In a world where political theater is commonplace, some stage acts are more absurd than others. The latest masterpiece involves the Democrats concocting wild theories about the National Guard. Apparently, they fear it might actually do its job, exposing their inability to protect citizens. This goes beyond a comedy of errors—it’s an entire circus.
The Democratic camp has been busy crafting fantasies where the federal government, under the former president, is supposedly planning to employ the National Guard for everything from enforcing immigration laws to calling in airstrikes on domestic groups—without a hint of due process, of course. It’s almost as if they’ve decided that reality shouldn’t interfere with a good story. While they’re mixing plotlines from every thriller and spy movie, Republicans are left to scratch their heads in disbelief.
And speaking of governors who won’t play along, Florida’s Ron DeSantis has a few words. Back when the current president took office, proactive governors like DeSantis took a stand against the administration’s lax immigration policies. They weren’t about to let the federal government decide on whether or not to enforce laws as they see fit. Yet now, when the shoe’s on the other foot and the former president is in question, suddenly enforcing federal law is taboo for the opposition.
In states like Illinois and its star city, Chicago, the plot thickens. Leaders there seem more interested in implementing policies that release individuals charged with serious crimes without bail than in maintaining law and order. It’s a free-for-all, and Democrats either don’t see the issue or don’t care to address it. No wonder folks are flocking to states like Florida—they’re heading south for more than just the warm weather; they’re seeking safety and sanity.
As the political drama continues, an interesting side note emerges: why isn’t the former president praised for seeking peace domestically as he did internationally? Perhaps the answer lies in reflexive opposition—the Democrats seem hardwired to oppose anything he touches, whether it’s a wall on the southern border or a peace deal in the Middle East. They are quick to criticize, even when the results align with what they supposedly desire: safety at home and abroad.
For the Democrats, the question remains whether they can move past their automatic opposition tactics. The public values safety and security above party politics, and when faced with the reality of rising crime and instability, they might just decide to follow the strong horse, wherever it may lead. If nothing else, the spectacle offers a bit of entertainment, though at the cost of their own credibility.
