Abortion Bans Are Not Meant For Republicans (A Satire)

The following bit of brilliant satire is by Alexandra Petri in The Washington Post: 

Ah! I see the confusion! Did I say total abortion ban? I apologize. I did mean “total,” of course, for you. But I intended it to be implied that the law would not be binding to all. I thought that would be audible — as most of my remarks are these days — as a kind of dog whistle?

All the particularly deserving were to be exempt from the ban — no, not children, necessarily; I think forced birth might be a powerful growth experience for them. No, not those for whom it is medically necessary, although I certainly would like voters to feel that probably the law was not a death sentence, whether or not that’s true. Victims of rape, or incest? No, no, I meant: Republican politicians.

I understand your confusion. You think that because I am invoking a value, I believe in it for myself. Actually myself is the last person who should have to be bothered by it! And if you have any questions, please consult my T-shirt, which has a little arrow pointing at my chin and says “I’m With The In-Group The Law Protects But Does Not Bind.” No, I don’t have any more of those (they sold out almost immediately!), but I have lots of “I’m With The Out-Group The Law Binds But Does Not Protect.” What size do you wear?

Do not come to me with my own logic and reasoning and ask me to apply it to myself or my candidates of choice, as though I were of the sort who is bound by law! Law is for other people! You saw me complaining about state secrets being shared, or files being improperly stored, and thought you could repeat my own words back to me as a “gotcha,” when I seemed to fall short in the same way? No chance! I cannot be gotten!

Don’t you understand? To me, everything is permitted! Judging myself by my own standards sounds, frankly, exhausting and impossible.

Do not think for a fraction of a second, though, that I will offer you any of the same leniency. I’m sorry, but you simply don’t have the leeway, given that you have to uphold your values and mine — and some other ones you probably didn’t even know I have you upholding!

Hypocrisy? For this to be hypocrisy, I would have to profess one thing and do another. So let me take this opportunity to apologize: If I have appeared to profess anything other than the raw desire for power, that was not my intention. If I at any point seemed to espouse values, that was a huge misunderstanding. I am very, very sorry!

See? No hypocrisy here! What a relief! Now, back to this ban. And, next, if we’re lucky, my plan to seize control of elections so I can weed out the votes with which I disagree. Remember, if I do it, it’s solving voter fraud, not committing it! Then, will I show my intense concern for the deficit by making it bigger, with tax cuts? Who knows! I am hypocrisy-proof and free as the wind!