Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... - Newsweek.com
SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Monday, October 06, 2008 9:47 AM

The Palin Debate, Continued: Mindless--or Priceless--Populism?

Andrew Romano

Last month, atheist author Sam Harris and former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson duked it out on this blog over the question of whether Sarah Palin is prepared for the presidency. Now, in the latest dead-tree NEWSWEEK, editor Jon Meacham and former Bush guru Karl Rove tackle a related question: What's the value of Palin's populism? I've excerpted the key parts of their essays below. Click through for the full read--and weigh in on the comments board.


Photos: (from left) J. Scott Applewhite / AP; Khue Bui for Newsweek

MEACHAMA key argument for Palin, in essence, is this: Washington and Wall Street are serving their own interests rather than those of the broad whole of the country, and the moment requires a vice president who will, Cincinnatus-like, help a new president come to the rescue. The problem with the argument is that Cincinnatus knew things. Palin sometimes seems an odd combination of Chauncey Gardiner from "Being There" and Marge from "Fargo." Is this an elitist point of view? Perhaps, though it seems only reasonable and patriotic to hold candidates for high office to high standards. Elitism in this sense is not about educational or class credentials, not about where you went to school or whether you use "summer" as a verb. It is, rather, about the pursuit of excellence no matter where you started out in life. Jackson, Lincoln, Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Clinton were born to ordinary families, but they spent their lives doing extraordinary things, demonstrating an interest in, and a curiosity about, the world around them. This is much less evident in Palin's case...

Advertisement

We have had terrific presidents and vice presidents from humble backgrounds, and we have had terrible presidents and vice presidents from privileged ones. The unease with Palin is not class-based. It is empirically based. She is a rising political star, a young woman—she is only 44—who has done extraordinary things. It takes guts to offer oneself for election, and to serve. It is far easier to throw spitballs from the stands than it is to seek and hold office. She is a governor, and she has the courage to go into the arena. For that she should be honored and respected. If she were seeking a Senate seat, or being nominated for a cabinet post—secretary of energy, say, or interior—the conversation about her would be totally different. But she is not seeking a Senate seat, nor is she being nominated for a cabinet post, and so it is only prudent to ask whether she is in fact someone who should be president of the United States in the event of disaster. She may be ready in a year or two, but disaster does not coordinate its calendar with ours. Would we muddle through if Palin were to become president? Yes, we would, but it is worth asking whether we should have to.

ROVE: With respect, Jon misses the principal arguments for Sarah Palin. She is the governor of a state with an $11 billion operating budget, a $1.7 billion capital budget and nearly 29,000 employees; she's got more executive experience than any candidate for president or vice president this year. In Alaska she took on the state political establishment, the incumbent Republican governor and the oil companies. She's a rising star who accentuates John McCain's maverick strengths and a "hockey mom" who has developed a powerful tie to ordinary voters. That link isn't itself an argument for Palin. But being able to connect with, and inspire, the public is an asset —not a liability. As for Jon's argument against "everyday Americans" as political leaders, many great presidents have been more average than elitist. Ronald Reagan, from Eureka College, was a far better leader than Woodrow Wilson, a former president of Princeton. Wilson would have given you 100 Supreme Court opinions he disagreed with, whether you wanted to listen or not. Barack Obama has also introduced Joe Biden
as a Joe Six-Pack, saying, "His family didn't have much money … sometimes moving in with the in-laws or working weekends to make ends meet." Biden himself rarely misses a chance to say, "I was an Irish Catholic kid from Scranton with a father who, like many of yours in tough economic times, fell on hard times." Both veep candidates are trying to portray themselves as ordinary folks.
 

Tag(s):
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: akcorrec (October 8, 2008 at 1:33 AM)

I am a female and work at Alaska’s only maximum security prison.  Sarah Palin appointed a good buddy of hers to be our Commissioner of Corrections, Joe Schmidt.  Joe Schmidt has deliberately made management decisions that have made our jobs, as correctional officers, more life threatening.  

We tried going to Sarah Palin with our concerns but she wouldn’t listen to us.  We then decided to submit a ‘no confidence’ vote in Schmidt.  Out of the 733 correctional officers working in the state of Alaska over 500 of us voted.  Out of those less than 20 said they had confidence in Schmidt.  The rest of us voted ‘no confidence’ in his leadership.  This was unprecedented.  At no time, before Schmidt was appointed as our commissioner, had we ever initiated a ‘no confidence’ vote in one of our commissioners.

Surely now, we thought, our governor Sarah Palin will hear and investigate our concerns regarding Joe Schmidt.  That didn’t happen.  Rather she publicly said that she stood by Schmidt and that 97% of Alaska’s correctional officers are just a bunch of “disgruntled employees”.

MRSA is running rampant in our institutions and we are deliberately being understaffed.  Joe Schmidt is not only allowing understaffing but is actively encouraging it.

Prisoners with MRSA are being treated but not officially diagnosed with the bacterium.  By not having cultures done, to determine the presence of MRSA, they are then able to be released right back out into the general prisoner population.  If they were officially diagnosed then they’d have to be medically isolated.  Consequently other prisoners and staff members keep contracting MRSA.

When a staff member contracts it, we’ve had two new cases in the last month and a half alone at my facility, they are told to “pin point exactly” where in the institution they contracted it.  It’s a bacterium that can only be seen under an electron microscope yet we’re supposed to say exactly where we got it???  

The department, under Joe Schmidt’s leadership, will not pay medical costs or reimburse leave time used, for any staff members that come down with MRSA unless they can prove that they got it at work.  The very same place that contagious prisoners are being treated and then sent back home to their cells to expose every other prisoner and staff member they come into contact with.

We are also constantly under staffed.  Rather than calling officers in on overtime, when we’re under manned, we’re left short handed.  There are many officers willing to come in and work.  All the department has to do is ask.  

We also have mandatory posts that are never to be left unmanned.  They are being manned by “phantom” officers.  Which is to say one officer assigned to two posts.  The officer’s name will be filled in, on paper, as filling in a certain post when in actuality he or she is working another one as well.  

Twice, in the last year, we’ve had “man down” alarms go off in the facility and not enough officers to be able to allow anyone to respond to the emergency.  By the grace of God, both times, the alarms were accidentally set off and no officer’s life was in actual jeopardy.  But we may not always be so fortunate. When that happens, whether an officer loses his or her life to MRSA or a prisoner assault, we’ll be able to credit Sarah Palin and Joe Schmidt with murder.


Posted By: CaseyMcGrady (October 7, 2008 at 9:35 PM)

[Palin is a ]"hockey mom" who has developed a powerful tie to ordinary voters?

Palin has been to Colorado at least 3 times since the end of August.  If she's so connected to the voters here, how come I don't know anyone who's actually been inspired enough to go here her speak?  On the othe hand, I do know a few people who were there when Obama gave his acceptance speech (including a few Registered Republicans).  

How much is the GOP paying those folks who show up to Palin's appearances?


Posted By: alkaline1122 (October 6, 2008 at 11:00 PM)

If McCain was really a "maverick," he would have picked someone like Joe Lieberman or Mitt Romney to get the moderate vote. Instead, he pandered to his conservative base with his pick of Palin, who will only be a heart beat away from possibly being President. So did McCain push aside politics for the good of America? No. Can I question his judgment? I believe so.