Tucker Carlson comes undone
July 06, 2009 12:42 pm ET by Jamison Foser
The generous view of Tucker Carlson is that, faults aside, he is at least a principled libertarian. Carlson himself is the most vigorous advocate for that view of Tucker Carlson, but he undermined it badly during today's Washington Post online discussion with a series of comments about his hometown:
Tucker Carlson: I love Washington. My wife and all four of my children were born in Northwest. I hope I never leave. But let's be honest: The city's not ready for democracy, much less statehood.
...
Katy, Tex.: Non Palin question. Considering that the Washington, D.C., crowd continues to elect Marion Barry to publicly paid posts, why does anyone think it is a good idea to let them elect a full-fledged representative to the House?
Tucker Carlson: Of course not. It's insane, not to mention unconstitutional. As a resident of the city, I'm happy to have taxation without representation.
So, Carlson is content to have 600,000 American citizens subject to taxation without representation because he doesn't like the way those citizens would vote if given congressional representation? That isn't principled libertarianism, that's run-of-the-mill unprincipled Republicanism.
(And that "unconstitutional" bit is nonsense, as Carlson well knows. The District of Columbia could certainly be granted statehood, and the two Senators and a Representative that would go along with it. Even if one stipulates that there are Constitutional hurdles to congressional representation for DC residents, the Constitution comes equipped with a handy remedy: the amendment process. That's how DC residents gained the right to vote for President, after all. One might expect a principled libertarian to take the stance that if the Constitution mandates taxation of US citizens without representation, the Constitution must be changed.)
This is a classic characteristic of propaganda... it can be self-contradictory from one week to the next, depending on who is speaking and about whom. Rush Limbaugh does it all the time... he flips and flops like a flounder on a hot boat dock.
1.) Redefine the District of Columbia as the fairly modest expanse of land on which the mall, the monuments, the museums, and most government buildings are located.
2.) Return the rest of the current District to the state of Maryland, which ceded the land for it in the first place.
Voila. Virtually everyone now has full voting rights and the nation still has a capital that belongs to everyone.
Optionally, the state of Virginia could cede the land on which the Pentagon sits so that it too could be part of a redefined government-specific District. If memory serves, Virginia originally ceded that land and some surrounding territory to be part of the capital, but got it back several decades later because it appeared that it would never be needed. How times change!
Optionally, that redefinition could involve Virginia ceding the land on which the Pentagon sits
POV, do you have a link for that?