August 19, 2017 --

“It should be borne in mind that there is nothing more difficult to manage, or more doubtful of success, or more dangerous to handle than to take the lead in introducing a new order of things. For the innovator has enemies in all those who are doing well under the old order….”

Machiavelli. “The Prince,” chapter 6.

“Every American election summons the individual voter to weigh the past against the future.”

Theodore H. White, “The Making of the President 1960.”

The fierce opposition to President Trump indicates that when voters, weighing the past against the future, decide to go with an “innovator,” the old order will resist the decision of the voters. rather vigorously.

Hillary Clinton indicated that she was horrified and “appalled” that then candidate Donald J. Trump refused to say, at the third presidential debate, October 19, 2016, that he would accept the election results. Clinton, at that debate, suggested that resisting the election of a president “is not the way our democracy works.” It would seem that for “The Resistance,” as it has come to be called, the workings of democracy now include reversing the decision of the voters.

The Constitution, up to now, has provided for removal of the president by impeachment vote in the House of Representatives, and then removal from office by Senate vote. The Twenty-fifth amendment, adopted in 1967, also provides for the Vice President to be Acting President in the event of presidential disability.

The left’s continued, unrelenting clamor against President Trump leaves one to wonder how far the anti-Trump opposition will go. Current opposition is viewed by some commentators as an attempt at “a silent coup.” With fervent enemies of the president, like Ben Rhodes, appearing on ABC’s “This Week” program, August 12, accusing the president of “manufacturing a crisis” with North Korea, going on question “the stability of Donald Trump,” where, LPR wonders, are the president’s defenders?

Is there no one to cite the words of Hillary Clinton, at that third debate, and declare that “The Resistance” not only flies in the face of American political tradition, it denigrates our democratic institutions?

Is there no Republican in Congress to say that the Democrats and establishment Republicans who boast about resisting the president are, in mindset, comparable to the Democrats who, in 1860 and 1861, resisted the election of President Lincoln?

Presently, it would seem that the left, in declaring opposition to hate, leave open one exemption: hatred for President Trump.