Editors’ Round Table on Sarah Palin: Energized—For What?
I will resist the temptation to steal my own thunder for next week's John Randolph Club meeting in Philadelphia, where I intend to talk about the most important aspect of the Palin Pandemonium: the conservative Christian rejection of the natural order.
There are at least two other aspects of McCain-Palin that are troubling: abortion and Israel.
James Dobson predictably ate his own words, and pro-lifers now, nearly to a man, are "energized." George W. Bush's words are now in the mouth of McCain, and we'll hear them again and again until the first week of November—"culture of life." What conservative doesn't want a culture of life? Sarah Palin, we are told, is a sign, a winkie-winkie to the pro-life community that a Roe-reversal is in the cards. "Change is coming!"
Senator McCain, as he told us at Saddleback, believes that life begins at conception. (Obama, pay grade notwithstanding, seems to think otherwise.) Is abortion murder, or infanticide? Well, you bet, if life begins at conception. So here is this human life, made in the image of God, the product of dinner-and-a-movie, when "no" didn't mean "no." Kill it, says John McCain. It's a human life, but kill it. It's small, it's out of sight, and hasn't this young woman been through enough?
John McCain has flip-flopped on Roe. Whether purely out of political expedience or not, we cannot say. But we can say that it has been politically beneficial to him. He's no longer talking about family conferences and never, ever wanting to overturn Roe. (Roe is necessary, by the way, for killing that date-rape baby.) "Life begins at conception" and "culture of life" flow easily, but if pressed, he'll say that he'd like to see the culture of life grow to the point that Roe would become irrelevant. Sarah Palin, on the other hand and commendably, doesn't like abortion at all.
John McCain, like Hillary, Pelosi, Barack, and Michael J. Fox, has thought long and hard about fetal stem-cell research and has come to a very special, personal, and painful decision. Unlike the rest of the aforementioned cavalcade of stars, he promotes a culture of life and knows when life begins. Kill 'em anyway. People have diseases. Make a pill; down the hatch. Sarah Palin disagrees.
Whose opinion matters? Does the Vice President nominate justices?
Wait, we are told, Sarah Palin is a symbol. Winkie winkie. No one seems to disagree that, at least for a very long while, Joe Lieberman (one of McCain's many "safe, legal, and rare" buddies) was his choice for running mate. That choice would not have energized a significant segment of voters. Palin has. None of that changes McCain's views on the Constitution, the role of Supreme Court justices, or his friends. If the primary source of "energizement" for the McCain ticket is Sarah Palin's views on abortion and fetal stem cells, a great burnout awaits the "culture of life." Sadly, James Dobson knew that a McCain administration would mean this, but, like a growing host of "excited" antiabortionists, he fell for winkie winkie.
I could not tell you whether George W. Bush is really a dispensationalist, believing that the success of a secular and "democratic" state of Israel is part of God's plan for the rebuilding of the Temple and the Battle of Armageddon. For him, perhaps, that's something that makes sense for great men of God like Billy Graham, but I don't know whether he relishes the Left Behind novels and fights the urge to jump whenever he hears a trumpet sound. His foreign policy has (somewhat) pleased dispensationalists, but it is designed around the plans of the neoconservatives.
Sarah Palin speaks the language of the Assemblies of God. She prays that our war effort in the Middle East is "of God." That doesn't mean that she has doubts about our presence in Mesopotamia; it simply means that she wants God to bless it and "prosper" it. Beyond that, she hadn't thought much about Iraq, until the Bush-McCain team began to bring her up to speed. Her proximity to Siberia notwithstanding, she has zero foreign-policy experience. What she does have is the proud flag of a modern, secular/religious state that is hostile toward Christianity. Thus, she has a firm commitment to a policy that has fomented Islamic aggression against the United States. That commitment will only grow in the malleable Mrs. Palin as she sits at the knee of the neoconservative Bush-McCain advisors, who are all too happy to make use of evangelical interpretations of Scripture in order to achieve their ends. The neocons are energized, too.
Politics, as Chesterton said, is really about drunk men exaggerating things. It will not be the end of any world if either ticket wins the televised contest in November. Life will go on in real homes, communities, and churches across the fruited plain. It is not an exaggeration, however, to suggest that the Palin pick is harmful. It has lured dissatisfied Christians (evangelicals, Catholics, conservative Lutherans and Calvinists) back to the GOP Roe-reversal delusion—and to an obsession with fruitless national politics in general—and it portends to put in Washington a new convert to perpetual war for Israel and petroleum pipelines and "our values."
