The gang that couldn't shoot straight...again

Forty-eight years ago a comedy movie about the mafia was made. It was called, "The gang that couldn't shoot straight" (aka The Gang). It was panned by movie critics as well as the mafia that didn't much care for the film's portrayal of real-life mafia gangster, Joe Gallo. I think that enough time has passed and that our memory of this stinker has faded so that the movie can be re-made, this time with a different role for loudmouth Liberal Robert DeNiro. Before we go on to the new plot, have a look at the colorful names of the cast of characters of The Gang: Kid Sally, Big Momma, Big Jelly, Beppo, Water Buffalo and Shots O'Toole. One can only marvel at the screenwriter's creativity - not seriously. Here's the new plot... It's all about the corrupt media and how they plan to take over the country, but first they have to remove the only thing standing in their way - a multi-billionaire real estate mogul who has become President. They are conspirators in perhaps the biggest heist since the Lufthansa robbery at JFK Airport in 1978 (yes, Robert DeNiro was also in the movie that 'immortalized' that heist, 'Goodfellas'). The media villains in the remake chose media assassination instead of physical assassination to accomplish their goal of taking over the hearts and minds of the country. In short, they collude in a massive smear campaign to get the President to step down. (Any similarity to the current situation unfolding as a result of the 'Mueller Investigation' and the last three years of media bias-assassination is purely coincidental - my lawyers made me say that).

Okay, now to the principal shooting sites. Where else can they be except for the Big Apple (NYC) and the Rotten Apple (DC)? The principal characters are, in no special order, the major news and cable networks, the owners of the New York Times and Washington Post AND the CEOs of Facebook, Twitter and Google. All have agreed to play themselves as their egos could not handle some actor actually representing them.

A 'B' list of characters includes two top former intelligence agency heads and a number of once-vaunted reporters (think Woodward and Bernstein) and 'opinion-makers' like media pundits (think Maddow, Matthews, Lemon, Veshi, et. al). To this, add assorted Democratic Party hacks (think Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, Jerry Nadler and all the Democrat candidates for President) and then throw in a couple totally certifiable types for seasoning (think Maxine Waters and Al Green for example) and the hosts of the major late-night shows. Now THAT'S entertainment!

It's 2016, and the movie opens with a boomed camera wide shot of a massive table where at least fifty people are seated. The lighting is dim and ominous music is being played. The camera pans over to a huge 20-foot tall projector screen on which is a menacing image of the President of the United States (think Donald Trump). The doors to an ante-room open, slowly, and in walks DeNiro (who is playing the central character, I.M. Muerto, who secretly owns controlling interest in all the major networks as well as the Times and The Post). He is accompanied by three men who no one but Muerto knows or recognizes. They are actually top echelon officials from the SVR - the intelligence agency that is concerned with the collection of intelligence outside the Commonwealth of Independent States, the G.U. - the intelligence service of the Russian armed forces and the FSB - counter-intelligence agency that reports directly to the President of Russia. 

Muerto sits down and pours himself a large vodka and offers the bottle to the three who gladly serve themselves. He then stands, looks out at the people around the table and screams, "I'm mad as Hell and I'm not going to take it anymore." He then chuckles to himself and says, "That was from 'Network,' one of my favorite movies. Believe me, that was tame compared to how we are going to make Americans feel about their President. When we're done with him, he'll wish he'd never been born," and slams his fist on the table for emphasis.

The plot thickens, and more twists and turns and new characters are added, like the Director and Deputy Director of the FBI and the heads of renegade DC companies (think Fusion GPS).

DeNiro hopes that this movie will bring him the adulation he craves and another 'Best Actor' nomination for his portrayal of I.M. Muerto (he's tired of doing stupid movies like 'Meet the Fockers' and wants some respect). Personally, I think America is ready for this re-make of 'The gang that couldn't shoot straight' especially now that we don't have the Mueller Investigation to occupy our every waking minute. I'm only sorry that the producer (think Rob Reiner) rejected Alec Baldwin for the part of the President. He would have been great, but I'm sure that Anthony Hopkins will class up the scenes and give it a British 'bump' that should sell some tickets in the U.K. (God knows they need the diversion given all their Brexit problems).  

