A Matter of Qualifications
We are approaching the time when the noise will subside and the
serious business of evaluating the evidence against the president
will commence. Claims of a constitutional crisis notwithstanding,
those will be the moments when America's greatness rises to heights
beyond the imagination of an envious world.
Nothing must interfere with the integrity of those moments when
ordinary mortals are called upon to step into the shoes of America's
immortal founders. For it is in their capacity of elevating each
and every one of us that the founding principles, the founding documents,
bear witness to the success of self government.
Pollsters may continue to poll, pundits may continue to pund, but
it will be the members of the Judiciary Committee in the U.S. House
of Representatives who will bear the burden of setting the course.
So far as it is humanly possible, they must be free from interference,
free from external influence, free from internal conflict. They
must qualify so that they may have our unqualified trust.
Five members of the Judiciary Committee are listed on the Internet
as members of the so-called Progressive Caucus, a group of 58 U.S.
Representatives. The site itself belongs to the "Democratic
Socialists of America" - a contradiction in terms, of course,
since socialism and democracy do not mix, all rumors to the contrary
notwithstanding. They are Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI),
Barney Frank (D-MA), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Robert C. Scott (D-VA),
and Maxine Waters (D-CA).
The Democratic Socialists are "the principle U.S. affiliate
of the Socialist International." Their agenda is of the classic
socialist vintage: a world based not on law, not on principle, not
on morality, but on a series of unattainable goals defined in broad
and, in reality, meaningless terms. Each rationale begins with the
phrase, "We are socialists because..." The central tenets
(labeled "Campaign for Economic Justice") prescribe what
"corporations and the wealthy" must give up, and what
everybody else on the planet, as well as the planet itself, must
The Washington representative of DSA confirms that the "Campaign
for Economic Justice" is being pursued in collaboration with
the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Given the extensive information
the site offers about each member, and their adopted agenda, it
seems reasonable to assume that they have no quarrel with the listings
as they appear.
In a sense, credit is due to members of the Progressive Caucus
for disclosing their commitment. Their example should point the
way for countless others who continue to conceal their true political
colors. Why? After all, socialism is one of the only two major avenues
of interpreting the world and of charting the future - there is
nothing shameful about an honest belief that it is the better of
the two. And if constituents cast their votes in the full knowledge
of these members' beliefs, they have legitimate seats in the House
of the People.
But the application of the most complex duty that our Constitution
places upon the shoulders of representatives calls for men and women
who are firmly anchored in and unequivocally committed to its letter
and its spirit. Such men and women cannot have a score to settle
with society. Such men and women must not have succumbed to the
myth that the shortcomings in America's past somehow detract from
the phenomenal inspiration of those who, more than two centuries
ago, created the American miracle.
Such men and women cannot be hostage to socialism. The Constitution
of the United States and Socialism are on opposite sides.
Where America's founders provided for power to remain with The
People, socialism vests power in a ruling elite. Where America's
founders sought to form a more perfect Union, socialism advocates
diversity. Where America's founders sought to insure domestic Tranquility,
socialism thrives on discontent, leading to warfare between groups,
classes, sexes, races. Where America's founders sought to establish
Justice, socialism pursues "social justice" - which in
reality means doing away with the rule of law, again rumors to the
The rule of law is essentially neutral. That is what the blindfold
on the statue symbolizes. Socialism removes the blindfold and makes
law the servant of its political agenda. For socialists, every realm
of human activity, every function of the human brain carries a political
charge. Everything is placed in service of the agenda.
Does the House Committee on the Judiciary accommodate five socialists?
The members themselves ought to answer that question. If socialists
they are, their qualifications for the coming process are in doubt.
This has nothing to do with being duly elected members of Congress,
but everything to do with their real agenda. If they are not socialists,
they should have their names removed from the web site. And, since
"progressive" is often simply code for socialist, the
Caucus might consider a different designation.
In the meantime, the people of this country have much to be concerned
about. How do members function in a judiciary committee if their
sense of justice is informed by class warfare, as opposed to the
For that matter, how does the Democratic Party account for placing
the same members in the Constitution Subcommittee if, as it now
appears, they do not regard the Constitution as the Supreme Law
of the Land?