I get a list of conservative Townhall columns in my e-mail inbox each day, and I usually try to read one or two of them (sometimes more). Yesterday, I really enjoyed Jeff Jacoby's column about Samantha Power, who is President Barack Obama's nominee for UN ambassador. The column surprisingly speaks highly of the controversial appointment (without any sarcasm), and it is entitled, A Conservative's Case For Confirming Samantha Power. Here are a couple of passages from it:
"But [Power] first came to prominence as a journalist writing about real
human monsters – those who incite and commit genocide – and about the
consistent unwillingness of American political leaders to make the
prevention of mass slaughter a priority."
"Power is vehement and
opinionated, and the softly-softly approach has never been her style.
But since when do conservatives think that's a bad quality, above all in
ambassadors to the United Nations? Those who savored John Bolton's outspokenness and admired Kirkpatrick's moral passion
should relish the prospect of Power's fervor and candor piercing the
UN's hypocritical complacency. Her political priorities may not be
theirs – she is a liberal, after all – but a US envoy unafraid to
condemn the world's most bloodthirsty regimes is something all Americans
should value. On the evidence so far, Power and the UN are indeed a
perfect match. And yes, that's a compliment."
I'm not sure where I
stand on the issue of interventionism into other countries. I've
gravitated towards the isolationism of such figures as Pat Buchanan and
Ron Paul, yet I realize that such a position has its weaknesses. But I
still found Jacob's defense of Power to be beautiful and moving. It's
refreshing in this age of political polarization when one "side" admires
someone from the other "side."
How Can Morals Be Both Invented and True?
1 hour ago