Campaigns & Candidates

Give'em hell, Sarah

Gov. Palin is correct: she and Harry Truman do have a lot in common. Consider this time capsule from 1944: "Poor people of the United States. Truman is a nice man, an honest man, a good Senator, a man of great humility and a man of courage. He will make a passable Vice President. But Truman as President of the United States in times like these?" That was Richard Strout, writing in the New Republic shortly after FDR named his fourth-term VP candidate. In the short time since she was announced as John McCain’s running mate last weekend, the New Republic and other publications have again begun laying judgment on the merits of a choice for Vice President. Peter Scoblic of the current New Republic calls Palin’s resume “frighteningly thin” and the choice of her as VP “arrogant”. Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post said McCain had put “politics over country” in choosing a candidate with so little foreign policy experience. John Dickerson of Slate called it “reckless” and Jonathan Alter at Newsweek is sure she’s likely to “bellyflop” when faced with questions from reporters on issues she’s not familiar with.

They obviously hadn’t met “Sarah Barracuda” yet.

They sure have now. If Sarah Palin’s rousing speech at the Republican National Convention is any indication of how she will handle herself – as both candidate and office-holder -- the media and the pundits will be eating their words. In her speech on Wednesday night she deftly made reference to these doubters in the media -- and to her own unusual road to the nomination -- by referring to “a young farmer and haberdasher from Missouri who followed an unlikely path to the vice presidency.” She was referring, of course, to Harry Truman – a small town man of common means who became both Vice President and later President in a time of war – and ended up being what many now consider one of the better presidents of the 20th century.

It is a comparison that fits Palin well – and may help to quiet those who say that she isn’t yet ready to be Vice President. As noted biographer David McCullough writes in Truman, he was the “son of rural, inland America”, who never went to college and served with distinction as an artillery officer in the Missouri National Guard in World War I. He tried his hand at several vocations before starting his haberdashery business – which ultimately became a casualty of hard economic times. Like the life of Sarah Palin and her family, it was not one of privilege -- rather it was filled with the ordinary challenges of an ordinary American.

Also like Palin, Truman began his political career in small-town politics -- as an administrative judge of the Jackson County Court, where he was known for his honest efficiency and ability to “get things done”. After a series of local government posts, he entered the larger stage as a United States Senator from Missouri in 1934. Truman’s senate career was largely uneventful until the early 1940s when he led what became known as the “Truman Committee”, investigating waste and fraud in defense contracting. He made his name on something that Sarah Palin would certainly appreciate – pushing back on graft and “sweetheart” deals inside the government.

Harry Truman’s experience as a Senator wasn’t especially broad or deep, and it hardly prepared him to be Vice President in a time of war. He was VP for just three months and rarely saw FDR alone before the President’s death. Upon becoming President himself, Truman had little inside knowledge about the key issues facing him: he knew little about how World War II was being prosecuted and knew nothing about the Manhattan Project and the development of the atomic bomb. He also was totally unprepared to deal with Joseph Stalin – who had been pushing around an ill and weakened Roosevelt in negotiations over a defeated Europe. By all measures, Truman was hardly qualified to step into the presidency. As McCullough writes, the reaction in the country was initially one of panic: “Good God, Truman will be President”, it was being said everywhere. “If Harry Truman can be President, so could my next door neighbor.”

And yet, history shows that Truman was more than up to the job. He went to Yalta just after FDR’s death and took the measure of Stalin and saw that he was not to be trusted -- making it clear that the United States would not stand pat while the Soviet Union annexed all of Western Europe. He made the tough decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan because he knew it would end the war in the Pacific. He went on to pass the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe. He desegregated the U.S. armed forces and recognized the state of Israel. In short, he made tough decisions on the most complex issues of the day -- decisions that have stood the test of time.

The foundation for these decisions came not from experience, but rather from a wellspring of solid character, reliable instinct and good judgment. As Mary McGrory wrote in the Washington Post on the day of Truman’s death in 1972: "He was not a hero or a magician or a chess player, or an obsession (emphasis added). He was a certifiable member of the human race, direct, fallible, and unexpectedly wise when it counted.

