Ron Paul's loyality to what and to whom
Posted on 04/07/2010 1:32:58 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Conflicting loyalties seem to have resulted in some surprising political decisions by Sarah Palin.
On Monday here at NewsReal Blog I argued that Govenor Sarah Palin’s active support of John McCain’s Senate reelection campaign makes no sense. Palin, after all, doesn’t owe McCain anything. Whatever debt she might have owed McCain she paid off during the 2008 presidential campaign.
In fact, if anything, it seems to me that McCain is indebted to Palin. This because his ‘08 campaign really did her a disservice, and also because McCain staffers have since betrayed the former Alaska governor with malicious and disparaging leaks to the media.
Many of the commenters to my post don’t disagree. However, they write, there is one laudable reason why Palin is actively supporting McCain: loyalty.
Fair enough. Loyalty is important. But it seems to me that Palin has competing loyalty obligations; and that she chose to be loyal to McCain when she just as easily could have chosen to be loyal to other people and other principles instead.
For example, Palin knows that some of her most steadfast supporters in the conservative and Tea Party movements have very profound and important differences with McCain.
These Palin supporters believe that on too many critical issues — including free speech (aka “campaign finance reform”), military modernization, and illegal immigration – McCain is a liberal wolf in a conservative sheep’s clothing.
What about loyalty to these people? What about loyalty to their issues and concerns? Why does loyalty to one man, one politician, outweigh loyalty to millions of dedicated conservative and Tea Party activists?
And why does personal loyalty to a man (McCain) outweigh loyalty to a set of conservative political principles?
No one’s saying that Palin had to actively oppose McCain. That might, indeed, have been awkward and ill-advised given that she was his vice presidential running mate.
But why did Palin have to go out of her way to actively support and campaign for McCain? Why couldn’t she have praised both McCain and his challenger, Rep. J.D. Hayworth, while remaining neutral in the Arizona Senate race?
I can think of two possible explanations offered up, respectively, by journalists Conor Friedersdorf and Matthew Continetti.
Friedersdorf says that Palin simply may not be the conservative her steadfast supporters think she is. She may, in fact, be a John McCain Republican. This would mean that she is liberal on some issues, moderate on others, and conservative about a few things.
Continetti notes that since being thrust into the national limelight, Palin has “become incredibly rich.” It may be — and this is me speaking, not Continetti — that because of her newfound riches, Palin feels an understandable debt, literally and figuratively, to Sen. McCain.
If true, that’s fine. Making money to support one’s family is honorable. But that’s a different type of loyalty, I think, than many of the governor’s defenders have in mind.
John R. Guardiano is a writer and analyst in Arlington, Virginia. You can follow him on Twitter: @Guardian0.
Bump
Nice collection of freeper quotes there dude....
“I said that making the sacrifice she did would make her a good candidate in my book.”
Absolutely. I agree that Alaska deserved a governor who wasn’t shoved into a bunker, and Palin is now freed up for mobile warfare, well, hopefully she’ll be more freed up after McStain quits hiding behind her skirts.
Though I detest CNN they streamed The Bachman-Palin rally, in MN, live today, it was great. No mention on FOX, how strange?
The very first chapter of Mark R. Levin's fine book "Liberty and Tyranny" opens with the following:
THERE IS SIMPLY NO scientific or mathematical formula that defines conservatism. Moreover, there are competing voices today claiming the mantle of "true conservatism" --- including neo-conservatism (emphasis on a robust national security), paleo-conservatism (emphasis on preserving the culture), social conservatism (emphasis on faith and values), and libertarianism (emphasis on individualism), among others.
This is true with Sarah Palin. While she might have certain "conservative ideals", she hasn't defined them, and neither have her most ardent followers. The same is true for Ron Paul. While I disagree with his foreign policy views vis-a-vis the Iraq War, I strongly agree that the Federal Reserve should be audited annually, I also strongly agree with him on border enforcement (which is both a national security and culture issue).
Live and learn.
Being a governor is not a 9 to 5 job. It is 24/7 . I have no problem with women working, but lets not treat a woman holding a job that precludes proper time with her family as a virtue. And Palin tried to turn it into one. She is a feminist, not a conservative.
Ron Paul's loyality to what and to whom
Thanks........ Don’t spend a lot of time looking. I just thought you may know of one off hand. I looked at McCain’s web site and he has some videos of support but not the radio ads. TAke care.
“But if Sarah alienates the conservatives, she has no base”
Right. The fact that it isn’t self-serving makes me respect her — but grudgingly because I wish it wasn’t for a McStain.
“Is Palin doing the ads or is McCain posting her sound bites from the past in his ads? “
It is ALL NEW...ALL PALIN...NO BYTES.
See post 41
“Her views will conform to whoever wins the nomination to be the GOP candidate for Senate in Arizona.”
You must have better sources than me.
Cool. Catfight....
from the ones that ‘try’ to look honest and suddenly enlightened....
“I like her but I have serious doubts.....” -
You’re an admitted MittBot through and through—which might just a wee tad bit color your perception of Palin’s motives and merits.
(And someone who supports Romney has some gall to be accusing Palin of shameless ambition!)
Doesn’t seem like you learned - your Barryboy is still under skin and in your pocket.
FGS! You are really a piece of work, rabscuttle385. Your hatred of Sarah Palin is out of control.
That asshat writer of this hit piece needs both a shrink and a clue.
Define "incredibly rich" - he didn't.
One year of making money doesn't mean she's "incredibly rich."
He neglects to show where or how, "her lifestyle has changed."
He neglects to show that she is motivated by money.
Sarah wrote a book and it became a best seller! GOOD on her and GOOD for her, but again, it was Sarah's success, just like every success in her life.
Sarah is a self-made successful woman of many accomplishments. From her degree in journalism to the governorship of Alaska, she'ds always made her own way.
John McCain brought her to the national stage, and they became close friends. She likes and admires him. Tough for you, and tough for us who want him out of the senate, but Sarah is not on the Arizona ballot: McCain *is*.
If Sarah's endorsement and campaign ads were all that were needed to win races, then all we'd need is to have Sarah make campaign ads for all the races!!!
I have no idea what this is about. I’ll sit back and watch.
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.