Archive for July, 2012

The Intolerant Tolerant

The estimable Mark Steyn, writing in National Review, on the
Big City Thug Mayors trying to punish Chick Fil-A for their President’s thoughts:

Steyn brilliantly captures the coming reckoning between those who advocate "tolerance" and "diversity" while still acting as Thought Police.

"In Mayor Menino’s Boston, if you take the same view of marriage as President Obama did from 2009 to 2012, he’ll run your homophobic ass out of town. But, if you want to toss those godless sodomites off the John Hancock Tower, he’ll officiate at your ribbon-cutting ceremony.

This inconsistency is very telling. The forces of “tolerance” and “diversity” are ever more intolerant of anything less than total ideological homogeneity. Earlier this year, the Susan G. Komen Foundation — the group that gave us those pink “awareness raising” ribbons for breast cancer — decided to end its funding of Planned Parenthood on the grounds that, whatever its other charms, Planned Parenthood has nothing to do with curing breast cancer. Within hours, the Komen Foundation’s Nancy Brinker had been jumped by her fellow liberals, and was strapped to a chair under a light bulb in the basement with her head clamped between two mammogram plates until she recanted. A few weeks back, Mark Regnerus, a sociology professor who “says he’s never voted for a Republican presidential candidate,” published a paper in the journal Social Science Research whose findings, alas, did not conform to the party line on gay parenting. Immediately, the party of science set about ending his career, demanding that he be investigated for “scientific misconduct” and calling on mainstream TV and radio networks to ban him from their airwaves.

As an exercise in sheer political muscle, it’s impressive. But, if you’re a feminist or a gay or any of the other house pets in the Democrat menagerie, you might want to look at Rahm Emanuel’s pirouette, and Menino’s coziness with Islamic homophobia. These guys are about power, and right now your cause happens to coincide with their political advantage. But political winds shift. Once upon a time, Massachusetts burned witches. Now it grills chicken-sandwich homophobes. One day it’ll be something else. Already in Europe, in previously gay-friendly cities like Amsterdam, demographically surging Muslim populations have muted leftie politicians’ commitment to gay rights, feminism, and much else. It’s easy to cheer on the thugs when they’re thuggish in your name. What happens when Emanuel’s political needs change?

Americans talk more about liberty than citizens of other Western nations, but, underneath the rhetorical swagger, liberty bleeds. When Mayor Menino and Alderman Moreno openly threaten to deny business licenses because of ideological apostasy, they’re declaring their unfitness for public office. It’s not about marriage, it’s not about gays, it’s about a basic understanding that a free society requires a decent respect for a wide range of opinion without penalty by the state. In Menino’s Boston, the Freedom Trail is heavy on the Trail, way too light on the Freedom."

Read the Whole Thing. Steyn has a keen eye for what’s happening around the globe, and he’s on target with this post.


James Taranto’s Best of the Web Today

If James Taranto’s Best of the Web Today (on, the Wall Street Journal’s Web Site) isn’t a part of your reading rotation, he should. His eye on the news is keen and clever, and he’ll pull up nuggets that you’re likely not going to find elsewhere.

Taranto is opining that under a Second Obama Administration, the Second Amendment isn’t as secure as we might think, especially since the President will have four more years and presumably a few appointments to the bench.

Taranto’s comment on E. J. Dionne’s anguish over a lack of "debate" over gun control is spot-on:

"Where a gun massacre is concerned," Dionne writes, "an absolute and total gag rule is imposed on any thinking beyond the immediate circumstances of the catastrophe." It doesn’t seem to occur to him that this assertion is self-refuting. If "an absolute and total gag rule" were actually in effect, it would prevent Dionne from saying so.
When people find it necessary to demand a "debate" or complain about the absence of same, it usually means they’re frustrated because there is a debate and their side is losing. Sure enough, Dionne’s complaint is that those who disagree with him–whom he labels "the gun lobby," "worshipers of weapons" and adherents to "the theology of firearms"–make their case far more effectively than his side does. "The rest of us," he whines, suffer from a "profound timidity," as a result of which they "allow" their opponents’ arguments "to work every time."
Dionne is claiming that those on his side have good arguments but fail to advance them because they have poor character. That may be true, especially the part about poor character, but it’s still an odd thing to say."

Here’s more:
"Now, there’s a very good reason why coastal elites’ arguments for gun control fall on deaf ears in most of Middle America. Those who value the Second Amendment suspect that people like Dionne and Bloomberg advocate "reasonable" gun restrictions as a camel’s nose to a total or near-total ban on private ownership of firearms and their use for self-defense.
This suspicion is entirely justified."