Entries(RSS)
"Life will go on in real homes, communities, and churches across the fruited plain." Thank goodness! and well stated Aaron.
As usual Chronicles' writers and editors hit the nail on the head.
If 20 years of "pro-life" Republican presidents since 1980 have not ended legalized abortion, what makes people think that a timid VP will?
I'm not fool enough to believe that there will be an reversal of Roe v. Wade if McCain/Palin are elected. I'm also not fooled into thinking that McCain/Palin is any more messianic than Obama is being made out to be. However, I don't see the benefit of the right wing adding to the firestorm around McCain/Palin. I believe that an Obama/Biden White House would expand the scope of Roe v. Wade, of stem cell research, and other "culture of death" ideals. (Handy term, that.) Even if the McCain/Palin doesn't eliminate these things, I'm fairly confident that they won't *expand* them, either.
As far as experience goes, I'd rather have the VP training on the job and learning foreign policy on the fly than the President. Even if McCain is only a faltering heartbeat away from death, that's one more heartbeat of experience that Palin would have to learn and grow in her role. She already has executive experience, something neither Obama nor Biden can claim, and that would shorten the learning curve.
Then again, there's a reason I'm a pastor and not a politician.
I believe that an Obama/Biden White House would expand the scope of Roe v. Wade, of stem cell research, and other “culture of death” ideals. (Handy term, that.) Even if the McCain/Palin doesn’t eliminate these things, I’m fairly confident that they won’t *expand* them, either.
John McCain supports additional funding for embryonic stem-cell research, including the creation of new lines, which requires the destruction of embryos.
Conservative Republicans define themselves by their opposition to the left and, in particular, the worst or most obnoxious aspects of the left. Since a moose-hunting AoG-member contrasts sharply with Hillary, Michelle, or their childless, feminist co-workers, they're twitterpated.
"Executive experience" is a political football that should be deflated. None of the pundits on either side of this silly debate gives a rip about it. It is said for effect. It's all a part of the bar room game of my side shouting loutishly at the other side. Chesterton said that thrusting women into this process is a form of abuse. Most Americans would deny this and scream "sexist" today, but that doesn't mean that they don't believe it deep down. It's one reason why, after the advent of Palin, you hear so often the phrase "[this or that] issue should be off the table."
It is the president's job to be the commander-in-chief of the U.S. military, not to create a culture of anything. The very idea of placing a 44-year-old "hockey mom"—who claims to have thought very little about a war in which much American blood and treasure have been invested—at the helm of that military, at a time in which we are spread thin and vulnerable, is absurd. The CEO of Baby Einstein has more executive experience than Gov. Palin, but she's isn't qualified either.
"If 20 years of “pro-life” Republican presidents since 1980 have not ended legalized abortion, what makes people think that a timid VP will?"
Matthew, I can't decide if Christians are just deluded or if it is just too painful to admit the truth so they go on pretending to believe a lie.
Aaron, I do think experience is overrated. How much experience does it take to veto unconstitutional legislation? What is needed is savvy and a certain gravitas and groundedness. Palin proved she didn’t have the latter when she immediately jettisoned any past “paleoesque” positions she may or may not have at one time held and embraced mainstream neo-conservatism. But I’m not sure that a lot of political experience, esp. at the national level, is not a negative. The system inherently corrupts.
Experience does count in foreign affairs, obviously, but also in handling domestic crises. Bill Clinton was so ignorant that he could be led by the nose by Mad Albright into a war in the Balkans. He claims, also, to have been misled by Reno in the attack on Waco. People like Obama and Palin lack the experience that would give them either a knowledge of other countries and their leaders or the steadiness of judgment that maturity brings. This does not mean that seasoned veterans will not do stupid and wicked things, but it does suggest that they will at least be more effective as Bush I was in the Iraq War I as opposed to Bush II in Iraq II, in which he was misled by the neoconservatives at Defense. The learning curve for an inexperienced president can be steep and dangerous. Dr. Red is correct in assessing Palin's lack of gravitas, but even if she were sincere, she might more easily be corrupted than someone who already knows how to play the game. We don't need a St. Francis as President, but a Metternich might not be a bad thing.