Stephan Helgesen is a former career U.S. diplomat who lived and worked in thirty different countries, specializing in export promotion. He is now a political analyst and strategist and author of nine books and over 1,000 articles on politics, the economy and social trends. He can be reached at: stephan@stephanhelgesen.com

Who's the real adult in the room...or voting booth?

The Democrats just can't stop trying to force open the back door to America's voting booths. Their recent suggestions about lowering the voting age to sixteen is just the next predictable step in their efforts to pack the ballot box and stack the vote in their favor. It was July of 1971 when President Richard Nixon certified the 26th Amendment to the Constitution giving 18 year-olds the right to vote. The Amendment was necessary because Oregon and Texas had challenged the constitutionality of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that gave 18 year-olds that right. Looking back, there was a compelling argument for lowering the age: if young men could be drafted at 18 and be sent to war then it was only fair that they could also vote.

The Constitution didn't make any provision for an official voting age, so from 1787-1870 it was basically up to the states to decide who should or shouldn't vote. There are three Amendments  to the Constitution that deal with voting: the 15th 19th and 26th, and lowering the age to 16 would require a new Amendment just as it did in 1971. But that begs several questions about voting in general. Why do we allow people to vote in the first place? Because we believe that people should have the right to influence the laws that affect them and because we're a constitutional republic that sends representatives to Washington to make the laws that affect us and that the citizenry should be allowed to cast votes for them.

Without spending too much time in ancient U.S. voting history, we have always had a lively discussion about who should be able to vote. There's the 'only property owners' argument that basically says that only those who have an investment (property) in America should be able to vote, the thought being that only those with something to lose should be allowed to protect it. Contrast that with the argument popular in some liberal circles today that everyone (even illegal aliens and those who are living here legally but are not citizens) should have the right to vote and you can see that voting still is a volatile issue.

What should the legal age of adulthood be and should it be the same as the legal voting age?

THAT'S the $64,000 question. The 'National Minimum Age Drinking Act of 1984' makes it unlawful for persons under the age of 21 to purchase alcohol, but if you're 18 (the age of 'majority') you can be drafted into the military. At 18 you can also sign a legally binding contract (in most states) and get married (or divorced), but there are exceptions. AND you can vote in local and national elections. At the age of 16, you're considered a minor - a child - not having achieved 'majority.' You can't sign a binding contract, be drafted, drink alcohol, or get married on your own without parental consent. Why, then, should 16 year-olds be allowed to vote when society says they're not ready to be regarded as adults who can be solely responsible for their own actions?

The short answer is that the Democrats want more voters and they know that younger voters will vote their way. Two-thirds of 18-29 year-olds voted for the Democrats in the 2018 midterm elections. Only 32% voted for Republican candidates. This is the largest voting gap in the last 25 years, but while the Democrats won the younger vote, they lost the over-45 vote. That says it all. To win future elections will either require more over-45 voters voting Democratic (or hope that many of them who would vote Republican will die) or Dems must stimulate a larger youth voter turnout (or gain more voters if the voting age is lowered to 16).

This is part of the Dems' voter demographic strategy that includes absolving illegal aliens of their crime of entering the U.S. (amnesty) AND then registering them to vote. Should this happen, Republicans would suffer a haymaker to the voter solar plexus: illegal aliens would be allowed to vote PLUS their children would be allowed to vote, too! We all know that those new 16 year-old newly-amnestytized voters would be voting Democrat because their parents will and because the Democrats have historically been perceived as the party of the 'little guy', the downtrodden, the persecuted.No matter that the Democrats' voting record on civil rights legislation has been a blemish on their party. For most people that's ancient history and water over the dam - and long forgotten.

