Earlier this year, in a supposed attempt to add more political balance to the op-ed pages of its (failing) newspaper, the New York Times hired conservative writer Bret Stephens. Stephens made a splash with an early column blasting the left’s climate change hoax – a column that caused a wave of outrage from liberal readers who threatened to cancel their subscriptions.
But if they were worried that they would have to grit their teeth through every one of Stephens’ columns, they needn’t have. Because from that point on, Stephens resolved to prove that there was really not that much difference between a liberal and a conservative. In fact, if you go by what he’s written in the pages of the New York Times, there’s literally no difference at all.
Let’s take a quick look at some of his columns from the past year:
“If you want to MAGA, Save DACA.”
“Roger Ailes, the Man Who Wrecked Conservatism”
“Only Mass Deportation Can Save America,” wherein he recommends deporting lazy white citizens in favor of foreign workers…
…and an unending slew of columns meant to please all the NeverTrumpers still wishing they could go back in time and rescue Jeb! from the jaws of defeat.
Not all of Stephens’ columns have been thinly-disguised liberal dog food, but he’s written nothing that could possibly exonerate his latest rant: “Repeal the Second Amendment.”
After some tired recitations of the usual statistics that liberals use to “prove” that gun violence is THE major threat to the U.S. way of life, Stephens says that the usual liberal arguments for gun control are flawed and relatively meaningless. The answer, however, is not to beat back those arguments with logic and reason; it’s to simply repeal the damn right to bear arms altogether. And like magic, he finds himself sharing the same ideological space as popular conservative icon Michael Moore.
Repealing the Amendment may seem like political Mission Impossible today, but in the era of same-sex marriage it’s worth recalling that most great causes begin as improbable ones. Gun ownership should never be outlawed, just as it isn’t outlawed in Britain or Australia. But it doesn’t need a blanket Constitutional protection, either. The 46,445 murder victims killed by gunfire in the United States between 2012 and 2016 didn’t need to perish so that gun enthusiasts can go on fantasizing that “Red Dawn” is the fate that soon awaits us.
Donald Trump will likely get one more Supreme Court nomination, or two or three, before he leaves office, guaranteeing a pro-gun court for another generation. Expansive interpretations of the right to bear arms will be the law of the land — until the “right” itself ceases to be.
Only a tried-and-true conservative would refer to same-sex marriage as one of the “great causes” of our time, naturally.
We’re not sure who the audience is for this crap, but we guess RINOs have to have their political punditry, too. And if Mother Jones is just a tad too liberal for your tastes, Bret Stephens is your guy.