Posted on October 14,
2022
Herschel And Hypocrisy
What's his alleged offense, really?
by
Daniel
Clark
As you're probably aware, the senate candidacy of 1982
Heisman Trophy winner Herschel Walker has been endangered by an allegation that
he instigated and paid for an abortion in 2009.
Because he is running as a pro-life conservative Republican, this charge,
if true, demonstrates blatant hypocrisy on his part, which of course is where
the controversy lies.
Thank heaven there are so very few hypocrites in the
world of politics that the apparent presence of one in the arena should make
itself so conspicuous. Things might be
different if, say, we had a lot of current officeholders who had imposed
borderline totalitarian restrictions on their constituents at the peak of COVID,
who themselves attended large and swanky gatherings while maskless. Then, one more example of hypocrisy would
hardly even be noticeable. It's a good
thing our politicians are more scrupulous than that.
We're
fortunate that there are no advocates of gun confiscation who have armed themselves
by obtaining special licenses that are not available to most inhabitants of
their states, are there, Dianne Feinstein?
Of course, the senator says she no longer has a concealed carry permit,
but explains that she needed it at one time for self-defense, when she was being
targeted by a group of radicals. What a wonderful
place California must be, that nobody there but a lone senator has such a need.
Perhaps the charge of hypocrisy against Walker could
be excused if, for example, a certain big-city mayor who had been in the
forefront of the "defund the police" movement, who herself had pledged to cut the
police budget of her already crime-ravaged city by 80 percent, assigned a
special police security detail to herself, so that she could have the
protection she was denying her fellow Chicagoans. Lori Lightfoot must have done no such thing,
or surely, the national media who are so up-in-arms over Walker would have demanded
accountability.
It's not as if former vice president Al Gore, the
world's foremost activist against "climate change," does little if anything to
curb his own energy consumption, but argues that he has bought absolution through
the purchase of nonsensical "carbon credits."
Or as if former president Barack Obama, after warning that, "Sea levels
are rising due to climate change, potentially threatening U.S. cities," ignored
his own scaremongering by purchasing ocean front properties in Martha's
Vineyard and on the outskirts of Honolulu.
If there were any Marxist politicians who championed
the Occupy movement and railed against the "one-percenters," who have used
their political offices to accumulate vast amounts of wealth they've never had
to earn, like President Clinton, President Obama, or Sen. Bernie Sanders, and
paid no price for their hypocrisy, then Walker would have no need to even defend
himself against the charge.
Without
a doubt, Walker's detractors would be outraged if any mayors of "sanctuary cities"
began shrieking in protest as small numbers of illegal aliens were delivered to
them in buses. New York Mayor Eric Adams'
political career would presumably be over, had he referred to this as a "humanitarian
crisis" while continuing to encourage far greater numbers to stampede across
our Southern border. Ditto that for Lori
Lightfoot, if she were to deny the aliens sanctuary by promptly whisking them
away to the suburbs. Can you imagine
such a thing?
Perhaps it is hypocrisy on the abortion issue in
particular that is considered so outrageous.
Certainly, then, there must not be any pro-abortion absolutists among
our politicians, who blather endlessly about what good Catholics they are. Right Joe?
Just as surely, they would never contradict the teachings of their own
church by calling legal restrictions on abortion "sinful." Right Nancy?
Nor would they profess to agree with church teachings on abortion, while
voting the exact opposite way. Isn't
that so, Senator and former VP candidate Tim Kaine?
We know that this kind of behavior rarely exists in
politics, because if it were commonplace, there would be nothing scandalous
about Walker being charged with the same.
In that case, the source of the controversy would have to be the
specific thing he stands accused of doing, and not the fact that he often speaks
in contradiction of it. This would mean
there must be something terribly wrong about a man who enlists a woman to help
him have a tiny, innocent person dismembered and killed, probably in that
order, so that he may welch on his obligation to raise this same, already
existing child. Can this possibly be?
Nah, it must be the hypocrisy. Yeah, that's it.
The Shinbone: The
Frontier of the Free Press