So I'm reading an article on Breitbart.com and I find myself in the same situation as with my last post. I'm asking myself about Joel Pollack - do you consider yourself a Conservative? If so, why are you criticizing this action and not praising it?
The article is titled "'Justice Democrat' Ilhan Omar Argued Against Bill on Female Genital Mutilation." Ms. Omar is Muslim, a Democrat, according to the author she is a Progressive, and she was recently elected to Congress in Minnesota. The legislation in question was a Bill before the State Legislature. In classic John Kerry fashion Ms. Omar was against the bill before she voted for it.
The author states Ms. Omar's "... stance on female genital mutilation (FGM) is anything but 'progressive.'” Now here's the rub - he's completely right. Her position on the legislation was not Progressive, it was Conservative!
Ms. Omar's stance on the legislation is described in Mr. Pollack's article as follows:
While she agreed that the practice was “heinous,” and ultimately voted for the bill — contrary to at least one report — Omar claimed that FGM should not be singled out by a new law, and that parents should be charged under existing laws. She was quoted in local news as arguing: “I don’t want us to create laws because we want to get into the media and because we want a flashy headline.”
Let's dissect that.
1. Ms. Omar says the practice is heinous
2. Ms. Omar says FGM should not be singled out for a new law when there are existing laws that could be applied
3. Ms. Omar is quoted as saying “I don’t want us to create laws because we want to get into the media and because we want a flashy headline.”
As a human being, I agree with her first point.
As a Conservative, I completely agree with her next two points. I am never in favor of passing new laws when existing laws will do. Also, a corollary to that is I am never in favor of passing laws just to get a flashy headline.
Oppose passing laws that are not needed. Do not using your Legislative office just to get headlines and promote yourself rather than promoting the public good. Aren't those two principles Conservatives believe in? Or are we in some alternative universe where up is down and Conservative means Liberal?
Which brings me to the irony of Mr. Pollack's earlier statement that Ms. Omar's stance "is anything but 'progressive.'" He's right. Her stance is actually that of a Conservative.
However, based on the tone of Mr. Pollack's article, it sounds like HIS position on this issue is the Progressive one - pass the damn law whether we need it or not - and not at all Conservative.
I think a better, more Conservative approach to his article would have been to praise Ms. Omar for her position and suggest she take that approach on every issue - determine whether we really need a bill before supporting it. Another angle might have been to praise Ms. Omar's position and then use it to point out that many Conservatives adopted a similar position when opposing the passage of unnecessary legislation like "Hate Crime" bills and stating Ms. Omar is no more a misogynist than those who opposed unnecessary Hate Crime laws were racists. Both were just adopting principled positions.
Or if you really think the law was necessary, compliment her for making the same points a Conservative would normally make but point out why a law governing female genital mutilation really is needed.
But that's not what Mr. Pollack did. Instead he points out that Ms. Omar took a what is essentially a classic Conservative position and criticizes her for it. He's writing for Breitbart, not HuffPost, so what gives?
The article is titled "'Justice Democrat' Ilhan Omar Argued Against Bill on Female Genital Mutilation." Ms. Omar is Muslim, a Democrat, according to the author she is a Progressive, and she was recently elected to Congress in Minnesota. The legislation in question was a Bill before the State Legislature. In classic John Kerry fashion Ms. Omar was against the bill before she voted for it.
The author states Ms. Omar's "... stance on female genital mutilation (FGM) is anything but 'progressive.'” Now here's the rub - he's completely right. Her position on the legislation was not Progressive, it was Conservative!
Ms. Omar's stance on the legislation is described in Mr. Pollack's article as follows:
While she agreed that the practice was “heinous,” and ultimately voted for the bill — contrary to at least one report — Omar claimed that FGM should not be singled out by a new law, and that parents should be charged under existing laws. She was quoted in local news as arguing: “I don’t want us to create laws because we want to get into the media and because we want a flashy headline.”
Let's dissect that.
1. Ms. Omar says the practice is heinous
2. Ms. Omar says FGM should not be singled out for a new law when there are existing laws that could be applied
3. Ms. Omar is quoted as saying “I don’t want us to create laws because we want to get into the media and because we want a flashy headline.”
As a human being, I agree with her first point.
As a Conservative, I completely agree with her next two points. I am never in favor of passing new laws when existing laws will do. Also, a corollary to that is I am never in favor of passing laws just to get a flashy headline.
Oppose passing laws that are not needed. Do not using your Legislative office just to get headlines and promote yourself rather than promoting the public good. Aren't those two principles Conservatives believe in? Or are we in some alternative universe where up is down and Conservative means Liberal?
Which brings me to the irony of Mr. Pollack's earlier statement that Ms. Omar's stance "is anything but 'progressive.'" He's right. Her stance is actually that of a Conservative.
However, based on the tone of Mr. Pollack's article, it sounds like HIS position on this issue is the Progressive one - pass the damn law whether we need it or not - and not at all Conservative.
I think a better, more Conservative approach to his article would have been to praise Ms. Omar for her position and suggest she take that approach on every issue - determine whether we really need a bill before supporting it. Another angle might have been to praise Ms. Omar's position and then use it to point out that many Conservatives adopted a similar position when opposing the passage of unnecessary legislation like "Hate Crime" bills and stating Ms. Omar is no more a misogynist than those who opposed unnecessary Hate Crime laws were racists. Both were just adopting principled positions.
Or if you really think the law was necessary, compliment her for making the same points a Conservative would normally make but point out why a law governing female genital mutilation really is needed.
But that's not what Mr. Pollack did. Instead he points out that Ms. Omar took a what is essentially a classic Conservative position and criticizes her for it. He's writing for Breitbart, not HuffPost, so what gives?
Comments