Cokie Roberts on Sarah Palin’s future

Those who are hoping that Gov. Palin will quietly disappear into one of history’s footnotes—a group which includes Republican supporters of other 2012 contenders as well as many Democrats—would do well to listen to what Cokie Roberts has to say on the subject, because there’s a reason she’s one of the top political reporters in the country. As the daughter of two successful politicians and an experienced and gifted correspondent, she knows her field better than most. Her conviction that “there’s more of Sarah Palin in our future” is grounded in part in her observation that “the camera loves” Gov. Palin, which is certainly true and important; of more significance, though, is her comment that Gov. Palin feels “she was vastly disserved by the McCain campaign and I agree with her.” What Ms. Roberts realizes and many others do not is that many of Gov. Palin’s negatives are the result of her mishandling by the McCain campaign, not her own personality, inclinations, and gifts, and thus won’t be coming along with her. To expect those negatives to endure and drag her career down when she won’t be reinforcing them is simply unreasonable. Two years is a long time in American politics, and four years is pretty near a lifetime; Gov. Palin will have plenty of opportunities over the next few years to dispell the negative perceptions of her among independent voters, and all she’ll need to do to accomplish that is to be herself.(Note: the original article from the Boston Herald has been archived and is only available for purchase.)

Brief comment on Barack Obama’s Cabinet choices

There have been a lot of comments on the people Barack Obama has chosen for various positions, and the significance of the fact that from Rahm Emanuel on, he’s opted to build a team of Bush appointees and Clintonites (including perhaps his best pick, Timothy Geithner, who looks at first blush like the best Treasury appointee in decades); but despite the skepticism of folks like Paul Mirengoff, I tend to agree with Jonah Goldberg and Victor Davis Hanson: in his appointments, President Obama has basically given the giant finger to his leftist base. I think Dr. Hanson is dead on to call this “one of [the] most profound bait-and-switch campaigns in our political history.” Throw in his perfunctory support for Jim Martin in the Georgia runoff election against incumbent Sen. Saxby Chambliss (while on the other side, Sarah Palin was barnstorming across Georgia as Sen. Chambliss’ chosen closer), and it really looks to me like he’s doing everything he can to keep the Democratic caucus on the Hill from running the show. I’m not sure if it will work, but I appreciate the effort.
Update: Here’s Investor’s Business Daily‘s Michael Ramirez’ take on this:

Camille Paglia on Sarah Palin

Even though I don’t agree with Camille Paglia on very much (if anything) politically, I admire her greatly for her honesty, the clarity of her perception, and the true independence of her mind, and also for her great gifts as a writer. Her latest column in Salon shows her at the top of her form, particularly in this telling observation about Barack Obama:

As I’ve watched Obama gracefully step up to podiums or move through crowds, I’ve been reminded not of basketball, with its feints and pivots, but of surfing, that art form of his native Hawaii. . . Obama’s ability to stay on his feet and outrun the most menacing waves that threaten to engulf him seems to embody the breezy, sunny spirit of the American surfer.

It also shows her refusal to close her eyes for the sake of ideology, as she expresses concern over

the mainstream media’s avoidance of forthright dealing with several controversies that had been dogging Obama—even as every flimsy rumor about Sarah Palin was being trumpeted as if it were engraved in stone on Mount Sinai.

She mentions specifically the evasiveness of the Obama campaign, and the unanswered questions about his association with Bill Ayers and (especially, to her) Bernardine Dohrn, writing,

We don’t need another presidency that finds it all too easy to rely on evasion or stonewalling. I deeply admire Obama, but as a voter I don’t like feeling gamed or played.

Those two sentences, comparing the behavior of Sen. Obama and his campaign to that of the hated President Bush and his administration, have to have cost her. Paglia spends a fair chunk of her column on Ayers and Dohrn, whom she clearly finds disturbing; and from there she turns to Gov. Palin, writing,

Given that Obama had served on a Chicago board with Ayers and approved funding of a leftist educational project sponsored by Ayers, one might think that the unrepentant Ayers-Dohrn couple might be of some interest to the national media. But no, reporters have been too busy playing mini-badminton with every random spitball about Sarah Palin, who has been subjected to an atrocious and at times delusional level of defamation merely because she has the temerity to hold pro-life views.How dare Palin not embrace abortion as the ultimate civilized ideal of modern culture? How tacky that she speaks in a vivacious regional accent indistinguishable from that of Western Canada! How risible that she graduated from the University of Idaho and not one of those plush, pampered commodes of received opinion whose graduates, in their rush to believe the worst about her, have demonstrated that, when it comes to sifting evidence, they don’t know their asses from their elbows.Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology—contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind prejudice.I like Sarah Palin, and I’ve heartily enjoyed her arrival on the national stage. As a career classroom teacher, I can see how smart she is—and quite frankly, I think the people who don’t see it are the stupid ones, wrapped in the fuzzy mummy-gauze of their own worn-out partisan dogma. So she doesn’t speak the King’s English—big whoop! There is a powerful clarity of consciousness in her eyes. She uses language with the jumps, breaks and rippling momentum of a be-bop saxophonist. I stand on what I said (as a staunch pro-choice advocate) in my last two columns—that Palin as a pro-life wife, mother and ambitious professional represents the next big shift in feminism. Pro-life women will save feminism by expanding it, particularly into the more traditional Third World.As for the Democrats who sneered and howled that Palin was unprepared to be a vice-presidential nominee—what navel-gazing hypocrisy! What protests were raised in the party or mainstream media when John Edwards, with vastly less political experience than Palin, got John Kerry’s nod for veep four years ago? And Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, for whom I lobbied to be Obama’s pick and who was on everyone’s short list for months, has a record indistinguishable from Palin’s. Whatever knowledge deficit Palin has about the federal bureaucracy or international affairs (outside the normal purview of governors) will hopefully be remedied during the next eight years of the Obama presidencies.The U.S. Senate as a career option? What a claustrophobic, nitpicking comedown for an energetic Alaskan—nothing but droning committees and incestuous back-scratching. No, Sarah Palin should stick to her governorship and just hit the rubber-chicken circuit, as Richard Nixon did in his long haul back from political limbo following his California gubernatorial defeat in 1962. Step by step, the mainstream media will come around, wipe its own mud out of its eyes, and see Palin for the populist phenomenon that she is.

It’s a powerful smackdown to groupthink and cant from someone who’s as free of both as any columnist around (on either side of the political aisle); the fact that it’s also a powerful defense of someone who both needs and deserves it just makes it better.

All about Sarah?

I’m starting to wonder. There have been folks on the right who’ve been insisting since John McCain chose Sarah Palin that liberals are afraid of her and feel a particular need to destroy her; I’ve tended to think that was overstated. Certainly, I think a lot of folks on the left found her particularly galling—for daring to go “off the reservation” and be a successful woman in politics on non-leftist terms (with her strong pro-life position being the main part of that), and for Sen. McCain having had the nerve to pick a woman as his running mate when Barack Obama hadn’t—but I figured it was much more that she represented someone who could actually put the McCain campaign over the top, and therefore was a threat to be destroyed ASAP, by whatever means necessary.Now, though, I’m beginning to think that the voices insisting that liberals hate/fear her specifically may have more of a point than I thought. What has me considering this is a recent post on the media blog for Condé Nast Portfolio on whom the New York Times should hire to replace Bill Kristol if rumors prove true that they’re inclined not to keep him on their op-ed pages. The blogger in question, Jeff Bercovici, is clearly an unapologetic liberal, which is no surprise; what is a surprise is the theme that seems to underlie his suggested alternatives. Of the four names he puts forward, two are Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy—the folks who got caught dissing Gov. Palin on a mike they didn’t know was open. A third is Kathleen Parker, whom he makes a point of labeling as a Palin-hater. Why highlight that unless it’s part of the point, and to be adduced as evidence that she has “the independence of thought that Kristol so glaringly lacks”?Which in turn makes me think that that supposed “lack of independence” on Kristol’s part may be code for “he likes Sarah Palin”; which, if so, is ludicrous, since Kristol was booming Gov. Palin for the slot back when it required incredible independence of thought to even entertain the idea. Which makes me wonder if there isn’t a subtext for replacing Kristol: the Grey Lady is willing to have a conservative columnist or two around if it has to—but one who supports Sarah Palin is just too much. If they’re going to have a conservative columnist, it must at least be a properly elitist Palin-hating conservative.Do I take this as proven? Obviously not. But I’m wondering if there might be something to it . . . and if so, what its significance might be.

Too little, too late

After sitting sphinx-like as his senior staff impugned Sarah Palin’s intelligence and character, John McCain finally opened his mouth—and this is the best he was willing to do? I’m sorry, Senator, but that’s just plain pathetic. To wait so long to say anything, and then not to address any of the specific lies floating around out there or call out any of the liars from behind their curtain of anonymity—especially given his vigorous defense of Barack Obama against attacks he deemed inappropriate—to fail to defend her against false charges given how hard she worked for you and how badly she was pummeled by your opponents for supporting your cause . . . that’s purely dishonorable. There is no other word for it.

Sarah Palin in her own words

The biggest problem for Gov. Palin going forward is the number of people out there who are against her because of who they wrongly believe her to be. Unfortunately, there are a lot of influential folks, including media types, who see it as in their best interest to reinforce those false images; fortunately, all she has to do to overcome them is to get her own message out, to be herself where the nation can see her, so that people can see for themselves that the ideas they have are not in fact true.That’s why her interview with KTUU-2 in Anchorage and the Anchorage Daily News has popped up in the national media, and why she has a number of national interviews lined up, beginning with this one with Greta Van Susteren which aired yesterday. It’s amazing how happy she is to talk with the media when she doesn’t have someone else setting her interview schedule, isn’t it?Video below the jump of Gov. Palin’s interviews with Van Susteren and Matt Lauer.

Palin-bashers discover the Law of Unintended Consequences

I took note last Friday of the dishonorable cowards in the McCain campaign who started trashing Sarah Palin before the election had even been held, presumably to try to shift the blame for the loss away from their own performance.It didn’t work. It didn’t work because Gov. Palin made an implausible scapegoat when conservative pundits had been griping in print for weeks about how badly the campaign was being run (with one aspect of that being their mishandling of Gov. Palin). It didn’t work because the conservative base, on the whole, is far more impressed with her than it is with Sen. McCain. Neither of these things should be surprising, as both were eminently predictable.What’s more interesting is the other reason it didn’t work: because other staffers on the campaign wouldn’t stand for it either. Folks like Randy Scheunemann (Sen. McCain’s top foreign-policy advisor), Steve Biegun (who briefed her on foreign policy)—and even the folks believed to be behind the leaks, Nicolle Wallace (a senior campaign advisor) and Steve Schmidt (one of the two heads of the campaign)—as well as longtime Palin staffer Meg Stapleton, a wave of denials has washed away the charges, and left a very positive picture of Gov. Palin behind. Not exactly what they’d hoped to accomplish, I’m sure.

“I’ve been working over 20 years in Washington and I’ve been around literally dozens and dozens of politicians. She is among the smartest, toughest, most capable politicians I’ve ever dealt with,” Scheunemann said. “She has a photographic memory.”————————————Nicolle Wallace, a senior adviser to McCain who helped on the Palin account early on, said Friday on NBC that the governor was “perhaps the most un-diva politician I’ve seen.”Twelve hours before Palin said all she’d ever asked for was a Diet Dr Pepper, Wallace told NBC: “The only thing I’ve seen her ask for is a diet soda.” . . .“Gov. Palin was a breath of fresh air, particularly for those of us who’ve been living in the Washington bubble,” said Tracey Schmitt, the vice presidential nominee’s traveling spokeswoman and a veteran of the RNC and both Bush campaigns. “Because she is a working mom, she brought a real sense of perspective to the campaign trail, which was important.”Schmitt said that Palin’s effort on McCain’s behalf was a dogged one—that she was completely devoted to helping the man who made her famous.“She was tireless on the stump and would have shaken every hand on the rope line if there were time,” Schmitt recalled. “It was evident that this work ethic and enthusiasm was fueled by her sincere commitment to helping Sen. McCain get elected.”Two other McCain aides who were pressed unexpectedly into Palin duty also have only positive things to say about her now.“One of the great developments of this campaign is the addition of Sarah Palin as a powerful and energetic new voice in American public life,” said Taylor Griffin, a McCain press aide who had been focusing on economic issues until he was dispatched to Alaska in late August. “She’s smart, insightful, and has an uncanny ability to ask the right questions.”John Green was McCain’s Capitol Hill liaison for much of the year but was quietly tasked this fall with helping Palin deal with some of her Alaska-related issues, spending significant time there and with her on the campaign trail.“I thought she was an exceptional political person, but more than that an exceptional person,” Green said. “She’s in line with conservative principles and is an everyday Republican—what we’re going to have to find more if we’re going to get back to being a majority party.”————————————In general, according to Beigun, Palin had a steep learning curve on foreign issues, about what you would expect from a governor. But she has “great instincts and great core values,” and is “an instinctive internationalist.” The stories against her are being “fed by an unnamed source who is allowed by the press to make ad hominem attacks on background.” Biegun, who spent dozens and dozens of hours briefing Palin on these issues, is happy to defend her, on the record, under his own name.

Foresight in hindsight

Since my first post on Sarah Palin this past June, I’ve had a fair bit to say about her and why she was the best person to run alongside John McCain. Now the campaign is in the rearview mirror, I thought it might be a good idea to go back and see how I did.From my first post, “Sarah Palin for VP”:One, she’s young, just 44; she would balance out Sen. McCain’s age.I think that worked out decently well; it did open the McCain campaign up to the argument that her youth took the “inexperience” argument against Barack Obama off the table, but taken all in all, I don’t think it really had that effect. If anything, trying to make that case hurt the Obama campaign a little, because their attacks on her inexperience rebounded on him. As Ramesh Ponnuru said at the time, “Obama has diminished himself . . . by getting into an Obama vs. Palin contest.” Once he gave up, he did better, because “experience” was never going to be an argument that was going to win this election anyway; and unfortunately, while Sen. McCain had a strong argument to make for himself as the real change agent in this election, an argument which Gov. Palin reinforced, he was curiously reluctant to actually make it.Two, she has proven herself as an able executive and administrator, serving as mayor, head of the state’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, and now as governor; she would balance out Sen. McCain’s legislative experience (though he does have command experience in the Navy).This gave the McCain campaign and others the ability to make a strong argument that Gov. Palin is in fact more experienced and better qualified than Sen. Obama. Had they done a better job of that, it could have intensified their experience argument against him. Unfortunately, the dysfunctional character of the McCain campaign and their seeming inability to put out a strong, coherent message undermined this. In the end, what I think this campaign demonstrated is that while Sen. McCain’s experience advantage meant something in national-security issues, it was in other critical respects meaningless. Those of us who pointed out that Gov. Palin was the only one of the four candidates who had ever run anything, and thus that she had a meaningful edge in executive experience, were right; those who noted that as an implicit criticism of Sen. McCain were also right. I can’t imagine Gov. Palin could do a worse job running a national campaign, certainly.Three, she has strong conservative credentials, both socially (she’s strongly pro-life, politically and personally) and fiscally (as her use of the line-item veto has shown); she would assuage concerns about Sen. McCain’s conservatism.Which would be why she fired up the base the way she has. Check.Four, she’s independent, having risen to power against the Alaska GOP machine, not through it; she’s worked hard against the corruption in both her party and her state’s government. She would reinforce Sen. McCain’s maverick image, which is one of his greatest strengths in this election, but in a more conservative direction.This is why, as even many conservative pundits who were initially skeptical have said, she was “the only choice who could have simultaneously excited the base and strengthened the ticket’s appeal to independent voters.” In the end, the media attacks and the badly mismanaged response to them from the McCain campaign succeeded in blunting her appeal to independents, but her connection with the GOP base remained strong; given a few more years to build her resumé, I think she’s in a good position to rebuild that support among swing voters as well.Five, for the reasons listed above, she’s incredibly popular in Alaska. That might seem a minor factor to some, but it’s indicative of her abilities as a politician.A point which has been referenced in some commentary. Of greater importance is the fact that those abilities have clearly made the transition to the national stage.Six, she has a remarkable personal story, of the sort the media would love.And so they did, when they weren’t desperately trying to find some way to use it to destroy her. But then, as I noted, No one now in American politics can match Sen. McCain’s life story (no, not even Barack Obama), but she comes as close as anyone can (including Sen. Obama); she fits his image.That made her a threat—and a bigger one than I realized. An awful lot of folks in the MSM reacted accordingly.Seven, she would give the McCain campaign the “Wow!” factor it can really use in a vice-presidential nominee. As a young, attractive, tough, successful, independent-minded, appealing female politician, though not well known yet, she would make American voters sit up and take notice.Check, and enough said.Eight, choosing Gov. Palin as his running mate, especially if coupled with actions like giving Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal the keynote slot at the GOP convention, would help the party going forward. The GOP needs to rebuild its bench of plausible strong future presidential candidates, and perhaps the best thing Sen. McCain can do for the party is to help with this.I still believe this, but obviously, the proof is yet in the future.In my post “Sarah Palin hits the bullseye,” I wrote,John McCain leads Barack Obama among women over 40—normally a solidly Democratic voting bloc. To take advantage of this, Dick Morris concludes, McCain should take dead aim at this demographic, perhaps by selecting a female running mate who would appeal to them.
To do that, are there any better options than Alaska’s
Sarah Palin? I don’t think so; and as Adam Brickley points out, people are noticing. Gov. Palin for VP.This is hard for me to judge, given the collapse of the campaign as a whole over the last month and a half. Anecdotally, it seems to me that adding Gov. Palin to the ticket did indeed provide the boost the McCain campaign was hoping for, but that the campaign lost at least some of that boost because they couldn’t make a good enough case for Sen. McCain, and he couldn’t make a good enough case for himself.A week later, in a post titled “Sooner or later,” I said this:This is not an election for the conventional approach. That’s one of the reasons why I think Sen. McCain needs to name Gov. Palin as his running mate . . .: if Sen. McCain is going to win, he needs to shake up the conventional wisdom and cross up people’s expectations.The Palin nomination certainly accomplished that. Unfortunately, he couldn’t match that when the economic crisis broke.I called Sen. Obama’s pick of Joe Biden as his running mate “One more argument for Sarah Palin” thusly:Joe Biden on the ticket with Barack Obama is the best argument yet for Sarah Palin on the GOP ticket.accompanied by a list of comparisons and the suggestion, taken from Adam Brickley, that Gov. Palin would be the best person available to debate Sen. Biden. She handled him well, and I do think she did better than anyone else out there would have been likely to do (with the possible exception of Bobby Jindal, who had taken himself out of the running).On the eve of Sen. McCain’s announcement, I wrote this:A great many people across this country—many Republicans, but also more than a few moderate Democrats—are catching the vision of a McCain/Palin ticket, and getting excited about the possibility. This is the reason John McCain needs to name Gov. Palin as his running mate, because you can’t say that about anybody else; the arguments for the other candidates are all purely rational, coldly political parsings of the data. There are equally strong rational arguments, and perhaps stronger, to be made for Gov. Palin, but among them is this: she excites people. None of the other candidates do that, except Mormons for Romney; none of them excite both wings of the Republican base; none of them excite people beyond the Republican base. Only Gov. Palin does that, and I hope Sen. McCain realizes that.He did, and she did. I could wish he and his staff had given her more support, rather than hamstringing her.When the attack on Gov. Palin began, I wrote this:To go one step further, I think the Democrats are making a major mistake here. They’re trying to neutralize her with ridicule as a lightweight, hoping for the quick wipeout right out of the box, instead of treating her seriously; and while that would work if she were a lightweight, she isn’t, and she’s faced worse before. What this means is that, when she comes to the debate with Joe Biden, the expectations for her will be low.and that because of Republican enthusiasm for her, she’s insulated from being Quayled:If she does put her foot in it and give the media the opportunity to label her a lightweight, out of her depth—I’ll be surprised if she does, but even the best of us do it at the worst of times—Republican voters aren’t going to buy the line. Instead, we’ll defend her against it to anyone who will listen, and some people will.On the former, all I can say is that I wasn’t giving her enough credit there; she outperformed my implicit expectations, turning the ridicule back on the Democrats time and time again. For the latter, things played out that way to some extent; every time someone on the left tried to turn something into a “gaffe,” Republicans rose up in all directions to hammer them down. Those efforts still left their mark in the minds of more swing voters than they should have, though, due to the McCain campaign’s efforts to mold Gov. Palin and keep her under control rather than just turning her loose.I also put up a post suggesting that Gov. Palin would be a very difficult target for the Obama campaign, and so she turned out to be; one of Mitt Romney’s strategists went so far as to describe them as “like a lion tiptoeing around a turtle—they don’t know what to do with it.” Unfortunately, the media filled in the gap by beating her up with all sorts of half-truths, invented stories, and interviews edited with malice aforethought, doing everything they could to create a false image to weaken her appeal. The campaign tried to fight this, but they were left playing catch-up; they would, I believe, have done better just to turn Gov. Palin loose to go over the heads of the MSM on every talk radio show and local TV station she could findTaken all in all, though, I think the Palin nomination has to go down as a significant political success; she didn’t put Sen. McCain over the top, but he finished a lot closer than anyone would have expected, and a lot of that is the fact that she energized the base in a way in which he never could have. That freed him up to go after swing voters, and that was working until the economic crisis swung them back into the Obama camp. The appeal she brought to the ticket was fairly easy to see coming, if you could just break out of the conventional wisdom long enough. Credit for that goes to folks like my father-in-law, who got me looking at Gov. Palin to begin with, and Adam Brickley, who kicked the whole thing off nearly 21 months ago. Now that’s foresight.

Final thought on John McCain

Though there’s much that I admire about John McCain the man, I’ve felt for a long time that his best qualities were all personal, and that (from a conservative point of view, anyway) there was little to say for him as a politician. Unfortunately, his conduct of this campaign only served to reinforce and underscore that judgment—the way money was spent, the persistent division in his campaign (he seemed almost constitutionally unable to operate with a single campaign manager), his poor personnel judgment (Rick Davis should never run another political operation at any level), his inability to put together a consistent, coherent message (much less to stay on message), and the awful decision-making (most notably the mind-boggling decision to pull out of Michigan) all indicate that whatever concerns anyone might have about Barack Obama’s ability to run the Executive Branch, John McCain wouldn’t have done much better.Unfortunately, the fact that he’s now allowing, and perhaps tacitly encouraging, his campaign staff to trash Sarah Palin further reinforces this. As Jennifer Rubin put it,

All of this, I must admit, also reflects on the non-leadership qualities of the former presidential nominee. John McCain was never known as one to resolve conflicts or knock heads. That’s how he wound up bankrupting his own campaign in the primary and then devolving into bitter infighting in the general election. Watching his team engage in vicious, public fighting suggests that perhaps he was never the ideal person for a chief executive role. After all, if the campaign was this bad, imagine what the White House would have been like.

As much as it pains me to say it, though, Rubin doesn’t go far enough. This doesn’t only reflect on Sen. McCain’s leadership qualities—it reflects on his honor. What Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt are doing, and what others are doing in propagating lies about Gov. Palin, is dishonorable; that Sen. McCain is allowing this to happen without challenging it is even more dishonorable. He owes it to his running mate to do better.