Out of the blue, the answer hit me.  I actually was discussing the fact that the sinkhole in Bayou Corne, Louisiana, has grown to encompass 8 acres.  

And while I was saying that all of a sudden I realized a possible explanation of why the Republicans would never go after Barack Hussein Obama on the birth certificate issue (don’t ask me how I got from Bayou Corne to that, it just hit me).   I wrote more than once that risking an election to remove Obama was the wrong way of going about things…that they needed to deal with a legal issue, i.e., the birth certificate issue, and remove him legally through that kind of an issue.  I considered it a lack of courage on their part to do so.

Now I realize they may have had the attitude, “what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander”, which is why they never got around to doing anything about the birth certificate issue.  They may have plans to try the same thing themselves.  With all the talk about cultivating the Hispanic vote, they may showcase Marco Rubio as the VP possibility in 2016.  Of course, there is one small problem with that.  Marco Rubio is in the same boat as Barack Hussein Obama…he does not meet the Constitutional requirements to be President and as Newt Gingrich said once, any VP candidate should be qualified to be President (in case the need arises).  So of course, it makes sense to me now that the Republicans did not want to rock the boat on that issue regarding Obama, because they may have their own plans to do the same illegal maneuver in the future.

I looked around and found that others have come to the same conclusion.  Read about it by clicking here.

So really, the Republicans lost because they don’t want to follow the Constitution.  It is something that is recognizable and no matter what they say, they don’t have a distinct difference from the Democrats.  They simply cannot be blessed just because the party name begins with an “R”.  They need to have the fortitude and determination to be shining examples of wanting to follow the Constitution and if they are merely a watered down version of the Democrats, why would anyone want to vote for them?

As Glen Beck used to say (something along these lines)…that it is the difference between “Progressive” and “Progressive Light”.  What’s the difference?  Both are “progressive”.

So they didn’t want to go after Barack Obama on the birth certificate.  They could have.  They have cleaned up the whole mess prior to the election.  His illegality due to not meeting the Constitutional requirements of being a natural born citizen would have been proved, and then all that he signed, vetoed, as well as the Executive Orders would be null and void.  Instead, there is a lot of loss, a tremendous amount of loss, because the Republicans went along with the wrong way of getting the job done.

It is a shame that the Republicans put their party first before the Constitution, because they could have cleaned up the whole mess, including getting rid of ObamaCare.  It would have been null and void too.

But because they want to go down the pathway of cultivating votes, even if illegally like Obama, they ended up losing.

“He that will save  his life, will lose it.”  Jesus

It would have been better to take the high road, follow the  Constitution, and we might be in a whole lot better shape as a nation this very instant.  Instead, they worked for their Party, not the Constitution, and in doing so, lost what they wanted to gain.  And they lost the respect through their lack of courage.

Now will the Republicans, as well as Democrats, show any persistent and determined interest in truly finding the truth about Benghazi?  Is this a Watergate in the making, worse than that… four Americans are dead, but will it just be laid aside on the wayside as so many critical issues are nowadays?

The lack of concern for the lives of the Americans involved should give the Republicans pause.  If there is such a flagrant lack of respect for life, what makes them think that someday they may not be the “expendible” ones whose lives are not valued enough to save?

Here is one variation of the quote attributed to Martin Niemöller, who spoke out against Hitler.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.