Rich Lowry
Rich "
Starbursts" Lowry, a noted expert on women in politics,
is offended that "the 'war on women' is back, and more tendentious than ever." In 2012, he says, when Democrats campaigned against the Republican War on Women it was "strained and unconvincing," but now, in the absence (so far) of a Todd Akin for 2014, it "lacks all self-respect." It's "silly." And "insipid." But I think this might have something to do with Lowry venturing forth from his home at the
National Review to vent his outrage at Politico:
The war on women has a proven record of success — in mobilizing Democratic women and trumping what would otherwise seem much more important issues — and it is so simple that any idiot can run on it.
So the campaign against the War on Women is unconvincing and silly, but also successful. D'you think maybe that's why a committed Republican writer would spend time writing a big piece about how silly it is? Of course, Lowry's whole argument is hinged on the idea that there's no substance involved:
To the extent that the war on women has any substance, it centers on minor but flawed pieces of federal legislation like the Violence Against Women Act and the Equal Pay Act. And contraception. Always contraception.
See, Rich, the fact that you think the Violence Against Women Act and the Equal Pay Act are minor pieces of legislation is significant here. This paragraph reveals that your whole argument is "I don't think women's issues are important, so it's an outrage that Democrats are successfully able to use women's issues against Republicans."
And the thing is, people—not even just women!—disagree about that. Many people actually do think that things like equal pay and preventing and punishing domestic violence are important. The fact that a prominent Republican writer would center a major piece on the argument that major pieces of legislation affecting women are minor and substance-free is not unrelated to why War on Women charges against Republican candidates gain traction.
Of course, as a Democrat, I'm all for Lowry continuing to make this argument. Maybe some Republican candidates should hire him as a consultant and use his arguments in their stump speeches and ads. If the War on Women is as trivial and nonexistent as he says, that should work, right?