Chuck Schumer’s Revealing Display of Authoritarianism in a NYC Restaurant

Democratic leader in the U.S. Senate, Chuck Schumer, acted like an ass in a Manhattan restaurant recently when he learned a Democratic friend and colleague’s wife, the daughter of the founder of CBS, voted for Donald Trump.

He was dining with friends when he encountered Joseph A. Califano Jr. — the former U.S. secretary of health, education and welfare under President Jimmy Carter and domestic policy adviser to President Lyndon B. Johnson — and his wife, Hilary, who were having a quiet dinner.

Onlookers said Schumer was incensed that Hilary — the daughter of William S. Paley, the founder and chairman of CBS — had voted for Trump, even though her husband, Joseph, is a well-known Democrat.

One witness said of the restaurant rant, “They are a highly respected couple, and Schumer made a scene, yelling, ‘She voted for Trump!’ The Califanos left the restaurant, but Schumer followed them outside.” On the sidewalk, Schumer carried on with his fantastical filibuster: “ ‘How could you vote for Trump? He’s a liar!’ He kept repeating, ‘He’s a liar!’ ”

Hilary confirmed the confrontation, telling Page Six, “Sen. Schumer was really rude . . . He’s our senator, and I don’t really like him. Yes, I voted for Trump. Schumer joined us outside and he told me Trump was a liar. I should have told him that Hillary Clinton was a liar, but I was so surprised I didn’t say anything.”

Notice how Schumer handles dissenting opinion: with rage, intimidation and intolerance. You’d expect a man who preens in front of the public for a living, and who runs one of America’s two major political parties in the most public job imaginable, would have a little more self-control. But he doesn’t. Why not? Because he does not feel obliged to do so. Like many of his fellow progressives, he feels entitled to impose his views in any way he wishes, even when his views are neither solicited nor appreciated.

What fuels such rage and intolerance? It’s beyond being a sore loser. The election was months ago. Democrats like Schumer already are licking their chops over a return to power, and not without reason given the Republican compulsion for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory again, and again and yet again. (Latest example: Refusing to propose an outright repeal of Obamacare in Congress, as promised for the last 7 years).

The rage and intolerance stems from the ideology of leftism itself. Think about what leftism is: force and compulsion. I won’t deny that the right is guilty of the same. But the right is more mixed. It’s a combination of liberty and compelling people to do things the government has no business making them do. Leftism, on the other hand, is almost exclusively about a big, intrusive federal government telling you what to do. It’s undiluted authoritarianism.

That’s why it’s not unusual for someone on the left side of the spectrum to do something I literally never see from the other side: assume that you agree with them, and in a hostile way. I hear stories about this from others quite a bit, and have observed it many, many times. People are at work, or at social events. Somebody on the anti-Trump/pro-Democratic side begins to talk about politics. Almost always, this is the person who brings it up. Instead of saying something like, “I don’t like what Donald Trump is doing/saying and this is why; what do you think?” the leftist launches into a hostile lecture, morally demeaning anybody who might have voted for Trump as moronic if not evil. It’s almost like a dare: “I dare you to disagree with me. If you do, you already know I think you’re moronic and evil.”

This is the sort of mentality many of us who don’t agree with leftists on everything (or even anything) are likely to encounter in regular society. And that’s what poor Mrs. Califano encountered when she recently tried to have a quiet evening out with her husband. Chuck Schumer chased her out of the restaurant, because he felt entitled to do so. That’s what authoritarians do.

Note that this is the same Chuck Schumer who defended the Fairness Doctrine for talk radio back in 2008. At the time, Obama was expected to become President, and politicians like Schumer wanted to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, which controlled the content of political speech prior to the late 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan removed it. Here’s how Schumer defended it:

The very same — the very same people that don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC to limit pornography on the air. I am for that. I think pornography should be limited. But you can’t say government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you’re allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.

He’s right about consistency. But notice he’s not in favor of repealing controls on pornography, so long as they involve consenting adults and take place  on private property. Instead, he favors retaining controls on pornography and extending them to political speech. That’s an authoritarian and a tyrant for you. Sure, Republicans who wish to outlaw pornography while upholding freedom in political speech have got a consistency problem. But what does it say about a man who recognizes this inconsistency and wishes to extend the controls and tyranny to all human activities? How does this make him much different from a Communist?

That’s the real issue here. Chuck Schumer will not pay any kind of political price for his behavior in this restaurant. Why? Because most if not all of his constituents, like himself, feel entitled to have this attitude. They feel entitled to live in a world where nobody disagrees with them on anything. Donald Trump is no ideological or political threat to him, and he knows it, particularly given his recent performance in the Obamacare repeal debacle. Trump’s threat is psychological. He dares to disagree and stand up to the schoolyard bullies who have controlled the playground, in some form, for many decades in the nation’s capital. You don’t do that, not on the career politician’s turf. Why do you think career politician Republicans are just as hostile to Trump as Democrats?

So what will become of freedom and liberty-loving Americans who don’t agree with Democrats when Democrats eventually retake the Senate and/or the White House? Schumer’s behavior gives us a preview of coming attractions. It will not be pretty.

Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael  Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on Twitter at @MichaelJHurd1

Check out Dr. Hurd’s latest Newsmax Insider column here!

Dr. Hurd’s writings read on the air by Rush Limbaugh! Read more HERE.