Posted on 12/21/2021 3:27:32 AM PST by Kaslin
When someone does the right thing, do you really care about why? Or do you care more about the right thing having been done? Personally, I care more about the results than the motivation. In politics, however, political opponents of anyone will make hay out of anything they can get their hands on. Can't blame them, really, but it's wildly dishonest and smells of desperation when it happens.
Do you believe President Donald Trump did everything he did out of a deep-rooted belief in conservatism? He'd been a Democrats just a few years before running in 2016, having donated a lot of money to left-wing candidates over the previous decades. But as president, Trump did some great things for which conservatives fought and failed for years. He also appointed three solid Supreme Court Justices. Do you care whether he was really on board with those achievements in his heart of hearts, or do you care more that they were done? I care more that they were done.
Which brings us to South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem. Earlier this year, Governor Noem caught hell for opposing a piece of legislation that would have banned boys and men from competing against women in school sports. As you might imagine, this caused a lot of outrage on the Right, though mostly with people who'd pretty clearly aligned with other potential 2024 GOP presidential candidates.
That doesn't matter much, people can be outraged by whatever outrages them and support whomever they like. But at the time, I defended Noem in a piece asking, "Have we lost nuance?"
Noem's position wasn't that she supported men competing against women in college sports. She doesn't. It was that the bill the South Dakota legislature had passed was written in such a way that it would have been declared unconstitutional. And, most importantly, would have seen the entire law thrown out, including the parts protecting high school girls.
So what was Noem's offense? She said the two should be separated, that was if her assessment proved true, everything else would remain in place. It seems minor, but for some reason the state legislature didn't do it. Does it matter how something is achieved or just that it is achieved? With the South Dakota legislature, on this issue, it seems the former is what matters.
Ultimately, I'm in the other camp. I like results that stick. I'd much rather win the last game of the World Series than the last game before the All-Star break. And I don't care if I win that last game in the World Series by my team hitting a two-out, two-run homerun in the bottom of the 9th while we were down by one run, or if we won it because the ball rolled through Bill Buckner's legs (sorry, Boston fans, but that's the easiest example I can think of where an error cost someone a big game).
Since the state legislature didn't act, Noem did.
She introduced the Fairness in Girls' Sports Act, which states, "Only female athletes, based on their biological sex, shall participate in any team, sport, or athletic event designated as being for females, women, or girls." According to Governor Noem's office, "The legislation describes 'biological sex' as 'the sex listed on the student's official birth certificate issued at or near the time of the athlete's birth.'"
Do I care why she's doing it? Not really. Nor do I care much about why the state legislature didn't just do it themselves. As long as it's getting done, who cares?
As for what was the sticking point before, Governor Noem's press release on the bill addresses that. "This legislation does not have the problematic provisions that were included in last year's House Bill 1217," Governor Noem's statement read. "Those flawed provisions would have led to litigation for our state, as well as for the families of young South Dakota athletes – male and female alike."
Whether or not you believe her depends, likely, on what you thought of her going into this. I've always liked her, as I like many of the other potential 2024 candidates. I don't get worked up about any of them, no matter how desperately the media tries to make me. I care about results. And in this case, this is moving toward the result I want.
How we got to this point doesn't matter to me. That we are at this point does. And that we are in the best position possible to not only get it done, but get it done in a way that lasts, matters.
It brings me back to what I asked back in March, "Have we lost nuance?" I really hope not.
She said that she didn’t want to rush sloppy legislation that would have been overturned. She wanted to bulletproof it.
That takes time, unfortunately.
She saw the polling and her future slipping away. That simple. Governing by looking at selfish interests rather than principle, though par for the course, gives us bad governance.
She disqualified herself. Noem is about Noem, not principles.
Noem is a prettier Lindsey Graham.
I’m going to disagree with you, because I understand her position. If she had rushed out legislation and it got overturned by the courts, it would have legalized transgender males in female sports. There would have been nothing that could be done.
Yeah, I care about why.
Because I put my faith in principles, not people.
There is no "perfect" conservative (not even RR), and everyone stumbles here and there ("there is none righteous, no, not even one" Romans 3:10).
Is Kristi Noem out for herself? In a way, who the heck isn't?
The biggest question is are they useful for advancing any part of the conservative cause?
Yes? Then show them a little grace.
Not the first time she governed by finger in the wind is all I will say.
Principles vs. self interest.
Let's give her the benefit of the doubt, and see where this leads.
Yes, because nobody knows what kooks in robes will do when they get their kooky brains wobbling around on the problem.
I'm happy to just speak clear English and let the kooks throw it out.
We don't need any f@ggot men pretending to be women in sports, or for that matter at all in society. We used to toss these nuts into the crazy bin, and so far as i'm concerned, that is exactly where every man in a dress needs to be.
But by all means, let us couch our efforts at sanity in soothing terms that won't upset the crazy clown posse on the Federal bench.
Every 6 years or so Lindsey Graham is a great conservative.
Principles ≠ Self Interest
Rand, say what you will about him is Rand all 6 years. What you see is what you get, warts and all. Lindsey plays make believe conservative when an election is on the horizon.
I fear Noem is a prettier Lindsey.
“Not the first time she governed by finger in the wind”
She’s too squishy to be a good leader.
I don’t know where else she has been unreliable. However, I do understand the left in that they rush through sloppy legislation to bait us into countering with equally sloppy legislation in order to fight it in court.
Then in court, they have their organized arguments by 1000 lawyers, while we did not. We lose, transgender sports is permanent.
We can’t be sloppy in response to their baits.
I got that. But in the larger picture, would you rather be represented by Lindsey or Mazzie Hirono?
I know that doesn't help the debate, but Lindsey is of some value, however small and fleeting.
The author’s whole point was that it doesn’t matter why a politician does the right thing, just that he does it.
Furthermore, if Noem did something because she was responsive to the wishes of the people, is that a bad thing? I thought that was the whole point. Put pressure on pols and they respond - that’s a good thing.
Concur
bump
I hope you see the problem here.
“Do you believe President Donald Trump did everything he did out of a deep-rooted belief in conservatism?”
Actually, yes I do.
Asking this question in an article about someone else having done something unrelated to Trump is this weenie’s way of saying, “I’m not a simpleton that follows everything Trump believes in. I think for myself and if I create a new stick for the left to beat Trump over the head with, so be it.
It was simply an unnecessary vertue signaling swipe PERIOD.
So, what made the legislature's bill unconstitutional?
Me too.
I like her. I actually think she WAS acting out of principle - and many here just didn’t understand what that principle was.
I’ve see the same here with regard to Rand Paul and his dad all the time. They want to vote strictly according to what is Constitutional - period. They understand that without strict adherence to the Constitutional limits on government, the state quickly overpowers individuals, and our liberty is lost.
You can’t get much more principled than that.
I also think people are constantly trying to create divisions with President Trump.
He is pro vaccine. So what. The only vaccine issue that should matter to Conservatives is whether he is pro vaccine mandate, and he’s not. Liberty is the only issue that matters.
Conservatives feel so strongly about their pet issues that they are way too easy to manipulate - it worries me that the trolls will manage to split us into a million pieces.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.