I don't know about you, but I remember what my sixteenth and seventeenth years were like. Politics and civic responsibility weren't even in the footnotes of my teenage lexicon. Had I been able to vote then (in 1960) I probably would have voted for the 'cool' guy, John F. Kennedy. He had the looks, the girl and the money - the political candidate's trifecta. While those things qualified him for celebritydom, I'm pretty sure that nobody should have voted for him because of them. Seen in the rear-view mirror of my life, I'm really glad that my government said that while it valued my opinion I should really keep it to myself and let it ferment a little until I reached the age of reason. Matter of fact, considering how high school and college-age students are acting today, we might even want to consider returning the age to 21. It's just a thought.

Stephan Helgesen is a former career U.S. diplomat who lived and worked in thirty different countries, specializing in export promotion. He is now a political analyst and strategist and author of nine books and over 1,000 articles on politics, the economy and social trends. He can be reached at: stephan@stephanhelgesen.com

The ultimate weapon of mass destruction: The Democrats

The Mueller Report or "How we managed to survive the DC smoke and mirrors machine" has dropped...with a thud. All the media had their say late on Friday, totally bereft of any hard information whatsoever. It is amazing. To paraphrase Churchill, "never have so many said so much about so little" for over two years. We have witnessed the Left salivate from the starting gate in 2016 and nearly wet themselves when the thought of toppling the Kremlin puppet Donald Trumpski and his band of merry Cossacks danced in their heads. After all, THIS was going to be the smoking gun that would show once and for all that Donald J. was in bed with Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin (what a terrible image that is) and that an entirely new supermax prison would have to be built to hold all the indictees that Robert Mueller would finger for their Russianizing.

Mueller did snag a few smelt in the net he set for the big fish, but they were for what the Feds call, 'process crimes.' None of them had so much slurped a bowl of borscht. Their crimes were unrelated to Mueller's charge of uncovering Reds under the President's bed or in his campaign. Nyet. Empty handed there, though he did snare Paul (the Ukraine lover) Manafort and Roger (the dandy) Stone and George (but I'm innocent, I tell ya) Papadopoulos along with sixteen Russians who will never answer their subpeonas and leave their dachas to darken our doorstep. Double nyet.

Not all of us are waiting for something more. We're dead tired of all of this. The great Democrat weapon of mass destruction is not waiting, however. Democrat Congressman and Chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff of California is not waiting. Like the Blues Brothers, he's on a mission from God to show the world that the U.S.A. has been under bogus management for over two years by a direct descendent of Rasputin. HE will not let go no matter what stubborn facts stand in his way. And he is not alone. The Democrat villagers have their pitchforks and torches at the ready. If need be they will turn on Mr. Mueller and burn him at the stake in Lafayette Park as they scale the fence around the White House to capture the 'traitor-in-chief.'

If all this sounds a bit too dramatic, it's not. It is however, made for TV, and TV is where we've all viewed the sordid rollout of hanging-level information. We've been living in a drip, drip, drip world of selective leaks, political grandstanding, false accusations and media madness that started with the phony 'Steele Dossier' that the mainstream media bought, hook line and sinker along with their co-conspirators over at the Justice Department. What a sterling cast of thespians this play of fools has attracted! From the denizens of the Deep State, to the FBI to former intelligence agency bobbleheads masquerading as political commentators on MSNBC and CNN, the stage is literally packed. 

This scandal had everything, totally worthy of a 'Made in USA' label. Friends, when we scandal in America, we scandal BIG. After all, if you're going there you might as well rope in every gullible sap on the Left you can convince to carry the tainted water. Adam Schiff is busy humming Fagin's "I'm reviewing the situation" while he irons his white robe, dusts off his blindfold (the one with the see-through holes), sharpens up his sword and rigs his scales for his debut as Lady Justice, post Mueller report. He has already written the script for the Capitol Hill docudrama, 'Reds and Feds.' It is bold - Mount Olympus bold - and heroic. He's also made sure there are parts for his committee co-crusaders from California: Rep. Jackie Speier and Rep. Eric Swalwell and others.