Mr. Wolf, I appreciate your excellent observations. The delusion that Republican victories will overturn Roe v. Wade is one of the only things keeping them in business. And I think that orthodox Christians, especially of a Lutheran, Romanist, or Orthodox bent, need to realize how deeply un-orthodox dispensationalism drives the foreign policy of the "right." False theology has led to the support of a state that has performed no little terrorism in its own right, that also persecutes Christians, and sends spies to America. Let's think about that.
Red, people will believe any number of preposterous things if the alternative is to terrible for them to contemplate. After so much time it is absurd to think the Republicans will do anything about abortion, reducing the size of government, protecting civil liberties, balancing the budget or bring integrity back to DC. But when the other option is that politics in this country can't be reformed and that the nation is most likely in a death spiral, most people will cling to their delusions like a drowning man clutching at straw.
Also when you consider unjust, aggressive wars are also part of the culture of death that is another mark against McCain. These are desparate times that someone like McCain could be considered prolife.
I'm sorry Palin is just a distraction. The chances of McCain dying in his first 4 years and making her POTUS are very small. In the last 84 years we've had 2 Presidents die in office. So all this energy and right wing enthusiasm is focused on a figurehead position with no real power of any kind.
Secondly, VP are always loyal - publicly at least - and voice the Presidents policies. If McCain pushers Amnesty or war with Iran Palin will support it or keep her mouth shut. If elected, Her political future will be in hands of McCain. She will toe the party line - like they all have.
Joe Lieberman, supposedly McCain's real first choice for VP, will have more power in a McCain administration than Palin. Perhaps AG or Secretary of State. McCain has already promised a "Bi-partisan" administration.
I like Palin but the choice is really Obama or McCain - I have no desire to choose "evil" and will vote 3rd party.
Palin is being used, plain and simple to sucker the dumb as ever Christian community to vote GOP one last time, before the crap hits the fan. It is also big time noise, along with the Georgia crisis to keep us distracted as our economy continues to go down the toilet. Even if McCain/Palin win, they will be presiding over what probably will be the next great depression. On top of that you will have perpetual war further draining the economy, and pissing off the populace. It has been said that McCain has told the GOP he is only going to be a one termer. With the current mess only getting worse , do you think Palin will have a snowballs chance in hell of being elected president? The prospect of Bush III is scary, but Bush IV would be unthinkable!!!!! Christians think they are going to take back America for Christ with these folks. I have a better chance marrying a Victoria's Secret model than that!
I would suggest that Mrs. Palin will be used as a member of an off-shoot congregation of the Assemblies of God to "court" Evangelicals, particularly those of the Pentecostal persuasion. It should be noted that not all "Pentecostal" groups are like the United Pentecostals who actually embrace a non-trinitarian oneness doctrine. Most of the "Pentecostal" groups do accept female pastors and deaconesses, however. There is a tendency among many Pentecostal groups to vote Democratic. Here Mrs. Palin will be an advantage for the Republicans.
Mrs. Palin has already, here in our climes, "galvanized" Evangelicals, especially those who were apprehensive about McCain. I use the term "galvanized" in the same way it was used to refer to Confederate soldiers who were turned into Union soldiers. She is pro-life, anti-gay marriage, pro-Israel and has remained married for more than twenty years, with nearly half of Evangelicals being divorced, her marriage plays as "awesome!"
About a mile from my house is a little country store. Early in the morning and in the early evening, it is the Redneck epicenter of the universe. Palin was the talk of the store yesterday morning. She can fish, shoot, field dress a deer and fly a plane. Most of these ol' boys and gals can relate to her husband who has had a DUI and to the pregnant daughter. Quite common around here. They really like her, in spite of her "weird" accent!
Palin fever will eventually fan out, then people will come to their senses. Being from the Detroit area, which is being destroyed economically, McCain better propose a different economic pakage than what Bush is giving us. So far, he indeed looks like he will be Bush III economically. All Obama has to ask is "Are you better off than 4 years ago, 8 years ago?" and the game very well might be over. Folks in the rust belt need jobs, not empty promises. Palin is nice to look at, but would almost be an embarrassment as a VP. Think she could hang with Putin? I don't think so.
The Assemblies of God, which Mrs. Palin used to belong to, is not anti-Trinitarian. I think a lot of the Pentecostal churches that vote Democratic are likely Black. As are many of the ones that accept female pastors and deacons. The AoG is actually pretty conservative on most things. The AoG is actually one of the more evangelical like of the Pentecostal denominations. More so than the Church of God, for example.
