You’re a unique phenomenon. You’re a millennial who doesn’t shy away from a tough conversation because feelings might get hurt.
And you’ve got a heck of a following.
Millions of people hang on your every word. So that means you have an immense responsibility to get it right.
No, not “right” as in “have every single one of us agree with you every time;” you need to get it “right” when it comes to the facts.
In the firestorm that followed your comments on The View, you rightly pointed out that we’re all entitled to our beliefs.
I happen to think you’re wrong on the issue of pre-born life, but that’s not entirely what I’m here for today. I (along with millions of other Constitutional Conservatives) am livid because while you’re entitled to your opinion, you are NOT entitled to twist the message of Constitutional Conservatism to fit your view. A view, I might add, that happens to be the polar opposite of one you held just a few months ago. You know, the one where you called abortion “murder” and “baby killing”? So which is it? I’d be a little afraid of where your credibility is right now. Who can trust you on this, or any future issue? Steve Deace put it perfectly: “If someone will fold on life, they’ll fold on everything else, too.”
You told The View (when asked how you could support someone who said such vile things about women as Donald Trump had) that you made a judgement call based on Hillary Clinton’s actions as opposed to Donald Trump’s comments. Since you’ve got two very different actions sitting in front of us right now (yes, they’re more than just words—you’re on tape TWICE espousing opposing views), should we not judge you by the same standard? You’ve spent the weekend portraying yourself as a warrior for truth who’s simply being attacked for “being honest;” but given your epic flip-flop, shouldn’t we question that honesty?
But again, I’m not here to debate your current position on abortion, or your past one. That is, as you rightly noted, the opinion you’re entitled to hold at any given time.
I’m here to take issue with you on how you justified that position to the ladies of The View.
You said that you are pro-choice, because it would be “hypocritical” of you to sit there as a supporter of limited government and advocate for government to dictate what we women do with our bodies.
You’re right on one count: Constitutional Conservatives do believe in limited government; we believe wholeheartedly in what our Founders saw as the answer to the millennia of man’s oppression over others: limiting the power and the scope of the government. I realize that you’re “not a reader” but rather a “watcher” (your words, not mine), but I’d encourage you to go and truly read the words of our Founders.
Not only that, but read the words of the thinkers that came before them. Read the words that influenced the drafting of our Constitution, and before that, the Declaration of Independence wherein these critical words are enshrined right out of the gate: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
Our Founders recognized that life—above all—was to be protected. Government was supposed to exist to protect and preserve life, and yes—many times that’s done through mandates. You know, like the ones that say we can’t physical harm or kill a person without consequences. That’s a mandate that a Constitutional Conservative should have no problem with.
Just like you, I too believe the government should largely stay out of what we do with our own bodies. Here’s the flaw in your logic though: as you rightly recognized just three short months ago, a pre-born baby isn’t some tumor on the mother’s uterus. He or she is a biologically separate life, with separate DNA, blood, heart, lungs, brain … the list goes on. And given the fact that that kid can’t defend his or her life by exercising his or her Second Amendment rights (that you also praised on The View), is it not the government’s prerogative to protect that life by prohibiting its murder through the process of abortion? It absolutely should be. And it’s a tragedy that it largely isn’t.
As long as we’re talking about the Second Amendment, I found it wildly ironic that in the same breath, you’re telling government to keep its mitts off your guns (the ones you use for YOUR preservation of YOUR life)—while condemning pre-born children to their deaths in the name of not having government go too far.
Ultimately, I can’t read your heart, and I don’t know what you really believe about the matter. I do know that one generally doesn’t go from believing “it’s murder” to believing it’s simply a “choice” that government should butt out of, without something else driving your decisions (like getting ahead in this highly competitive, headline driven, anti-life world), but again, I can’t read your heart.
I do know this: Constitutional Conservatism is not up for interpretation. You don’t get to market yourself as a standard bearer of our founding principles and then go on national TV to spit on the ONE thing that makes those founding documents different from anything else that had ever been tried. Without the inherent God-given right to life, the Declaration of Independence is nothing—and without it, the Constitution is nothing.
Here’s the thing, Tomi: with just a few words on The View, your views are being applauded by millions of progressive liberals who were dying to hear a “conservative” say what you just said. And now the rest of us have deal with the cleanup involved with the fact that you justified killing a child in the name of limited government.
Tomi, you can believe whatever you want.
You just don’t get to call it Constitutional Conservatism.