Yes, America, there is a Santa Claus and he is Donald Trump. Without him there would be no presents under the Democrats' tree and no earthly reason for them to engage him in a pitched battle for the high ground using their most dangerous weapon of mass destruction - their arrogance-fueled animosity, their disregard for the good of the country and their Chatty Cathy flapping gums. Now that the pre-game entertainment of the Mueller Flying Circus is over, the real game can begin. God help us all.

Stephan Helgesen is a former career U.S. diplomat who lived and worked in thirty different countries, specializing in export promotion. He is now a political analyst and strategist and author of nine books and over 1,000 articles on politics, the economy and social trends. He can be reached at: stephan@stephanhelgesen.com or at his Republican Action Website www.projectpushback.com

Are Republicans living in a dream world?

While the Democrats are busy recruiting a million new voters to beat President Trump in 2020 are Republicans living in a state of denial about America's ability to survive the onslaught of challenges from the Left?

Those of us who know that anything is possible also know that even a country like ours that has withstood attacks from tyranny and terror cannot remain free if good men and women do not defend it from assaults from within. We cannot live our lives in an insulated protective cocoon, watching Lawrence Welk and reruns of old 1950s sitcoms, pretending that nothing could ever turn our proud country into a faint memory of greatness.

Democrats are convinced that the America of the past is nothing but an empty shell of make-believe and doesn't reflect reality, and that those of us that cling to its core values of honesty, hard work and patriotism are fools living in a fools' paradise. The political Left is also convinced that the only way to save our village is to destroy it, and they are dedicated to its destruction by attacking our institutions and values. What other reason could there be for constantly marginalizing conservative thought, infecting us with identity politics and accusing us of being racists with little or no sensitivity to the weakest in our society?

Their war against life in the womb and repeated attempts to 'help' us end our lives by assisted suicide are but two of their attempts to de-personalize human beings. Decriminalizing drugs is another of their pursuits. They hope to turn the issue of drug addiction on its head while ignoring the hundreds of thousands of people suffering death-by-pusher each year. Legalizing drugs is not the answer to stopping drug abuse. Their newest attack is leveled at our independent judiciary as several of their leaders are now suggesting that our Supreme Court be turned into a political body!

Our country barely survived the last Presidential election. Had the loser won she would have surely guaranteed the country a long but steady decline of our economy and a return to the nanny state of excessive government control. We came close, perilously close to losing our basic freedoms, but if you think that we 'dodged a bullet' for good, you are ignoring a sobering reality. The reality I speak of is the steady march of Progressivism. Progressives are like fire ants that have an insatiable appetite and when smelling a food source will do anything and sacrifice any of their number to reach it. Progressives' food source is power. However, unlike the fire ants that will stop once they reach the food source, Progressives won't. To them power is everything. It is not an end, but a means to achieve their objectives of total hegemony over everything that has made America the envy of the world.

Their journey is a perverse one. They insist on creating equality and a level playing field even if our biology cannot accommodate it. They do not understand one of the basic tenets of life...that while we are all created equal, we are not endowed with the same abilities or talents, and no matter what is done, some of us will fail. To ignore that fact is to ignore human nature. Progressives will not stop at trying to revise and rewrite our history. Now they want us to redress the wrongs of our ancestors by paying reparations to the descendents of slaves brought to this country 300 years ago. It is futile to argue with them about the merits of this and other issues because their standard response is that we are racists - bigots with original sin that can never be washed away. We Conservatives have only a few options at our disposal  if we truly want to defend our liberties from a Progressive takeover in 2020. The first one is to wake up from our self-induced dream. The second is to channel the fervor of the Minutemen of the 18th century and push back...together. 