Unlike Barack Obama, who is an obsession of the left, Sarah Palin from this vantage point looks a lot like Harry Truman: a small town woman with five kids and a husband who has a regular job. She began her career as a small town mayor, close to the people and their problems. She took on the entrenched interests of her state, resigning as Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in protest of ethical violations by another commissioner that were ignored by the sitting governor. When she became governor herself, she quickly broke up the old boys network that is Alaskan politics, rejecting the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” and passing real ethics reform in the state. She’s a reformer who is tough and principled, and who has earned the respect of her opponents. And based on her speech Wednesday night, it is not difficult to imagine Sarah Palin standing firm with Vladimir Putin if put in that position -- much in the same way Truman handled Stalin.

Indeed, those who have seen Palin in action in Alaska attest to her good political instincts, her toughness and her broad-based appeal to ordinary Americans. As Christopher Orr of the New Republic writes: "What the Democrats seem poised to miss now (about Palin) --is that she is a true political savant; a candidate with a knack for identifying the key gripes of the populace and packaging herself as the solution. That keen political nose has enabled her to routinely outperform her resume. Nearly two years into her administration, she still racks up approval ratings of 80 per cent or better."

If the Democrats missed it before, it will be hard (but not impossible – such is their disdain for her) to underestimate Palin after the performance she put on tonight at the Republican National Convention. What they saw was a natural at work.

Orr goes on to make another critical point about Palin: "Sarah Palin is a living reminder that the ultimate source of political power in this country is not the Kennedy School or the Davos Summit or an Ariana Huffington salon; even now, power emanates from the electorate itself. More precisely, power in 2008 emanates from the working class electorates of Pennsylvania and Ohio."

My guess is that in this election year, Harry Truman would have appealed mightily to those working class voters in Pennsylvania and Ohio – regardless of how many Senate hearings he’d held, or how much foreign policy experience he has. And now, after Sarah Palin has had a chance to introduce herself to the American public, I bet that she will, too.

He's worked with Gov. Palin

"Sarah Barracuda" is as impressive with political and policy associates close-up as she is from media glimpses at a distance, my radio listeners were told on 8/31. Listen to the podcast here. Mead Treadwell, who helps lead an Alaska think tank, told us at length in a phone interview from Anchorage about his years of interaction with Sarah Palin when she was mayor of Wasilla and more recently governor of the state.

Posting of that night's full audio on our website is delayed while Kathleen LeCrone is away at RNC St. Paul, so here's the half-hour with Treadwell on Palin, courtesy of Joshua Sharf's website.

Diversity for its own sake? Why?

With a woman on one ticket and a black on the other, let's not forget that the popular slogan that "diversity is our strength” rests on a historically and empirically unwarranted premise. The notion was started by the Marxist in the 1950’s as a divide and conquer strategy, no more no less. I remember going into the Communist Party bookstore in San Francisco as a college junior to load up on stuff for a class I was taking at Berkeley. (In those days it wasn’t completely taken over by the Marxists as it is now.) I remember seeing the “Hero Negro” comic books they’d pass out to blacks. If the Feds photographed everyone who went in and out, I’m probably on the list.

Ever since then, the Marxists have successfully pitted various groups against each other: ethnic groups, young against old, poor against the rich, gay against straight, town vs. country, anything they can find and exploit. They get all these groups discontented and clamoring for their entitlements, creating disunity. Sound familiar, say in the Obama campaign? This Marxist premise has been virtually unchallenged over this ensuing generation.

Remember Rep. Pat Schroeder’s pressure on the armed services to insert women into positions of authority in the early 1980s, just for the sake of it? This notion has spread up the chain until we see what we have today even at the presidential level.

So in the present situation, if we’re going to assert that this notion “diversity is our strength” is detrimental to the country, we will have to start at a much more foundational level than McCain’s choice for VP.

