Poking about in my feedly, I ran across this Politico piece: “De Blasio’s nightmare”, by Maggie Haberman and Glenn Thrush. I don’t particularly care about the trials and tribulations of the mayor of any Democratic hellhole – and New York is certainly a hellhole; if I never have to go back there again, it will be too soon. Except possibly on some touristy cruise excursion where we visit museums and the Statue of Liberty. That might possibly be barely tolerable – but I’d seen this situation referenced elsewhere so I thought I’d look, though I’m not really invested in the whole police-vs-community thing.* Police work is local news at its most parochial; only the media obsession over race-baiting makes any of these stories “worth” covering at the national level, because they happen to suit the liberal Democrats’ desperate need to stoke black racism to keep that segment of their voting base solid and turning out while they sell blacks downriver so they can curry favor with Hispanics.
No, what particularly struck me was this phrase, slipped in near the end of the piece: “Kochian force rather than Obamaian reason.” What’s even odder is that it doesn’t even make sense in context: the “stagecraft” of being the executive head of a civic body. Things like, say, showing up on time to events to give a talk. (What kind of moron mayor can’t even show up on time to give a speech at a public event? And get a reputation for doing things like that? The kind who thinks that he’s Head Honcho and can do whatever he wants and damn the rest of the populace, I expect.)
However, that’s not even what really struck me as so much gibberish. Kochian force? Presumably in reference to the Koch brothers, who happen to be a couple of rich dudes. You know, like George Soros, only with fewer fingers in media pies. Unlike most of the rest of the rich dudes, the Koch brothers seem to lean libertarian (as far as I know) rather than lockstep leftist Democrat, so they get to be kabuki demons for the media narrative. (Lucky them.) Since when did rich people wield force in this country? Especially as contrasted, note, with Obamaian reason. Obama. Right. He’s that guy who’s the President of the United States, who issues things like Executive Orders, makes jokes about the IRS auditing his enemies (which then actually happens, mind!), and is the putative head of the military? That Obama? Who basically says whatever the h3ll he wants (“If you like your plan, you can keep your plan!”) and does whatever he thinks he can get away with as regards enforcing the law as his Constitutional duties require of him?
Which one of those two ought properly be associated with the use of force? The head of state of the world’s reigning imperial superpower, or some rich dudes in what’s (depressingly) one of the least-corrupt countries on the face of the planet? I don’t know Maggie or Glenn – but this one phrase is sufficient evidence that there is something seriously wrong with both of their mental models of the world, and that of their editor(s).
Unless there’s some despicable mass-murdering dictator named Koch that I’ve never heard of and/or they’re the disoriented victims of a multiverse shift that left them stranded in an alternate reality in which “Kochian force rather than Obamaian reason” actually makes sense.
*Diagram this sentence. I dare you.