  

Stephan Helgesen is a former career U.S. diplomat who lived and worked in thirty different countries, specializing in export promotion. He is now a political analyst and strategist and author of nine books and over 1,000 articles on politics, the economy and social trends. He can be reached at: stephan@stephanhelgesen.com

Flintlock to gridlock

One hundred and fifty-six years ago our country was plunged into a Civil War which claimed the lives of 620,000 American souls in the Union North and in the Confederate South. Slavery and the economy were the principal reasons, but so was a sharply divided American society. This cultural division was rooted in the desire on the part of the South to maintain the status quo and in the North to upend it (except for those truly wealthy power-brokers that wished to maintain it there, too).

America's future hung suspended for four long agonizing years. The same was true of her economy and balance of power. It was commonly thought at the time that the country could never recover from a Confederate or Union-led government. If the South won, the way of life in the North would be destroyed, and if the North won, the South would cease to exist. So split were the feelings of traditional, rural, agriculture-based America towards the 'barons of industry' in the North. There was no room for compromise, though many tried before the first shots were fired at the Battle of Fort Sumter on April 12th of 1861. There was no going back. There would only be carnage until 1865.

This is what happens when people are hopelessly deadlocked and give up trying to iron out their differences. We often forget that the worst can always happen and that which we are trying to preserve can disappear, quickly and without warning. These many years later we find ourselves living in the nuclear age where a 620,000 death toll that took four years to accumulate then can be accomplished in a matter of minutes, now. Our politicians are huddled at the farthest reaches of their parties, never venturing forth into neutral territory to even consider each other's ideas or proposals. Gridlock is the new flintlock. Intransigence and the policy of personal destruction have replaced discourse.

People today say that America could never again experience another civil war, that we have become too civilized and wouldn't dream of taking up arms against our brothers and sisters. In my heart of hearts I believe that they're right. Unfortunately, there exists the real and present danger of a major breakdown in law and order accompanied by a shrill vocal opposition to our government's policies. This is leading to a political and intellectual disconnect and an unwillingness to live in peace. We needn't look any farther than our most recent Presidential election and the ascendency of Donald Trump to the Presidency to see the division among our citizens.

A seemingly unstoppable wave of protests has taken place since January 20th, protests that have found their raison d' être in a fundamental belief that America is broken and that the political Right is to blame. The loss of an election, when three million more popular votes were cast for the Democratic Party candidate, did nothing to ameliorate the growing unrest in the country. Few people calculated that the anger of the American Left was so overwhelming and so widespread that it would lead to a wholesale loss of faith in the electoral process and an unwillingness to accept a duly elected President. The flames of this resistance have been fueled by identity politics, the media and by many Democrats in Congress and the Senate, and things are rapidly reaching a flash point. By giving their tacit approval to protest groups (by not condemning them) these people have lost their right to be viewed as innocent bystanders. They are now unindicted co-conspirators and are guilty of courting disaster by encouraging a further loss of confidence in our country's institutions.

Those who donate large sums of money in support of sometimes violent protests are ignoring the dangerous consequences of their actions and the irreparable damage that can result from angry mobs. By providing the 'red meat' of financial support and the social media repetition of phony news stories, such donors are using the First Amendment as a shield to protect themselves. Pandering is their politics, and incitement to disrupt peaceful Americans' daily lives should not be condoned or rewarded by looking the other way or by compromising our laws. It is ironic that the Left doesn't understand that by spreading dissension they are actually hurting themselves and their own causes and may be moving us closer to Civil War 2.0.

When order breaks down, the nightsticks invariably come out and the uniformed protective services are called in to keep the peace. We have seen this happen throughout history, and it never ends with a whimper. Now is not the time to ignore our laws. Instead, we should all be thinking of ways to make them work for everybody. The loudest voices must not be allowed to silence the thoughtful ones or we've all lost...not just the battle but the war.