Ask any woman what she thinks of the Sarah Palin VP choice. I would wager she has a positive feeling about it. I know my wife was in tears of joy when Palin gave her acceptance speech. McCain’s political calculation is to capitalize on the discontented Hillary voters. We will see quickly what the progressives do to counteract this. You can bet they will marshal great resources to quash this threat: ** Dig dirt ** Strategic disinformation ** Put the word out to Al Qaeda in Iraq to capture or kill Palin’s son to grieve and destabilize Palin emotionally. Doing this before November 4th would be the most effective. ** Do something to destabilize her marriage, such as siren seductresses targeting her husband, lonely with the Mrs. away for weeks at a time, complete with hotel rooms with hidden video cameras to record the proceedings.

In the long run, if we have a President whose response to a crisis is to burst into tears and cease to function, then the Marxists have succeeded, and we’re fornicated. But we’ll see. Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meier were pretty good leaders, so I am cautiously hopeful.

Palin pick a masterstroke

The choice of Sarah Palin by John McCain was a political masterstroke. Here are five reasons why. 1) Obama, with his "change" mantra, had positioned himself prior to the Convention as a "post-partisan" outsider who is going to change Washington. That's his schtick. It is the only real raison d'etre for his candidacy, because he lacks a signature issue or a track record of experience on major policy questions. It's the whole "we are the change we've been waiting for" thing. And it has worked pretty well for him so far -- or at least until this past week. 2). Obama's choice of Joe Biden and his extremely partisan acceptance speech showed clearly that the "emperor of change" isn't wearing any clothes: he's actually become a standard liberal Democrat running what will be now a highly partisan campaign. It will now be mud-slinging, personal and very populist. Michelle Obama's role at the Convention was to cast the Obama family as a "up-from-the-bootstraps" success story -- a middle class family. It goes perfectly with Biden's story, and it is prep for a John Edwards-style "two Americas" campaign based on liberal, populist rhetoric. Obama was the #1 most liberal Senator in the U.S. Senate and Biden was #3. Not much "post-partisan" in that.

3). McCain is the real change agent in this campaign -- and always has been. He's been consistently against the Washington establishment, and has confounded the Republican party and the Bush administration in many areas. A McCain presidency would most certainly NOT be an extension of the Bush years.

4). Palin is the perfect complement to the McCain maverick narrative. She's been a reformer in Alaska and has a record of accomplishment that has included going against the entrenched interests of other Republican power-brokers. She told the Federal government that they could keep the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" and has been an anti-earmark hawk. She is a real change agent. She hasn't just talked about it like Obama -- she's done it.

5). Palin will appeal immediately to many women who supported Hillary Clinton -- and the more that Obama and Biden try to bully her as not being "up to the job" the more they will run the risk of alienating women. The Obama campaign will have to tread lightly, though I don't think they will be able to -- for their arrogance and anger is just too great.

I expect that Palin will be in for a rough ride -- but if she can establish herself in the eyes of America as a credible leader, she will provide a great contrast to the pompous Biden. It was a great choice -- worthy of the gambler that is John McCain.

* * * * * *

It will be interesting to watch the feminists get tied in knots over the Palin selection. It seems on its face pretty simple: Two parties, three men, one woman. The Republicans have the woman -- so you would think that the feminists would support Palin as a matter of principle: only the second opportunity in history for a woman to become Vice President.

Don't hold your breath on that: the feminists have proven before that liberal orthodoxy is more important than gender. So the fact that Palin is pro-life will automatically disqualify her as being the "right" kind of woman for the feminists, who only support those who hew to a strict ideological agenda. It is much like George Bush not getting any credit for having a black woman as Secretary of State; because Condi Rice is on the wrong side of their issues, she simply doesn't count. The same will happen with Palin -- and it further proves that the Democrats have a very small tent, indeed.

