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.
I hope no child of yours ever slips and falls from the path you have taught and lived. If such should occur, do not take it a proof of your failure as a parent. But in view of your perfectionist view of the absolute, unfailing effectiveness of parental counsel (and control) I fear for your ability to accept an erring child’s misstep.
I would say stopping health care; the unemployment rate; and the deficit are more important. Each to his own.
With your newly acquired logic, she's a traitor RINO.
Or did you miss that?
“Unless the Indian reservations steal it for McCain, it’s JD’s win. The motivated vote in primaries. “
I pray to God you are right. No sarcasm!
The key is for us to keep focused (well, ME right now), to ignore the below the belt personal attack by someone who is doing NOTHING for conservatism, and to continue the fight for liberty.
FOCUS!
(Talking to myself!)
Paul supporters are NOT conservatives. WE are. ONWARD!
The issue of course isn’t this year, but the next six. I’m a Palin fan but I sorely wish she had only backed McCain nominally, at most.
Thanks for posting that, McGavin999! “You betcha,” I think she got the message, by the crowd numbers!!!
I guess you missed THIS
To: Lakeshark
“According to Sjb, Palin is now the enemy, which, according to their logic means Bachmann is too. “
Uh, not so fast....I don’t see Bachmann doing Arizona Biltmore fundraisers for McCain
I don’t see Bachman making multiple appearances with McCain
I don’t see Bachmann running radio ads all day long, every day for McCain.
Funny how you missed that. Then again, no it isn’t.
201 posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2010 4:03:19 PM by stephenjohnbanker
I live in San Diego and 20 miles north of the larges and busiest border crossing in the world. I know all about
the problems of illegals for decades.
Just another reason I support Sarah Palin
Palin expands her position on Illegal Immigration
Palin: we need to close the borders. They are called illegal aliens for a reason and if they are not going to follow the rules they should not be in our country.
It’s pretty simple I ratched that one down to the simple answer because its an easier answer than some politicians want it to make it be. you close the borders.
You get more agressive about cracking down on the illegal aliens and we take it serious what our border patrol officers are trying to do
December 2009
Lars Larson radio talk show
LARS: The amnesty proposal that was defeated in Congress — in your view, was that amnesty for illegals and would you back amnesty for a path to citizenship, as the current president calls it?
SARAH PALIN: No, I’m not for amnesty. Let’s ratchet this down quite simply to remember what we’re referring to. Illegal aliens are called “illegal” for a reason.
We need to secure our borders and I am not for amnesty. And there are humane ways to deal with the 11-13 million illegal aliens who are in our country right now, but if they’re not going to follow the rules, they need to get out.
Too right.
Before the VP campaign, Sarah Palin, boasted that when one of her children was born (I forget which one), she was back in the office within days.
This gained her great applause - so strong, so dynamic, so committed to public office. And indeed, Sarah Palin is used as a talking point that women can "have it all."
But one does wonder about the infant. Some mailing lists of Stay At Home Mothers lamented this story, pointing out how the quiet devotion of mothers who give full time care to their children is disregarded. They also specifically suggested that the older girls might become troubled, seeing so little of their parents, and being responsible for the situation at home.
If he valued her half as much before he realized how much he needs her now, he’d have held back and spoken out against his handlers who savaged her after the election.
I’m a big fan of Sarah, but I’m starting to have some reservations about her as a Presidential candidate - and they’re actually similar to the non-ideological (setting aside that Obama is wrong ideologically on pretty much EVERYTHING) concerns I had about Obama.
Sarah doesn’t hang around terrorists or go to hate churches, but she didn’t serve a single term in her elected office and there’s a lot I don’t know about her or where she stands - sure, she can tell us, but we haven’t really seen enough of her style of governance. She’s popular and an electric speaker (even without a teleprompter!) which is good for fundraising, but aren’t exactly leadership credentials. She has a compelling life story, but I’m more interested in what a President will do than where they’re from. She was even nudged out of office by libs abusing an ethics law she passed to slam her office with frivolous claims - that’s the same type of naivety that’s so alarming with Obama.
There are plenty of good candidates - the media loves to jabber about Romney, Huckabee, and Palin, but what about the ones conservatives have seen govern effectively? Why are they so hush-hush on Thune, or Daniels, or Jindal, or Barbour, or Pence? Sometimes I think media silence is more indicative than media rage that there’s something there which would undermine their liberal hegemony.
I’m starting to learn more about Sarah, but its really difficult to reconcile what she says she stands for when there’s not a comprehensive record there to analyze. For example, Romney says things that are completely opposite from how he actually governed, and I like having that firewall there to keep me from being fooled.
That said, if it really is Sarah against Huck & Mitt and the usual suspects (Paul, Rudy, etc) instead of anyone really substantive, there’s no doubt I’m for her.
Maybe we should cut sjb some slack if he’s in Arizona and has to keep listening to and watching the ads over and over again. It’s easier for us across the country to be bothered by it but keep some perspective on the big picture and 2012.
I think Sarah Palin’s husband Todd is quite capable. But I understand she left the gov office in alaska cuz she was being aggresively sued by those in her own party. Mrs. Palin chose to pay for her defense rather than impose that cost on the taxpayers of her own state. Mrs. Palin should be applauded for that.
How many other politicians do we know that pay for their own defense in frivolous lawsuits rather than charging the taxpayer?
Mrs. Palin is able to make the bucks because of her popularity. I doubt Todd Palin could bring in the bucks like she is.
Besides, isn’t a parents responsibility, regardless of sex, to provide and care for their children equally?
Both parents are heavily involved in the parenting, Todd left his job to help pick up some of the parenting load.
So the kids now have a dad that stays home full time and a mom that works part time, sounds OK to me.
whatever happened to the “mute” button on the remote?
Actually, although I knew about your delightful and memorable meeting with President Bush, I wasn’t on the thread that night, so it was neat to read your post. rabscuttle385’s later post to you on this thread is unconscionable. Everyone here knows that you’re a devout Christian woman, married to the same wonderful man and mother of four successful adult children. You are blessed and God bless you, ohioWfan!
I don't have to watch the ads here in Ohio.
HOWEVER, I'm countering it with donations to J.D. and that helps a lot.
It is the extremity of the anger that I can't accept.
Palin and Bachmann have very similar views. To throw Sarah under the bus because of this endorsement makes no logical sense whatsoever.
awww, a concerned NewBie.
Perhaps you know that he didn’t?
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.