“We were merry, in our undertone, at the idea of making so large a cup of tea for the fishes.” -Joshua Wyeth, 1773
Reports over the weekend indicated that one of Governor Gavin Newsom’s business ventures, Plumpjack, was once again targeted by ne’er-do-wells. In addition to causing crime, apparently poverty also makes people thirsty. According to reports, the latest theft marks at least the fourth time such an event has taken place. Perhaps more surprising in the news release is not that this has happened four times, but that it has happened only four times.
Be it Newsom’s haughty spirits store or anywhere else in the city by the bay, there was no avoiding this outcome. Increased theft is the natural consequence of statutory relaxation – thanks to 2014’s Prop 47 – in California that allows up to $950 worth stolen merchandise to be treated as a misdemeanor rather than a felony (but ostensibly not a crime at all).
While outrageous, a news story about increased crime in leftist hellholes barely registers anymore; they are that commonplace. For most, therefore, the latest headline provided a quick laugh at the expense of Newsom but nothing more. For me, though, it prompted a fascinating idea.
Imagine this scene: 1,000 patriots stand outside each of California Governor Gavin Newsom’s two wine and spirit stores waiting patiently for business hours to commence. When the doors open, the peaceful crowd waits their turn to enter, selects a choice bottle of Napa wine under one of the Plumpjack Family Wines labels, and exits the store without paying, merchandise in hand. This alone would be a wonderful optic – a revolving door of smiling Americans ready to toast at the expense of their leftist, lunatic leaders and the untenable policy positions they espouse.
What occurs next is where the event becomes even more richly symbolic and meaningful. Rather than uncork one of Newsom’s own Cabernet Sauvignons at their next meal, each patriot could march over to the Golden Gate Bridge and pour their bottle into the San Francisco Bay. Can you imagine the photos of the bridge lined with Americans, each with an inverted, and now emptied, vessel of wine? The thought is titillating.
To be certain, the actions are not without risk. Under California penal codes, despite the reality being that criminals are rarely brought to justice (see: a video from Wal-Greens, a video from Neiman Marcus, and another viral video from CVS), there nevertheless exists the possibility of prosecutorial actions. For petty theft, the law on the books is no more than six months in county jail and a fine of no more than $250. Even though the law is rarely, if ever, enforced, does anyone really believe local DAs, Breed London, and Chesa Boudin wouldn’t exact revenge on regular Americans making a political stand? If the January 6th narrative has taught us anything, it’s that being a regular patriot is dangerous.
Still, our original founders risked certain death for their bold actions against British rule. Now? A $68 PlumpJack Syrah might – might – result in a small fine, especially if the patriots with sticky fingers don’t have any priors. Moreover, there appears to be no law forbidding the inclusion of alcoholic beverages into the frigid waters surrounding the city. At any rate, any legal action taken against the modern-day tea partiers would quickly highlight the rank hypocrisy of criminal justice. There are simply too many other examples of crime going unpunished to suddenly find a problem with a single event.
I admit, while brazen theft is condemned in the Bible (it’s one of the Ten Commandments, no less) there is a certain joy in pondering the optics, retribution, and demonstration of absurdity that marks Democrat leadership. I can justify taking from him. Insofar as Californians pay the highest tax rate in the nation and live under tyrannical oppression, a bottle or two of Newsom’s expensive estate wines seems a paltry trade off. Call it peaceful, call it tax-payer reparations, call it redistribution of wealth, or call it community unrest. Each moniker is accurate and beautifully appropriated from the absolutely ludicrous chyrons of the George Floyd Riots.
At any rate, the merchandise is insured, right?
What’s more, knowing that Newsom operates a successful vineyard, winery, and liquor store naturally prompts a logical question: How is it that the man competently runs a private business but played a central hand in bottoming out San Francisco and later the entire state of California? How is it that the man shut down schools and restaurants but had no issue sending his own children to in-person learning at private schools and dining at posh eateries? How is that he endorses open theft of small business? I would derive immense pleasure listening to him explain how his own law enabled the emptying of his own store.
It also prompts another question: How long would wealthy, leftist elites tolerate crime laws if they were actually impacted by them? Politicians rarely like being affected by their own policies. I wonder how long San Francisco would remain a prosecutorial-feee zone for thefts under $950 if the ruling class of bourgeoisie felt the sting of their idiotic legislation.
In any event, none of this should be understood as strategizing a crime. The FBI might do that with regard to gubernatorial kidnappings, but that’s not my cup of tea (or glass of wine, as it were). No, no, no, crime is bad and I would never encourage American heroes to merrily make a large glass of wine for the fishes.
I’m just saying it would be awesome.