* * * * * *

Did you hear that Barack Obama's first reaction to the Palin nomination was to question her experience? Isn't that rich? Does Obama really want to have that discussion? The Democrats' new narrative is that the Palin selection takes the issue of experience "off the table". Oh, really? Let's see: Palin was mayor of a small town in Alaska and then governor of the state for 2 years -- a chief executive role where she was responsible for working with the legislature on economic, budget and energy issues. She reigned in pork spending, challenged "big oil" and took on a culture of corruption. Her record in Alaska is full of accomplishment for such a short period -- she definitely has much to show for her time in office. She's also got a great personal story.

And what about our Obama? Well, let's see...eight years in the Illinois State legislature and then four years in the U.S. Senate -- a legislative role where you don't command anything larger than your senate staff. In those four years he has sponsored no legislation, and though he Chairs the Foreign Affairs sub-commitee on Europe (which oversees NATO and thus Afghanistan), he never held a hearing. Not one. Obama started running for president after just 18 months in the Senate, of course, so he really has been a Senator for a scant two years or so. His tenure in the Illinois State Senate was marked by a huge number of "present" votes on major issues -- 130 times according to the NY Times. Voting "present" means abstaining -- essentially taking no stand. According to the Times, many of these were on sensitive or critical issues. That's what Obama calls leadership?

In any event, the race is really between Obama and McCain -- not Obama and Palin. And that race isn't even close on the question of experience.

Online: GOP pumped for Palin

I'm on a lot of Republican email lists, and never a discouraging word was heard from any of them about Sarah Palin for VP in the first hours after McCain's thunderbolt in Dayton announcing her. Here's a sampling: From Phil Burress, head of the Ohio pro-family movement that many believe made the difference for Bush in that state four years ago, a mass email headlined: “VP pick secures Ohio for McCain!”

From the listserve of GOP USA Media.com: "Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has a record of delivering on the change and reform that we need in Washington. Governor Palin has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy resources."

From Karen England, chairman of Capitol Resource Center in Sacramento: "This morning we're in St. Paul, meeting with other national leaders of the pro-family movement and the mood has definitely shifted into excitement with John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Former Attorney General Ed Meese commented, 'This is a very good day for the McCain campaign.'"

From Colleen Parro, executive director of the Republican National Coalition for Life: “John McCain has just won the election with this pick.” Parro's board chairman, conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly, added that Palin is "an exemplar of all that is good and true... a major leader in the pro-life movement."

Here in Colorado, State Sen. Ted Harvey, just off his run for the 6th CD nomination to succeed Tom Tancredo, directed the attention of his email list to a Fred Barnes piece on Sarah Palin in the Weekly Standard, July 2007. In the previous year's election, Barnes wrote prophetically, "a Republican star was born. The triumph came in Alaska where Sarah Palin, a politician of eye-popping integrity, was elected governor. She is now the most popular governor in America, with an approval rating in the 90s, and probably the most popular public official in any state. Her rise is a great (and rare) story of how adherence to principle--especially to transparency and accountability in government--can produce political success."

Roger Houdek of Greenwood Village gave his listserve a selection of Palin's position statements from her gubernatorial campaign website, starting with this: "I am a conservative Republican, a firm believer in free market capitalism. A free market system allows all parties to compete, which ensures the best and most competitive project emerges, and ensures a fair, democratic process."

Frank Millis of Wheat Ridge said in mass email that while it's true "some radical feminists [will] vote straight socialist regardless of circumstances, I honestly believe for the first time that McCain and Palin can now beat the socks off a [Democratic ticket] which only has a discredited Robin Hood agenda."

Dusty Oliver, who helped with my Senate races in Arapahoe County, summed it up: "I almost fell over when I heard that McCain picked Sarah Palin. She is GREAT! Not afraid to take on some of our butthead Republicans and call them on the rug for ethics violations like she did to Sen Stevens and Rep Don Young of Alaska who are both under indictment. I saw a bumper sticker they have in Alaska: 'Gov. Palin...Coldest State... Hottest Governor.' Ya gotta laugh!"

They aren't laughing over at the Obama-Biden campaign.