McCain better propose a different economic pakage than what Bush is giving us.
He has. The only trouble is, it's a worse one. If you thought Bush was a disaster for places like Detroit and Rockford, then John McCain will be the Rust Belt's Hurricane Katrina.
I don't get it. Palin pick is harmful for the reasons stated. But it is still lot less harmful than just about any other pick that would go with this election's narrative. It is as far as you can go without talking to Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan.
jack bailey (@17):
A friend sent me an e-mail yesterday saying that Sarah Palin wasn't ideal, but "we have to start some place" (which, I think, is a fairly accurate statement of your own view, correct?).
The problem with that idea is that Sarah Palin doesn't just represent a set of coordinates, from which we can move in the right direction. She has a velocity--she's moving at a certain speed in a certain direction, and that direction is away from those things that any traditional Christian believes in.
Yes but so are Obama and Mccain only more so. OK. So who should have been McCain's pick then?
I think any focus on Roe v Wade is a red herring. I don't see how Obama could do any worse than what we already have short of (Chinaesque) enforcing some x-child policy. What I believe is most disturbing is the assault (continuing and still accelerating) on the family which an Obama presidency would continue mainly through subordinate appointments. I don't see any improvement in McCain/Palin. The number one place of assault is in public schools (and most parochial schools). One of the prime emphases of these daytime youth incarceration places is the relentless focus on careers/professions for women and to the total exclusion of family vocations for women. In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter at all if we never have a female president/vp/CEO/CFO/etc. But without children conceived and formed (real education) in families, our collection of human beings is doomed! What this country needs desperately and immediately is an end to all government interference in education and in compulsory attendance for youth.
So who should have been McCain’s pick then?
Depends on what you mean by that. If you mean, as I suspect you do, "Who would have made you more likely to vote for McCain?" the answer is "No one." If I vote for a ticket headed by McCain because I like his running mate, then I'm still voting for McCain.
Lee (@20):
I don’t see how Obama could do any worse than what we already have short of (Chinaesque) enforcing some x-child policy.
Public funding for abortion. It's one of Obama's policy proposals, and it's part of the Democratic platform.
Beyond that, though, you're right.
Scott Richert wrote:
"John McCain supports additional funding for embryonic stem-cell research, including the creation of new lines, which requires the destruction of embryos."
Additionally, whereas GOP officials would have opposed any expansion of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research under Obama, under a McCain administration they'll willingly give it their blessing because it's their man in The Oval Office supporting it.
Conservatives voting McCain-Palin will be accomplices in conservatism's destruction. And, ironically, with Palin now the nominee for the office of VP, they'll now be gleeful accomplices in its destruction.
"Experience does count in foreign affairs, obviously, but also in handling domestic crises. Bill Clinton was so ignorant that he could be led by the nose by Mad Albright into a war in the Balkans. He claims, also, to have been misled by Reno in the attack on Waco." I'm sorry to say that I believe that even with Dr. Trifkovic as his adviser, Bill Clinton, with his sonrisa de estiercolofago, would have made his policy decisions in the Balkans based on polling data as to what would make him most popular. (Am I mistaken in recalling that American presidents have consistently improved their approval ratings by bombing places?) Actually, there are people without any expertise of any kind who could have told the Clintons that it wouldn't be a good idea to get involved in civil wars in foreign countries that hadn't attacked or threatened us, and could have handled the Branch Davidians without a massacre. Sarah Palin's lack of experience is not what bothers me about her.
Many thanks to Messrs. Fleming, Wolf and Richert for this great forum.
I'd like to hear what people think about Bobby Jindal, an intellectual Conservative Catholic, or so I hear. What that means, I do not know, but it sounds good on its face.
My idea is that the GOP call this election in and get ready for 2012. I think Jindal and Palin should figure talk about the future of the GOP. As for Palin, a woman, figuring in discussions about taking the reins at some future point, it is difficult to hold that she ought to be disqualified because she is a woman. There are ways of getting around that fact. Thankfully, the U.S. Marine Corps and US Army are run by men, and men run and indeed comprise the Joint Chiefs who would essentially run a war during a Palin administration.
Not to fret about a woman becoming commander in chief...
Life will go on in real homes, communities, and churches across the fruited plain.” Thank goodness! and well stated Aaron.
