By Kevin D. Williamson
Wednesday, October 16, 2019
W
|
Now, when I hear the words “otherwise unemployable
morons,” I think of Robert Francis O’Rourke and his sad little presidential
campaign, which suffered a little setback on Tuesday night when the gentleman
who advertises himself as “Beto” tried out some tough-guy shtick on Pete
Buttigieg, who is, whatever else you can say about him, a veteran of the
Afghanistan campaign, one who rightly pointed out that he doesn’t have to prove
his “courage” to the idiot son of a well-connected El Paso political family who
has done almost nothing with his life other than show himself a reasonably
effective fundraiser in the family business.
O’Rourke is a cretin, and an ambitious cretin at that.
And what are his ambitions?
Turning America into the airport.
O’Rourke proposes to gut the Bill of Rights — beginning
with the First Amendment and the Second Amendment — to stick the federal snout
into Americans’ bedrooms and churches, and anywhere else he detects the scent
of nonconformity.
In spite of their scary reputation, so-called assault
rifles are used in such a vanishingly small portion of violent crimes that the
FBI doesn’t even bother keeping up with them. (All “long guns,” which is to say
rifles of all kinds and shotguns, account for about 2 percent of the firearms
used in violent crimes.) But O’Rourke has announced plans to dispatch armed
federal agents to conduct door-to-door raids to seize such firearms, because
they offend his personal sensibilities.
It is not as though this is part of some greater “tough
on crime” posture. O’Rourke isn’t exactly a law-and-order man: He has no
interest in enforcing our immigration laws, for instance. And he has proposed
to enfranchise felons, too — not after they’ve served their time and completed
their sentences, but while they are incarcerated. Which is to say:
O’Rourke proposes to strip law-abiding Americans of their constitutional rights
while extending new political rights to felons behind bars. Why? The most
obvious answer is that gun owners tend to vote for Republicans and felons tend
to support Democrats.
The “assault rifle” is a negligible factor in American
public life, but it is a very powerful cultural totem. And just like the TSA,
the O’Rourke agenda has nothing to do with security and everything to do with
power: securing power, deploying power, enjoying power.
Similarly, O’Rourke has announced plans to use the tax
code to punish churches and other organizations that have political and social
opinions of which he does not approve. What about political parties? Those are
tax-exempt nonprofits, too, and there is no limiting principle in O’Rourke’s
position that would rationally exclude them from being similarly sanctioned.
Why punish churches for teaching the articles of their faith? Because Robert
Francis O’Rourke, in his infinite wisdom, does not approve of their articles of
faith. What this amounts to is taking the illegal activities of the IRS
during the Obama administration and making them official policy.
Nice.
You’ll notice a pattern emerging here. When O’Rourke
encounters something that makes him uncomfortable, his instinct is always the
same: Send federal agents to stick guns in somebody’s face until he gets his
way. (And if you think the IRS is something other than a gun in your face, try
declining to pay your taxes for a few years.)
O’Rourke’s politics — and the
politics of the Left more generally — are increasingly totalitarian.
“Totalitarian” is not only a scary-sounding adjective. It is a word that
actually means something, and what it describes is a theory of government that
recognizes no sphere of truly private life, no life outside the state — one
that sees the scope of the state as total, hence the term.
Totalitarianism
is in fashion on the Left. And so the Democrats have turned from such familiar
proposals as health-care subsidies for the poor to the abolition of
private health insurance, a measure endorsed by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth
Warren, among others. Democrats, no longer content to impose confiscatory taxes
on income, now propose — here again, Sanders and Warren stand together — to
seize Americans’ savings, confiscating their property rather than merely
levying their income. If you don’t like that, you can organize a political
campaign against it — maybe, if the Democrats will let you. But keep in mind
that Democrats today also hold as an article of faith that the federal
government should have the power to prohibit the distribution of videos
critical of Democratic presidential candidates, which is what the Citizens
United case was all about.
The borders may
go unsecured and the felons may continue to run wild in the streets of this or
that Democrat-controlled city, but in Robert Francis O’Rourke’s America, you — you,
citizen — will do as you’re told. It will be as petty and imbecilic as a trip
through security at JFK, with one important exception: The airport has an exit.
No comments:
Post a Comment