Yesterday’s Sister Souljah Moment, Today’s Costly Silence Charles Lipson
President Biden’s quick trip to New York City was the perfect moment to assert a genuine commitment to public safety by calling out Manhattan’s left-wing prosecutor, Alvin Bragg. But Biden and his attorney general blew the opportunity. They said nothing, aside from the usual pablum about safe communities and guns coming in from out of state. That’s not enough, even in very liberal cities like New York.
Democrats simply aren’t trusted on crime. That’s hardly new, but it has become much more damaging politically now that voters consider crime one of their top issues. For years, the party has framed its policies as “pro-justice” and “anti-racism,” with little attention to “law and order.” Race gets pride of place, of course, because, in city after city, a disproportionate number of those arrested are African American, mostly young men.
Republicans say that what Democrats call “racial justice” really means “soft on crime.” More and more Independents are siding with Republicans on this issue. These critics not only demand safety for themselves. They point out that most of this rising crime harms law-abiding people in poor, minority communities. The arrest statistics, they say, reflect the hard reality of who commits crimes, not biased policing.
The parties’ sharply opposed views on crime, law enforcement, and prosecution have become central issues in American politics. It’s an issue that strongly favors Republicans.
Some three decades ago, Bill Clinton understood this political landscape and attacked the Democrats’ image head-on by calling out a black celebrity, Sister Souljah. In the aftermath of the 1992 Los Angeles riots, she said, “If black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people?” Clinton’s angry response reinforced a political argument he made during the campaign: he intended to deter crime by punishing criminals, severely if need be.
For Democratic Party activists today, positions like Bill Clinton’s are as dead as fax machines and Blockbuster video rental stores. Joe Biden knows that. That’s why he’s never taken a stand against progressive prosecutors, mayors, or governors or blamed them for the rise of crime.
Does avoiding a clash with progressive activists mean paying a high price with independent voters? That’s one question that may be answered in the 2022 midterm elections. According to Rasmussen Reports, crime ranks with inflation as the voters’ top two issues. Its data shows that 88% of Americans are concerned about crime, and 61% are “very concerned.”
Biden can say, accurately, that he never favored defunding the police. But he never condemned those who led the defunding movement, either. He was nominated at a four-day national political convention that took place during a summer of deadly riots; yet speaker after speaker never mentioned them or demanded a restoration of order in our cities. The subtext was the rioters’ righteousness.
The Democratic Party’s position, often stated quite explicitly, was that all police departments were corrupted by systemic racism, that many police officers were like the one who murdered George Floyd, and that it was racist to say that “all lives matter” since that somehow implies that black lives don’t. That’s an odd interpretation. “All lives” includes blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asian Americans, those of mixed race, everyone.
It’s important to state this obvious linguistic truth because this is not a trivial word game. The equality of human lives is foundational in our democracy. It shouldn’t be problematic to say so.
He could begin by denouncing “Justice Democrat” district attorneys across the country and explaining how he differs from them. He could name names, not issue broad, vague statements.
Biden could demand his party change course and support only prosecutors who intend to work with police to stop violent crime and prosecute those facing credible accusations.
He could oppose policies that let violent criminals back on the street quickly after their arrests.
He could stop nominating left-wing, “Justice Democrats” to positions as U.S. attorneys, federal judges, and top positions in the Department of Justice. As long as he continues doing so, his praise for law enforcement is hollow.
Will he do any of these things? Extremely unlikely, at least not unless his pollsters tell him he must or he meets disaster in the November election.
Voters are fed up. They understand that government’s most basic responsibility is to provide a safe environment for law-abiding citizens. When a whole political party fails to meet this core responsibility, it can expect to pay a heavy price. That’s another reason Democrats fear the chill winds of November.
What could Biden say if he wanted to change course? What could he do? He could begin by denouncing “Justice Democrat” district attorneys across the country and explaining how he differs from them. He could name names, not issue broad, vague statements. The list of names to denounce is a long one, and includes:
- Los Angeles’ George Gascón
- San Francisco’s Chesa Boudin
- Manhattan’s Alvin Bragg
- Philadelphia’s Larry Krasner
- Louis’ Kimberly Gardner
- Chicago’s Kim Foxx
- Austin’s José Garza
- Baltimore’s Marilyn Mosby
- Portsmouth, Virginia’s Stephanie Morales
- Milwaukee’s John Chisholm
- Portland’s Mike Schmidt
Biden could demand his party change course and support only prosecutors who intend to work with police to stop violent crime and prosecute those facing credible accusations. He could oppose policies that let violent criminals back on the street quickly after their arrests. If he can find any Democratic prosecutors who already implement these policies, he should praise them by name and commit the White House to supporting more like them. Within his own purview, he could stop nominating left-wing, “Justice Democrats” to positions as U.S. attorneys, federal judges, and senior offices in the Department of Justice. As long as he continues doing so, his praise for law enforcement is hollow.
Will he do any of these things? Extremely unlikely, at least not unless his pollsters tell him he must or he meets disaster in the November election. If Republicans take back the Senate, Biden will have to nominate moderate candidates to win confirmation. So far, however, he has shown no signs of bending. He has maintained the rigid, progressive stances he began taking after the 2020 election.
The president continues to mischaracterize the crime problem, referring to it almost exclusively as “gun violence.” That plays well within his political party, but Democrats’ reluctance to arrest, jail, and prosecute those who commit crimes, on the grounds that such law enforcement would constitute “systemic racism,” is a dead end. A wiser view would be to ignore the race of perpetrators and victims, treat everyone equally, and make sure police and prosecutors do the same. That wouldn’t just be wiser politically. It would reflect our country’s basic ideals.
It’s not just urban centers where law enforcement has collapsed. It has shattered along the southern border, thanks to Biden’s policies. Conditions are now so bad that the president himself refuses to visit the border and his vice president – tasked with devising a long-term fix – visited only once, briefly, and stayed hundreds of miles away from the epicenter of the crisis.
Voters now see this combination of open borders and open doors for shoplifting, smash-and-grab, carjacking, armed robberies, and murder as intertwined policies. Dangerous ones that disregard our laws. The public associates them with the Democratic Party, concludes that the administration is failing, and says it expected something far different, far better, far more moderate from Biden, given his campaign promises. All true. But it’s also worth remembering that the voters chose all these progressive district attorneys, who never hid their views.
Whatever voters thought when they elected those prosecutors and President Biden, they are now fed up. They understand that government’s most basic responsibility is to provide a safe environment for law-abiding citizens. When a whole political party fails to meet this core responsibility, when it refuses even to acknowledge its primary duty to provide public safety, it can expect to pay a heavy price. That’s why Democrats fear the chill winds of November.
Comments are closed.
