In the wake of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s bombshell report regarding former U.S. President Barrack Hussein Obama’s traitorous actions against the United States of America and its citizens, there are many voices calling for some kind of serious and real accountability. But in the absence of any such accountability over past political actions that were demonstrably harmful and destructive to the lives of Americans, it is understandable that many remain skeptical about such a possibility.
But the elusiveness of achieving ‘accountability’ in government may be the consequence of deeper forces beyond any individual’s direct control. Unfortunately, in a democracy governed with the ‘consent of the governed,’ the difficulty in holding individual politicians ‘accountable’ for their political actions is an unavoidable part of the democratic process itself. After all, the usual way for politicians to be held ‘accountable’ for their political shortcomings has simply been by losing elections.
So maybe the real story here is not just about Obama’s traitorous actions, but also about how and why so many Americans – supposedly citizens of a free society – either could not see Obama’s anti-Americanism, or worse, openly supported it. So who’s really accountable?
When Obama first became president in 2008, it was glaringly clear that he was no friend of America. Calling upon Americans to “summon a new spirit of service,” his collectivist philosophy became much more explicit in his second term, when during his January 2013 inaugural speech he announced that “preserving our individual freedom requires collective action.”
It was a horrific contradiction, softened by Obama’s promise that “while the means will change, our purpose endures. When times change, so must we.” Promising “new responses” to America’s increasing poverty (ironically under Democrat rule), to discover today in 2025 that Obama’s conspiratorial actions transcended criminal boundaries should come as little surprise.
Perhaps it is time to re-evaluate not only Obama’s traitorous actions, but also his traitorous ideology, which to the philosophically aware was clear from the very first day he stepped on to the American political stage. Yet, Americans not only cheered and applauded him, but re-elected him to a second term of dysfunctional and dystopian state rule.
So the question must again be asked: To what extent can voters themselves be held accountable for the destructive governments they elect, and how would that accountability be enforced?
Many might answer that the poverty and dystopian conditions citizens are forced to endure is itself their punishment for voting irresponsibly. “That’s democracy.” It may be ‘democracy,’ but it’s not ‘accountability,’ since real accountability would prevent an offender from repeating his/her unaccountable actions without end. “Democracy” offers no such protections.
That Obama should be held accountable for his demonstrably traitorous actions – in a court of law, not a court of public opinion – is a completely justifiable position. The real tragedy is that things ever got to this point. In a free democracy, it is the voters’ responsibility to prevent such tragedies.
This requires a philosophical alignment with the principles of the Right. Because without a grounded philosophical understanding that is Just Right, citizens of a free nation will always be at risk of failing to identify the enemies in their midst.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.