Although we are generally in agreement with the Republican Party’s policies, we cannot endorse its new idea of kicking all the women out of the country. We were quite unaware of this Republican scheme until Democratic National Committee chairwoman and Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz recently brought it to our stunned attention. Appearing on the Cable News Network, she explained that “Look, between the 15 Republicans that are left — all of whom are trying to out-Trump Donald Trump — by saying, ‘Yeah let’s kick women. Let’s kick them and immigrants out of the country. Let’s take away health care from women.'”
Thus far we cannot confirm that any of those 15 Republicans, even Trump, are actually advocating any of this, but there are several among them who could probably say even more outrageous things without the press or anybody else noticing, and we’d hate to think the chairwoman of a major American political party would resort to slanderous hyperbole to make a point, so until all of those candidates provide solid proof that they’re not plotting to kick all the women out of the country we’ll assume the worst. There’s a grain of truth to the rest of Wasserman Schultz’s rant, too, as most of the Republicans do seem willing to kick out some of the more troublesome illegal immigrants, and if by “health care” she means continued subsidies for late-term abortions and Planned Parenthood’s baby parts business, well, most of those 15 Republicans are on the record as being against that as well, so we can’t in good conscience accuse Wasserman Schultz of being a liar.
In which we case feel compelled to state, despite our longstanding registration with the Republican Party, that we are not favor of kicking all the women out of the country. Indeed, we even share Wasserman Schultz’s indignation with the very notion.
It’s not good politics, for one thing, what with women being such a sizable share of the electorate. Our guess is that most women will be opposed to such a policy, unless it involves being kicked out to a country populated entirely of unusually well-built yet endlessly attentive and impeccably liberal men, which is unlikely, so it could prove problematic in the general election. If the Republicans did somehow survive the issue and actually carry out the policy it would be a boon to the party, given its decisive edge in the male vote over the years, but it doesn’t seem worth the risk.
Neither does it seem good policy to kick all the women out of the country, despite the tempting obvious benefits. There’s that whole biological imperative thing to be considered, even if it doesn’t seem to figure in the debate about subsidizing late-term abortions and Planned Parenthood’s baby parts business, and even in the Obama age when women’s workforce participation is sliding to pre-feminist levels we recognize a certain economic value to having women in a country. There are a number of women we rather like, too, despite our Republicanism, and even though most of them tend to vote wrong we’d hate to seem them summarily kicked out of the country.
Strange as it seems to be in agreement with Wasserman Schultz, we proudly stand with her brave defense of having women in America. One can only hope that at least one of those 15 Republican candidates will be similarly brave.
— Bud Norman