Stephan Helgesen is a retired U.S. diplomat, now author and political strategist. He has written over 600 articles and six books on politics, economics and social trends. He can be reached at stephan@stephanhelgesen.com

Russian to judgment

The Kremlin must be buzzing given all the news coming out of Washington these days. I can see it all now, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is feasting on Beluga caviar, drinking champagne, surrounded by balalaikas and high-stepping folk dancers, swirling like dervishes to the tune of the new U.S. media-inspired DC Two step. He must be laughing out loud watching the Democrats sharpen their 'shaskas' (the Cossacks' weapon of choice) in the hopes of mortally wounding the new Attorney General and anyone else in the Trump Administration that has ever talked with a U.S. immigrant Russian cab driver or read a Russian novel in college.

The Republicans are saying that this whole 'Russia thing' is a tempest in a samovar, that the Democrats are engaging in a modern-day Stalin-light purge that they hope will take the entire Trump Administration down. Were this whole hullabaloo not so serious (as it distracts from the important work that needs to be done by the new Administration), it could become a hit play on Broadway, a kind of updated version of one of Anton Chekhov's stories that revealed the seamier side of Russian life.

But it's not a play, nor is it a satire. It is, instead, a glaring example of what happens when a vanquished opponent vows to fight on and is ready to use anything at his disposal to strike a final blow at the victors. If I understand this melodrama correctly, the Democrats believe that the Trump campaign team actively colluded with the Russian government, through its apparatchiks, to insert themselves into our Presidential campaign and then attack and hack the computers of the Democratic National Committee and those of Hillary Clinton and her closest aides and confidants.     They did this on explicit orders from pro-Trump forces who are trying to maintain plausible deniability by 'forgetting' that some of them like the new Attorney General, Jeff Sessions and General Michael Flynn, had meetings with the Russian Ambassador.

It's all playing out like a Matryoshka doll (sometimes referred to as a 'Babushka' or grandmother doll). As one unscrews the head of the first doll it reveals another, smaller doll within it. And so it goes as yet another doll is uncovered. This is the 'drip, drip drip' that eventually killed off both the Nixon and Clinton Presidencies, and if left unchecked, it will weaken the current President's ability to govern even if there is no 'there' there. In order to achieve success and take down Mr. Trump, the Democrats will need to find a 'smoking gun' to prove a link, any link, other than a chance or misremembered meeting with the Russian Ambassador or just slurping a bowl of borscht at the Russian Tea Room in New York City.

So far, the FBI and the CIA are involved as are at least two committees in the Senate and the House. The Republicans hope that they can circle their wagons and avoid a special prosecutor and keep things 'in the family.' The last thing they want is to be backed into a corner and be subject to the same kind of endless hearings that Hillary Clinton endured with the Benghazi debacle or her email server. This could be disastrous to both Republicans AND Democrats as most Americans don't have the stomach for another 'Watergate.' The contentious Presidential primaries and general election  drained most of our strength and left some of us bleeding at the parapet. Even those on the winning side, don't have the patience for another round of 'Russian Roulette.'

We can only hope that any and all investigations will be undertaken, thoroughly, and impartially, and that the 'truth' will out. If it drags on, the only other alternative we have is to plop ourselves on the barcalounger in front of the tube with a huge bowl of popcorn and settle in for some binge watching of: "Doctor Zhivago, "The man who knew too little," "Gorky Park," and the "Hunt for Red October." It could be a long night at the dacha.

Stephan Helgesen is a retired U.S. diplomat, now author and political strategist. He has written over 600 articles and six books on politics, economics and social trends. He can be reached at stephan@stephanhelgesen.com

Democrat walkabout

The Democratic Party is desperately looking for leadership and may be ready to mimic the rite of passage of the indigenous people of Australia by crossing the threshold of their ideological safe space and embarking on a intellectual 'walkabout' in search of their identity...and a new leader. This was to be expected. Every loser walks this walk to some degree. In 2012, the Republicans did an autopsy on themselves, hoping to find the root cause of their death at the polls.

