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 was talking about Bachmann, not Palin.
In any event, the statement remains true — fragile and needy children don’t care whether Mom is Congresswoman or Governor or ex-Gov.
I’m all for Palin campaigning about the country and try to save the country from socialism, just so long as Todd picks up the slack at home, and we don’t see much evidence of that, her angry denials withstanding. Until he recently quit his job, he’s worked most of his adult life, and Sarah was out being Mayor and Gov, so who was taking care of the five kids?
I care about kids. That’s my “problem.”
Speaking of character, I care about those Palin kids. You, not so much.
Still no response to my points — just a lot of personal attacks. The facts —
— Bristol got pregnant
— Levi living in Palin house (basically with girlfriend)
— Todd working on his job until very recently (who was minding the kids?)
— No detailed response from either of the Palins about this.
— If they’re going to play in the big leagues, they have to show more parenting skills and attention to kids. It’s not that hard. Politicians do it all the time.
What are you talking about? I haven't made any personal attacks towards you. Please show me where I have.
I simply stated that I will not pass judgement on working mothers. I also have seen what you might consider ideal home situations, stay at home mom for example, and still the daughter got pregnant.
No detailed response from either Palin? Why do they have to give you a detailed response? I think you're a bit over the top and if you think children are perfect, well, you have a long way to fall.
You list of concerns can lend themselves to lots of speculation. However, we will not get any insights into what goes on or has occured in the past as long as the Palins think that what goes on in the home says in the home. You cannot blame them for this type of thinking because this is a how most Americans think about their home. It has been a tradition in this country to see the home as a man’s castle and if someone wants to think something about them, then as my grandmother used to say, “Let them think, it will not change a damned thing.”
You=Your. The “R” sometimes does not type right on my keyboard.
You attacked Levi without answering his points. Just because he’s a jerk doesn’t mean everything he says is a lie. Especially if the basic facts seem to support his version.
So long as the Palins don’t give a detailed response to genuine concerns about their kids, they cannot hold themselves up as a paragon of family values. It not only opens them up to attack from conservatives (me) or much worse, their liberal enemies.
You can use your preferred anecdotes about bad stay-at-home moms, but that does not answer my point. It is a sin for two prosperous parents — and most parents in America are rich by global standards — to abandon their children to day care or nannies. If you can’t pass judgment on that, what CAN you pass judgment on? Are you a liberal at heart?
Don’t worry. We’ll get you a roach motel.
Lol. I was wondering if they’d take the bait.
Have a good chuckle? I did ;-)
The rest of your assertions rely on the testimony of Levi Johnston. If you want to consider him a reliable source, that's your business.
In the meantime, I'll feel free to suspect you are buying into his story because you want to.
Is that you, Levi?
Seriously, you are going to be sooo embarrassed when you sober up.
I didn’t know they let Levis crack head mom post from jail.
Bristol got pregnant
Levi stayed at their house (did the Palins deny that?)
Until very recently, Todd and Sarah were both away working.
A lot of kids with little parenting.
I rest my case.
And you said you didn’t do personal attacks. See Jim Rob’s warning below. But I won’t report you. :-)
You are way too generous for a lib - so you can keep yours.
GO CONSERVATIVE SARAH - you p*ss them off and American Patriots will step on them!
Or did Levi tell you?
Nothing goes unnoticed here. YOU think I didn’t know about your crap before I replied to your post. I just wanted it proven one more time. I’ll say you are the one who took the bait, chump!
You are a chuckle and a half, skippy. Bash SARAH continuously and then back track, then bash, then backtrack. You and McCain are from the same mold of deceit.
Where did I “bash” Sarah?
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.