"DRAWING A LINE IN THE SAND" A Four Part Essay
A continuing essay series examining the conflation of politics and religion.
“OP-ED: Praise Be to Politicians Who Swear on the Constitution—Not the Bible” by Brian Addison, July 17, 2014. LONG BEACH POST NEWS
“there was one common factor between almost all of the oaths of office taken that night. All of them were taken while the oath-taker placed their left hand on a Bible—except one.
Newly minted 3rd District Council member Suzie Price was the only elected official that night who swore on the document she was promising to uphold—the Constitution.”
For this essay I would like to draw your attention to a commentary penned by Kevin D. Roberts Ph.D. the president of the Heritage Foundation. The title of his piece is: America Must Reclaim What the Left Has Attempted to Destroy1 which was published this past July 25, 2023 at the think tank’s website.
Roberts, in my opinion, is arguably the premier thought leader of today’s movement-conservatism, especially in light of his position as it directly relates to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 and its steadily numerically increasing advisory board members.
It is a fairly long commentary at just over 2,800 words. It originally first appeared in the Heritage Foundation’s publication The Daily Signal (a Heritage Foundation multimedia news platform.)2
I for my part will be focusing on what I have determined to be the core claim that has Roberts up in arms and propagandistically-proselytizing his readers with a genuinely specious collection of arguments while at the same time hardening their minds against his avowed enemy—the Left; asserting to his audience that-
“Today, Americans are rising up; drawing a line in the sand; and telling those who every day expect to impose their will on us, on our families, on our children, that never—never—will they succeed.”
In lieu of critiquing the writing as a whole, mainly because I am not interested in validating what I already know to be a work steeped in sophism, I will simply focus on the commentary’s three stated “key takeaways” and each one’s immediate contexts. The first part of this essay will look at takeaway 1, after which the remaining two takeaways will follow in parts 2 and 3 with part 4 weaving together the sophistry and focusing on what it is that “the left has” allegedly “attempted to destroy.”
Key takeaway number 1.
Today, the nation is increasingly misgoverned, misled, and outright attacked by a ruling elite that does not want us to “keep” our republic.3
In the opening preceding context of this first quote Roberts begins setting the tone for his piece by referring to Independence Hall in Philadelphia. With his opening lines focused on three select abbreviated quotes of which the first two come from the first sentence of the second paragraph of the American Declaration of Independence, while his third choice is the opening words to the preamble of the Constitution of the United State of America.
History remembers Independence Hall for the grave, soul-stirring words written there:
“All men are created equal …”
“Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness …”
“We the people …”4
He then invokes a brief historical narrative that is well established in American history, but to be sure he presents his readers only with what will fit his sophistic goals,
But it is a pithier, sharper sentence spoken there that distills the challenge before America today. You’ve probably heard the story.
At the end of the Constitutional Convention, as delegates emerged from their secret deliberations, a Philadelphia woman—one “Mrs. Powell”—asked Pennsylvania delegate Benjamin Franklin what kind of government the convention had given them.
Franklin answered her: “A republic … if you can keep it.”
Franklin’s challenge feels so bracing still, two centuries later. Today, the nation is increasingly misgoverned, misled, and outright attacked by a ruling elite that does not want us to “keep” our republic.5
Right from the start of his commentary he has engaged in a distorting convolution of words. While it is true that Independence Hall was the location where two of America’s most important founding documents were signed the actual work of writing the Declaration started “On June 11, 1776,” where “[Thomas] Jefferson holed up in his Philadelphia boarding house…began to write”6 after he finished writing the document it was later adopted on July 4, 1776, while the Constitution itself was signed at Independence Hall on September 17, 1787, eleven years after the Declaration. The story of the Constitution’s birth especially in the light of its “secret deliberations” is actually quite interesting:
The Constitutional Convention assembled in Philadelphia in May of 1787. The delegates shuttered the windows of the State House and swore secrecy so they could speak freely. Although they had gathered to revise the Articles of Confederation, by mid-June they had decided to completely redesign the government. There was little agreement about what form it would take…
After three hot summer months of equally heated debate, the delegates appointed a Committee of Detail to put its decisions in writing. Near the end of the convention, a Committee of Style and Arrangement kneaded it into its final form, condensing 23 articles into seven in less than four days.
On September 17, 1787, 38 delegates signed the Constitution. George Reed signed for John Dickinson of Delaware, who was absent, bringing the total number of signatures to 39. It was an extraordinary achievement. Tasked with revising the existing government, the delegates came up with a completely new one. Wary about centralized power and loyal to their states, they created a powerful central government. Representing wildly different interests and views, they crafted compromises. It stands today as one of the longest-lived and most emulated constitutions in the world.7
So as can be seen Roberts is intertwining the histories of both the documents and their words, and to make matters continue to fit his sophistic endeavor he retells the story of Mrs. Powel and Franklin minus an important detail, as can be seen from the following excerpt from the Library of Congress:
In the aftermath of the violent events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, one year ago today, Senator Amy Klobuchar [D, Minnesota] and other federal legislators reminded us that we have “a republic,” but only “if you can keep it.”8
The source of this quotation is a journal kept by James McHenry (1753-1816) while he was a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention. On the page where McHenry records the events of the last day of the convention, September 18, 1787, he wrote: “A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy – A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.” Then McHenry added: “The Lady here alluded to was Mrs. Powel of Philada.” The journal is at the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress.9
For reasons unknown Roberts neglected to supply the whole exchange, perhaps he did not want to confuse his readers with the facts, namely that the Constitutional Convention chose a Republic over a Monarchy.
Here after telling the story is his first key takeaway, “the nation10 is increasingly misgoverned, misled, and outright attacked by a ruling elite that does not want us to “keep” our republic.” This then is how he follows up on the Franklin-Powel story by making baseless charges and then focusing on the idea of the American Republic.
To begin with Roberts provides no evidence or proof for his charges; he simply wants his readers to go along with him and agree that the current administration is in his opinion acting with intentional malice towards Americans, he wants his readers to think of left of center politicians as a “ruling elite” thereby conjuring an image of a monarchical government, and the reason that these so-called ruling elites are treating their constituents so poorly is because they apparently want to do away with the republic, notice the lack of capitalization. From my perspective it seems to me that Roberts is writing with the assumption that the majority of his audience will not focus on the minor details, probably because he knows that his status as a highly educated leader of a non-profit think tank will be viewed as meaning that he knows what he is talking about and should not be questioned.
This approach of creating the idea of an oppressed citizenry and the use of distortion represents a significant part of the far-right messaging apparatus that is filling the minds of MAGA minded citizens all over the country, and it is a serious problem. Roberts knows that in order for Republican candidates to win enough votes to implement their plans they will need as many votes as possible, even if it means manipulating average citizens with misinformation and writings and speeches that arouses their emotions and shuts down their thinking.
To wit by making his audience feel as though Democratic politicians are attempting to take away their voice by way of denying them a Republic (a country) that is governed by their chosen elected representatives and their chosen elected leader they will respond by fighting back with their votes against all things liberal.
What then is the American Republic as it is and was intended to be when the Founders crafted the Constitution? This will be the first thing discussed in part two of this essay where we will segue into our focus on key takeaway number two:
Human equality. God-given rights. These, America owes to the God of Abraham; the holy, heroic people of Israel; and the city of Jerusalem.11
Robert J. Rei, November 25, 2023
"There's only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self." -Aldous Huxley
"America Must Reclaim What the Left Has Attempted to Destroy” (COMMENTARY American History) Kevin D. Roberts, Ph.D. (President, Heritage Trustee since 2023), July 25, 2023, The Heritage Foundation, https://www.heritage.org/american-founders/commentary/america-must-reclaim-what-the-left-has-attempted-destroy,(This piece originally appeared in The Daily Signal, https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/07/20/reclaiming-our-inheritance-1776-fighting-liberty-truth-2020s)
See note 1; Also The Daily Signal as a Heritage Foundation multimedia news platform most definitely serves as a topic of interest when it comes to developing an understanding of far-right conservative messaging efforts and the online echo chambers that are created and sustained for the objectives and purposes of movement-conservatism’s cold civil war agendas, goals, and plans.
See note 1
Ibidem
Ibidem
“The Declaration of Independence: How Did it Happen?” National Archives, America's Founding Documents, (page was last reviewed on October 7, 2021), The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration/how-did-it-happen
“The Constitution: How Did it Happen?” National Archives, America's Founding Documents, (page was last reviewed on October 7, 2021), The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution/how-did-it-happen
“Klobuchar Leads Debate on Senate Floor to Respond to Baseless Objections to Certified Electoral Votes” (Speech given January 6, 2021 in the Senate shortly before protestors overran the Capital) United States Senator Amy Klobuchar “Working for the People of Minnesota”, January 7, 2021, https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/1/klobuchar-leads-debate-on-senate-floor-to-respond-to-baseless-objections-to-certified-electoral-votes. This speech truly qualifies as an important historic “defense of Arizona’s election results following an objection signed by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Representative Paul Gosar (R-AZ) and their colleagues.” I strongly recommend taking the time to read it, especially in hindsight of the insurrection that was underway just outside the Capital Building.
““A republic if you can keep it”: Elizabeth Willing Powel, Benjamin Franklin, and the James McHenry Journal” Julie Miller (Julie Miller is the curator of early American manuscripts in the Manuscript Division at the Library of Congress.), January 6, 2022, Library of Congress Blogs, Library of Congress, https://blogs.loc.gov/manuscripts/2022/01/a-republic-if-you-can-keep-it-elizabeth-willing-powel-benjamin-franklin-and-the-james-mchenry-journal/
I have previously discussed the use of the terms country as opposed to nation in the context of MAGA conceptual ideas of American polity. What follows is a note from my previous essay in which I discuss my reasons for making this observation:
I have intentionally opted to use the term “country” as opposed to the term “nation” specifically because a significant part of the underlying problems currently driving the obvious disunity in American views of polity reside in the conflicting uses of the two terms in question. MAGA conceptual ideas of American polity are driven by a near constant messaging emphasis on America as a “nation” that is/was culturally homogeneous by way of the erroneous, incorrect, and mistaken notion of the country as a Biblical Christian Society, whereas a modern liberal consensus understanding of America as a “country” rests firmly upon the founding of a new polity that elevated a multi-cultural democratic diversity of individuals who rejected British monarchical rule over the colonists of whom the then growing majority of the populace had been born and raised on the new continent; A new continent whose peoples had come to realize the grand ideals in the conception and implementation of the Magna Carta, during the course of the immediately preceding centuries, empowered them to reject the religiously supported practices of birth-right rulership that for centuries had disempowered them. Today’s MAGA rebellion movement is an attempt by extremely (obscenely) wealthy parties to maintain/regain unfettered control of the national economy in order to continue the spirit of greed in support of the ultimate bigotry of dominionist ideologically philosophized theologies; as represented by Christian nationalism.
See note 1
Brilliant, as usual.
Thank you for the scholarly elucidations. Please keep up the good work.
I have a feeling that few Americans have had an actual opportunity to study the underlying forces at work when the Constitution was created. Regurgitation of selected “salient facts” was more important as I recall. Thoughtful discussions were absent, or buried in dense required reading tomes with little or no time to digest them in the course syllabus time frames, or ignored. As busy adults with families there’s limited time to digest much more than skewed Cliff Notes versions, like those promulgated by the Heritage Foundation leadership under the color of “we’re in this together.” The people are uneducated, not dumb. Counterpoints and clarifications like you are creating is needed.
Self interested lawyers, and the courts and SCOTUS have perverted and obfuscated its roots with legal parsing and hair splitting arguments over decades to the point that it’s hard to recognize the original thrusts. Sadly, Leonard Leo and his FEDSOC minions are perverting it further with unchallenged “originalist interpretations” muddled with dominionism as if religion was and remains the driving force underlying American democracy, merely because they gerrymandered the electorate to the point that the electees no longer represent the majority.
Again, perhaps an outline can lead to a digestible elevator speech presentation. It’s necessary.