Things will be different for the Democrats. At the vanguard of their walkabout will be our old friend, Barack Obama, who will be guiding their journey with the help of  "Organizing for Action," a non-profit and non-partisan (really?) 501(c)4 that advocates for the agenda of guess who? Yes, Barack Obama. It's the follow-on organization to his "Organizing for America," and it is building an army of community organizers. Their manifesto? In their own words, "With more than 250 local chapters around the country, OFA volunteers are building this organization from the ground up, community by community, one conversation at a time—whether that’s on a front porch or on Facebook. We’re committed to finding and training the next generation of great progressive organizers, because at the end of the day, we aren’t the first to fight for progressive change, and we won’t be the last." 

OFA was the next natural step for Mr. O who is also a very able community organizing strategist. Set up in 2013, OFA was pre-ordained to be the Progressive movement's new messenger. Why? Because Mr. Obama needed a post-2016 election platform to continue preaching his sermons to us as President emeritus, sermons about his wonderfulness and how critical it is for America to continue on the path towards a utopian socialist state. Thinking that he would have a ready-made ally in the new President (Hillary Clinton), Mr. Obama was confident that he could shoehorn his way back into the media spotlight with President HRC's help and begin to rake in mega donations to his cause. He didn't count on the anti-Christ winning the election, however. So while this has made him change his approach, it will not deter him from his mission to make America, Progressive.

The principal tactic of OFA is simple...resistance. After all, isn't it resistance that won our independence from the British; that gave the Negro his freedom? Isn't it resistance that helped shorten the Vietnam War? And, perhaps, most important of all, won't it be resistance that will thwart the dangerous policies of the Trump Administration that are designed to bring America back into the orbit of antiquated American values and save the country from an unhealthy attachment to that outdated document, the Constitution? (Italics are my own.)

I believe, that someplace in the back of his mind, Mr. Obama was actually hoping that Hillary Clinton would lose the election so that he alone could be the Democratic Party's standard bearer in the fight to slay the conservative dragon living on Pennsylvania Avenue. After all, much is at stake for him: a possible repeal of his signature healthcare legislation, an acceleration of deportations at the border, the loss of Federal funds for 'Sanctuary Cities,' the reversal of his beloved LGBT policies, and the list goes on. Hillary Rodham Clinton proved herself incapable of mobilizing the necessary forces to take this fight to Trump. So, borrowing heroics from the 'Lord of the Rings,' Mr. Obama is preparing to answer the people's call for help and strap on his magical sword of oratory and assault the malevolent Trumpian forces of occupation.

This kind of epic, good versus evil battle is tailor-made for an ex-President like Barack Obama whose legacy is under attack and who thinks of himself in Olympian terms. And while he may be starting out his journey to save Middle Earth as Frodo, he will quickly morph into Aragon with the help of his loyal followers. They will see to that and so will the rest of his Party when they regain their senses after their walkabout. Like the penitent man, the Democratic Party will slowly raise its head as one, gaze into the shining countenance of Mr. Obama, and embrace him as their moral compass and their William Wallace. Like the Romans at Masada and the Persians at Thermopylae, the Obamaites intend to vanquish the opposition by the sheer force of their numbers.

Counting on the support of all the angry Democrat voters, disaffected college students, the 'sisterhood' and the LGBT and minority communities, the new Progressive Obama Coalition will coalesce around OFA and '44' and use Indivisible's "Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda" to overthrow the illegitimate ruler of the United States.

America, prepare yourself, for we are in for a very long, dark and stormy night of protests. The impending coup attempt from the Left may take awhile to reach critical mass, but Mr. Obama can wait. The only thing competing for his time is writing his memoirs (a reported $60 million book deal for his wife and himself). Not bad for a community organizer that suffered under the ignominious yoke of eight years of luxury in the White House.

Stephan Helgesen is a retired U.S. diplomat, now author and political strategist. He has written over 600 articles and six books on politics, economics and social trends. He can be reached at stephan@stephanhelgesen.com