a disposable means to an end….
“Over 60 years after Lewis warned what might be the outcome of an overweening anti-Christian materialist philosophy, combined with the union of state, industry, and academia, and the manipulation of the mass media, reality is coming increasingly to resemble fiction,” she wrote.
And even more so eight years later, after the world’s still-most-powerful nation has suffered under the whip of immoralist-in-chief Obama.
A Force Of Nature
When The Wanderer asked a strong Trump supporter how he thought the presidential campaign season was going, he likened Trump to a force of nature, like El Nino, which disrupts weather patterns.
A.J. LaFaro, the immediate past chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Party, headquartered in Phoenix, said in a June 5 email:
“ ‘Political global warming’ is occurring everywhere. The people and crowds are becoming more heated and violent, caused in part by the ‘political climate change’ created by the inaccurate, biased, and unfair reporting of the news and social media. And let’s not forget Donald Trump — the Republican Party’s ‘political El Nino.’
“El Nino is characterized by unusually warm ocean waters, and this is one of the strongest El Ninos Republicans have had dating back to the late 1970s. Trump has definitely heated and stirred up the GOP,” LaFaro continued.
“The 2016 U.S. presidential election cycle, America’s ‘political hurricane,’ has caused a great deal of irreparable harm and destruction so far, and will cause a great deal more as it moves out of the eye toward the November election,” he said.
“Will we be able to recover, rebuild, and make America great again? Only time will tell.”
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress