Disappointment is no argument against Gov. Palin

I have continued to be bothered by the attitude of the folks at PowerLine toward the Palin pick. I get that they’re Minnesotans who were really hoping to see Tim Pawlenty in that slot, but I think the disappointment is skewing their perspective; they’ve been veering unsteadily between appreciation and snide dismissal. Yesterday, for instance, Paul Mirengoff put up a post on Palinmania, a subject which I agree warrants self-reflection on the part of conservatives—but rather than addressing the real problem (the recurring temptation to put too much weight on and too much of our hope in politicians, who are, after all, merely human), he simply dismissed the phenomenon as ridiculous because focused on an “empty, or at least incomplete, vessel.” The implication, it seems to me, is that if John McCain had picked someone worthy for the slot (and you know whom they have in mind), the reaction might be reasonable; the problem is that Sarah Palin is unworthy.I now know that I’m not the only one who’s been bothered by their ongoing attitude; Beldar put up an excellent post this morning critiquing their complaints about the GOP response to Gov. Palin, a post which made several points that badly needed making; I hope they pay attention to what he has to say and re-evaluate their position.That said, I think there are a couple things which still need to be said, and both come down to another Paul Mirengoff post dismissing “the ‘Life Happens’ Republicans.” He concludes that post with the line, “The party has changed. It has become either less or more mature”—and from the tone and thrust of the preceding paragraphs, it’s clear that he’d vote for “less.” Though it’s a brief post, he manages to articulate three things which he holds up as signs of GOP immaturity. Taking the last one first, he writes,

The catch-phrase of the day seemed to be “life happens.” And indeed it does. But Republicans used to believe that the choices we make usually go a long way towards shaping the manner in which life happens, and that therefore indifference is not a fully appropriate response to bad choices.

This, I believe, is unfair—indeed, as unfair in its way as anything out of the liberal media. What exactly are the choices involved here? Let’s list them:

• Bristol Palin’s choice to have sex with her boyfriend, Levi Johnston
• Their decision to get married (which came before her pregnancy)
• Their decision, on her pregnancy, to keep the baby
• Todd and Sarah Palin’s decision to support their daughter and future son-in-law in their marriage and parenthood

Which of these choices was a bad choice? The first one. (Liberals would disagree, of course, but I’m not addressing liberals here.) Who made it? Bristol Palin. (And Levi Johnston, of course, but Gov. Palin didn’t raise him, so he may be considered outside the purview of anything reflecting on her.) In considering that, one might fairly say that “the choices we make usually go a long way towards shaping the manner in which life happens, and that therefore indifference is not a fully appropriate response to bad choices”; and if you look at the response which Bristol Palin made, and which her parents made, to that choice and its consequences, you can clearly see that Mirengoff’s snide “used to believe” is in fact unfair and unwarranted. Clearly, the Palin family firmly believes that “the choices we make usually go a long way towards shaping the manner in which life happens, and that therefore indifference is not a fully appropriate response to bad choices”—you can see that from the string of good choices Bristol Palin and her family made in response to the initial choice. And it’s to that that the GOP delegates were responding positively; painting their acknowledgement of the fact that “life happens” as “indifference . . . to bad choices” is simply wrong.Mirengoff’s uncharitable misreading of the GOP delegates’ charity and forbearance as immaturity is the thing that galls me most here, but it’s not the only thing. In the third paragraph of his post, he writes,

Many people here say they are looking forward to Palin’s debate with Talkin’ Joe Biden. They say that expectations will be low and there’s a good chance that Biden will come off as a bully. There was a time when Republicans would have been less delighted to be the party of low expectations, relying on a sympathy backlash.

(He also notes talk of a sympathy backlash with respect to Bristol Palin’s pregnancy.) If you want to blame anyone for teaching the party the political utility of low expectations, go look at George W. Bush, who found them very helpful in his debates with Al Gore. As for the whole “sympathy backlash” idea, that’s politics, and has been for a while now. What really gets me, though, is that last clause. There’s actually no suggestion in anything he reports that convention delegates were relying on a sympathy backlash for Gov. Palin in her debate with Sen. Biden; that’s his insertion. They understand, yes, the advantage of low expectations on the part of the press—but that doesn’t mean their own expectations for her performance are low. That’s Mirengoff reading his own low view of Gov. Palin into their comments.This assumes his initial complaint:

a vice presidential nominee who, given her credentials, would not (in my opinion) have rated ten minutes of consideration but for her gender.

I will grant that Gov. Palin doesn’t have a long résumé; but as Beldar pointed out here, she’s accomplished a great deal in her time as governor, and as he noted here, her service as chair and ethics commissioner on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is in fact a major point on her résumé as well. He notes and comments on an article from the New York Times which highlights the fact that the governor of Alaska is perhaps the most powerful state executive in the country, as well as being the one who faces some of the greatest challenges. Further, as CinC of the Alaska National Guard (a role in which she has shone—see the video below), in pipeline negotiations involving Canada and fisheries matters in which Canada, Russia, Japan, and South Korea are concerned, she has far more foreign-policy experience than other governors. And then throw in the fact that everything Gov. Palin has accomplished, she has accomplished in the face of an extremely difficult political environment.All of which is to say: granting everything good about Gov. Pawlenty, what argument is there that he is more prepared or qualified to be VP except that he’s been governor longer? Considered carefully, even given her shorter tenure, I’m firmly convinced that her credentials alone warranted at least as much consideration as his did, even leaving aside her gender—and even leaving aside as well the fact that she’s a much more charismatic speaker and seems to match him (roughly, anyway) in other political skills. Three months ago, when I started looking closely into her record, her accomplishments blew away my initial concerns over her length of service, and I became firmly convinced that she was the best choice for VP; I think any impartial consideration of her record will at least concede that that was a fair and reasonable conclusion, both for me and for Sen. McCain.

HT for the video: Jennifer Rubin