Why do Republicans always let Democrats win?
Is it because so many Republican officeholders want to be Democrats – or regarded as “good Republicans” by Democrats? Or is it because they are, in fact, Democrats – ideologically in agreement on fundamentals (i.e., socialism) but wanting to see socialism realized at a more gradual pace?
Put another way, they are not smart enough to understand that when you accept the foundational argument or premise of your opponent, you have agreed with the foundational argument or premise of your opponent. And once you’ve done that, all that remains is haggling over the details.
Mitch McConnell is such a Republican. He said the following the other day, in regard to accepting the Democrats’ notion that the recent mass shootings must be responded to by enacting more laws that haven’t prevented mass shootings:
“Our colleagues have put together a common-sense package of popular steps that will help make these horrifying incidents less likely while fully upholding the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”
Multiple italics necessary.
“Common sense”? According to whom? The Democrats? Who also say it is “common sense” to deny all Americans – except those who are armed in the service of government – from being allowed to possess guns at all?
“Popular steps”? Says who? Certainly, such “steps” are “popular” . . . among the Democrats who support more such “steps.”
“Help make these horrifying incidents less likely…” Based upon what evidence, exactly? Or rather, is the foregoing based on the assertions – the foundational argument – of the Democrats that making it harder (and even legally impossible) for people who had nothing to do with these or any other “horrifying incidents” will make them “less likely”?
Finally, “fully upholding the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens”? Well, excluding the rights of 18, 19 and 20-year-old citizens, whose rights are about to be further restricted via procedural delays imposed upon their right to buy a gun that those who are 21 and older are (for the moment) free from. How long before they are not free from them, the Republicans having accepted the Democrats’ argument that such restrictions “will help make these horrifying incidents less likely”?
How will the likes of Mitch McConnell argue against such “common sense” measures when the Democrats insist more are necessary after the next shooting the latest infringements upon the Second Amendment they just amen’d didn’t prevent?
It is of a piece with another Republican accepting of Democrat arguments, viz – that “we” must have a goverment-run “health care” system because “health care” is a “right,” according to Democrats, amen’d by Republicans such as the Orange Man – who spoke of repeal and replace the Democrats’ “plan” for “health care” – Obamacare – with a another “plan,” this one crafted (as these things are popularly styled) by Republicans.
Of course, if people have a “right” to “health care” then it follows that they have a “right” to many other things, besides – such as dinner, for instance. And a car. Why not anything that people need – or desire? Democrats agree – and so do Republicans, in principle. Which is why it is only a matter of time before such “rights” are agreed to, in fact – by Republicans.
But the worst thing Republicans just agreed to is this business of “Red Flagging” people. The term derives from car racing, where its waving by an official signals the race must stop immediately, usually due to a wreck on the track or something similar that presents a threat to the other drivers.
Now, courtesy of Republicans, any American who is “deemed to be a threat” . . . by Democrats can be “Red Flagged,” which means he can be Hut! Hut! Hutted! – i.e., have his home (and himself) assaulted by armed government workers who will use their guns to kill him if he “resists” their invasion of his home and the violation of the Second Amendment rights that Republicans such as Mitch McConnell claim they are “fully upholding,” by surrendering.
The Second Amendment does not say the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed . . . ” unless Democrats (and Republicans) say it is “common sense” and “popular” to infringe them.
The Constitution does not say that it is ok to Hut! Hut! Hut! people because other people have “deemed them to a threat.” And if it does say it, then it is a vile an instrument fundamentally at odds with the very concept of rights.
Such as the right to due process of law – accusation, followed by a fact-finding examination in a court, followed by a conviction – before becoming the target of a Hut! Hut! Hutting!
And yet, the Hut! Hut! Hutting! of any American the Democrats “deemed to be a threat” has just been deemed “common sense” by Republicans such as Mitch McConnell. Which makes one wonder what else they will deem to be “common sense” in the weeks and months to come.
Probably “threatening” speech, when Democrats say that, too, is a “common sense” measure that must be taken.
My old colleague from Washington Times days, the columnist Sam Francis – who wasn’t a Republican – styled the Republican Party the Stupid Party. He may have been too kind – too generous – in his appellation.
The Republican Party of Mitch McConnell is the Complicit Party, a thing far worse than mere stupidity.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)