I was working on an article on the similarities between liberals' embrace of theories of anthropogenic climate change and their enthusiasm, in an earlier generation, for Keynesian economics when I heard the news of Sarah Palin's decision to resign as governor of Alaska.
So, naturally, I have to write about it. After all, I've already published five articles on this site about the Alaska governor and the never-ending stream vicious attacks on her. My last article appeared just three weeks ago. I didn't expect to be writing again on the subject so soon — even after I read the recent hit piece in August's Vanity Fair that provided an outlet for the anti-Palin rants of the (still) unnamed McCain campaign staffers.
Partly, this was because not all the recent media coverage of Palin has been that bad. The August issue of Runner's World has a very positive feature story focusing on Gov. Palin's passion for long-distance running — a passion I share (along with Rep. Ron Paul's passion for cycling!). Had she not announced her resignation as governor, I expect that the story would have generated still another frivolous ethics complaint. After all, she expressed a preference for a particular brand of running shoe. (To find out which brand, you'll have to read the article.)
Gov. Palin alluded to the frivolous ethics complaints — fifteen have been filed against her since last summer, and all of them have been dismissed — in the press conference she called to announce her resignation. The complaints, she said, have consumed enormous amounts of her time and her staff's time, impairing her ability to govern effectively.
Naturally, the cable network talking heads have already begun to dissect Palin's decision and its effect on her chances of winning the Republican Presidential nomination in 2012. The consensus seems to be — William Kristol of The Weekly Standard being one of the few exceptions — that Palin's decision to resign before the end of her term will irreparably harm her chances of winning the nomination or getting elected if she wins it. Another dumb move by the Wasilla whack-job, the chatterers are saying. Proof that she's unfit to be President. I'm sure that Kathleen Parker, the "conservative" columnist with an incurable case of PDS*, will be out with a column this weekend making these very points.
They're all assuming, of course, that Governor Palin wants to be President Palin.
Suppose she doesn't. Suppose she really, truly wants what's best for those to whom she has made solemn commitments — namely, the people of Alaska and the members of her family. Suppose that the endless attacks on her, the frivolous ethics complaints, the intense media scrutiny — suppose that the time and resources spent in constantly putting out these fires have made it difficult, if not impossible, to keep the commitments she has made, and suppose that she has determined, accordingly, that she can do more for Alaskans and her family if she is not the governor.
Then her decision is actually an act of statesmanship. She is like the soldier in battle who willingly takes a bullet to save his comrades. She has put the interests of those she serves ahead of her own. She really does have the "servant's heart" she's always talking about.
Of course, I don't expect the beltway talking heads — of either party — to understand this. Even William Kristol thought Gov. Palin's resignation might just be a clever way to set herself up for winning the Republican nomination in 2012. And maybe it is, even if it is unintentional. Imagine: a candidate who puts the interests of her constituents and her family ahead of her own political ambitions. Wow! What a concept!
And maybe, just maybe, somewhere in the subconscious recesses of their collective (and collectivist) minds the beltway elites do understand this. And, if they do, they are right to be afraid.
I really, truly, hope that I won't find it necessary to write any more articles defending Sarah Palin, at least for a while. I hope she can find some well-deserved peace and time to enjoy her family. But I'm afraid this is not to be.
I predict that Sarah Palin, as a private citizen, will continue to be attacked and vilified in the liberal blogosphere and the mainstream media. I predict that she will continue to be the butt of jokes from late-night comedians. I predict that the D. C. Republican establishment will continue to try to shut her out. I make these predictions because, as I explained in the last two articles I published on this site (which you can read here and here), she is an attractive, intelligent, articulate, pro-life evangelical Christian who resonates with a large number of American voters because she is one of them. And the elites are afraid of her, even if they don't know why.
In fact, the attacks have begun already. Upon learning the news, Brad Woodhouse, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, issued the following statement:
Either Sarah Palin is leaving the people of Alaska high and dry to pursue her long shot national political ambitions or she simply can't handle the job now that her popularity has dimmed and oil revenues are down. Either way — her decision to abandon her post and the people of Alaska who elected her continues a pattern of bizarre behavior that more than anything else may explain the decision she made today.