If things indeed go nuclear, that won't be the case. Do you think the world community or the new axis of evil is going to just sit and do nothing if we use nukes on Iran or if we are crazy to attack Russia? They won't have to push a button or send one friigin missile to bury us, just unload all of their dollars and totally pull out of Fannie and Freddie and we are toast!!!!! Americans are going to finally reap what the neocons have sown, and Palin is the new neocon queen.
@26JMB
Bobby Jindal has been a wash so far--during his successful run for governor, he promised not to permit pay raises for legislators. Then at the height of negotiations to pass his "ethics" package, he promised the legislators that he would sign their pay raise, a whopping 300%. When the citizens discovered the deal, Jindal had to crawfish back to his original position and veto the payraise. Of course, he's youthful, as is his staff, and maybe he will find out what it means to lead after he has negotiated the obstacle course known as Hurricane Gustav (as I compose your answer, half of our capitol Baton Rouge still does not have electrical power).....
Sarah Palin did energize the Republican Party and I must admit that I find her likeable. Yet the parading around of the pregnant, seventeen year old Bristol Palin on the convention stage with the young "man" who impregnated her is a further Republican and conservative surrender in the culture wars. The Bristol Palin event was a bizarre spectacle which helps mainstream illegitmacy and promiscuity. By placing her fast-tracked political career ahead of her daughter's privacy in her time of trial and shame, Sarah Palin gives us a glimpse into her character. Bothersome to me as well is the way Fundamentalists and Pentacostalists seem to revel in sin, as long as forgiveness is asked. Yes, "Go and Sin No More" is true and reflects the wisdom of Jesus but don't expect a congratulations from the congregation for sinning.
In the end, John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin was his expedient and desperate effort to appease conservatives long enough to help him get elected. But conservatives would be silly to expect much from McCain if he is elected. The war in Iraq will continue "until victory." He will cut taxes "when I can." He continues to support illegal immigration amnesty when he and the border governors(Governors Schwartzenegger, Napolitano, Richardson and Perry) declare the borders are secure.
For the knee-jerk Republicans out there who salivate for a McCain-Palin victory in November I give this warning- fear the fall-out of a McCain presidency. He does not care for the Republican Party as an institution but only as springboard to power. McCain will rip apart his party about as badly as did Richard Nixon once upon a time. Does a Republican Party with 38 senators and 160 congressmen staring into a bleak future of 2013 with Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama being innaugurated stir your fancy?
JMB wrote:
"I’d like to hear what people think about Bobby Jindal, an intellectual Conservative Catholic, or so I hear. What that means, I do not know, but it sounds good on its face."
After his well pubicized venture at playing exorcist (albeit an amateur one) while in college, Jindal increasingly looks like another snake-waving, tambourine-banging nut job like Carter, Bush or Palin.
Although it's best to have a man of faith in office, I'm suspicious of anyone who indulges in any religion's more bizarre practices. And, given that the worst two presidents of the last forty years, Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush, were wont to embrace religious indulgence more bizarre than most other recent Presidents, I'm not anxious to see someone similar back in The White House any time soon...even if he is a Republican or a Catholic.
Hey all you Paleo Purists! We've lost the culture war. The dialectic has turned a few times and nothing short of meltdown and/or civil war is going to bring back the life we cherish. Most of us older folks haven't even been able to pass it on to our children and certainly not to our grandchildren. No election is going to change that -- as most of the Chronicles posts recognize.
So why are we being stubborn holdouts for the perfect ticket? It hasn't happened, again. All one can do is perform a little calculus as the issues and facts parade before us and go for the team that is closer or even slightly closer to our own desires.
Other than the possibility of McCain foolishly pursuing hegemony around the world, McCain is closer to our side than is Obama. And even with Obama we are still going to have someone who thinks we should be the world's policeman. You can count on his signing on to United Nation's adventures and foolish treaties that usurp US sovereignty. With McCain having a Democratic congress to contend with I doubt that he will be able to engage in much imperialism.
It pains me to see so many of you whom I respect being such absolutists. Most of you are agreeing that Obama would be worse and yet you are still holding out. For what? Look, we all know the Bush years have been a disaster but at least we got a Supreme Court that recognizes the 2nd Amendment means what it says. And didn't Bush appointees uphold the partial birth abortion ban? I hate to expouse situation ethics but that's the choice we have before us.