By David Codrea
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “Trump: Decision to Consider Women Humans Should Be Left to States,” self-styled funnyman Andy Borowitz writes in The New Yorker.
Employing the trademark snark that inspired The Huffington Post to crown him “the satire king,” Borowitz also proves himself to be predictably (and tediously) reliant on Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals” – Rule 5 to attack non-“progressive” targets:
Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
It might infuriate if anyone outside of Andy’s smug metrosexual echo chamber cared what he says. And while it’s not hard to find things to laugh about as far as Trump, or Cruz, or especially panicky RNC dinosaurs are concerned, Borowitz and his better-than-flyover-rubes followers are actually sappy enough to support an Elena Ceaușescu clone or that goofy, rumpled pinko from Vermont.
True to form, Borowitz is a doctrinaire hoplophobe, penning such recent gems as “U.S. Becomes Laughingstock of World for Something Other Than Gun Laws” and “Obama Continues to Stubbornly Link Gun Violence with Guns.” He appears to be a textbook example of the fearful clod Julia Gorin of Jewish World Review defined in her classic “The Anti-Gun Male.” And considering his nominal heritage, he’s also what the late Aaron Zelman of JPFO labeled “bagel brained.” As a person of privileged media prominence, he moves in circles where the chances of running into someone like Theodore Haas are pretty remote, but it would be interesting to see Andy try to pile up the laughs at that guy’s expense.
His latest jab at The Donald isn’t the problem. Politicians are fair game and Trump provides more than his share of target opportunities. But it’s the concept of federalism and “states’ rights” where “progressive” policies start to trip on their own inconsistencies, and that’s the door Borowitz just opened for us to walk through.
“I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne,” Barack Obama said back in 2008 when attempting to appear “reasonable” about citizen disarmament. What exactly works in Chicago was left unsaid, which, considering the current deadly state of affairs, bears examining. What Obama was doing was making the fraudulent case that, Supremacy Clause notwithstanding, states and local jurisdictions have the power to negate unalienable rights based on the tyranny of a regional majority.
Note that only goes one way, though. When Hillary Clinton’s husband signed the 1994 “assault weapon” ban, there were no provisions for states or cities to opt out. Whenever the gun-grabbers want to impose their will on others by restricting rights, the infringements cover everyone, in Everytown, regardless of whether they’re in Chicago or Cheyenne.
Conversely, when restrictions on rights are eased a bit, all of a sudden indignant “progressives” start screaming about “home rule.” No matter that a higher level of government has enacted protective legislation; all of a sudden it’s imperative for control freak enclaves to claim the power to ban guns in parks, to outlaw classifications of firearms they don’t want to let people own, and to forbid the practice of carrying, or transporting or transferring. They insist on having it both ways which means they insist on always having it their way.
And if we don’t give it to them, the rest of the world (and especially Europe) is going to continue laughing at us, right along with Andy and his fans!
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.
He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and also posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.