We can expect more of this, and worse, in the days, weeks and months to come. Because, although they might claim otherwise, her enemies know, in their heart of hearts, that Sarah Palin is no lightweight. If she were, they wouldn't be trying so hard to destroy her.
*Palin Derangement Syndrome.©2009 Phil Manger, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Saturday, July 4, 2009
Last modified: Saturday, July 4, 2009
The views expressed in this article are those of Phil Manger only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Phil Manger is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Phil Manger of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By Phil Manger |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Micki Bond
Date: 2009-07-04 06:59:06
well said, Phil!
Posted By: Dale Husband
Date: 2009-07-05 18:56:48
Are you sure you are a libertarian? Your bashing of Liberals and your praise for Sarah Palin make you sound like a Rush Limbaugh/Ann Coulter style right wing extremist. I'll know in the future to be wary of anything you say from now on.
Posted By: Phil Manger
Date: 2009-07-05 20:02:08
Yes, I really am a libertarian. I've been a libertarian for over 40 years. The only change in my views during that period are (1) I am no longer an anarchist, having conceded to reality on that point some years ago; and (2) I am now pro-life.
As for your other point, if you re-read my artricle (as well as other articles I've written on this subject), you'll see that I haven't been "praising" Sarah Palin so much as defending her from the mindless attacks that have been made against her.
Sarah Palin is not a libertarian, and I've never claimed that she is. However, in her role as governor of Alaska, and in the statements she made before becoming the Republican vice-presidential nominee, she has been more libertarian than just about all other Republican politicians except Ron Paul. For example, she opposes income and sales taxes, preferring instead severance taxes on resource extraction (effectively a land-use tax, the only kind of tax a libertarian can support). She wants to shrink government. Despite the allegation that she claimed the Iraq war was a "task from God" (she actually said "let us pray" that it is a task from God), her statements have indicated that she is less than enthusiastic about the war (when asked about "the surge", she replied that she hoped we have an exit strategy in place). She pointedly did not endorse McCain when he locked up the Republican nomination. When Ron Paul was running in the Republican primaries, some of his supporters proposed Palin as a possible running mate for him. And she has also spoken warmly of Ron Paul.
In my opinion Palin made a HUGE mistake in accepting McCain's offer. They should have let her keynote the GOP convention and nominated someone else for VP. Once she became McCain's running mate, she had to toe the McCain/neocon line. During the Katie Couric interview, Palin looked like she was becoming physically ill when she was asked about the bailouts. It was obvious to me, if not to others, that she did not like the bailouts, but felt obliged to parrot McCain's views. And I believe her fundamental policy differences with McCain are what really lay behind her clashes with McCain's campaign staff.
Posted By: Tim
Date: 2009-07-06 08:20:26
Kudos, Phil.
I am a libertarian who donated to the GOP after Palin's announcement. I was refreshed by the Republicans seeming to embrace some more libertarian, reform minded politicians.
But, par for the course, if you defend her, then already somebody is attacking YOUR character. I don't know if the lefties read the lib forums or are confused on their own ideology, but I didn't expect school yard insults or personal attacks in the libertarian forums. Even as a libertarian, I still have respect for Limbaugh and Coulter, and read/listen to what they have to say. I don't always agree, but I can at least pick out what is useful and what's not.
Posted By: LibertarianBlue
Date: 2009-07-07 15:42:16
Maybe its me but I remember a small thing my dad (a Vietnam Vet) told me one day "If you cant take the heat, get out of the fire". I learned very quickly that politics is a blood sport regardless if your a politician or just an observer. I would think Palin wouldve learned this lesson by now even after seeing how Clinton was treated by her/husbands enemies and hell even her own team. I see this as a good thing from a strength prespective since I dont want a leader to will cave/complain about the other side picking on them. I want a leader with a spine, nasty attacks from the opposing side weed out the weak.