Skip to comments.Palin and the General (Putting the McCain Endorsement in Perspective)
Posted on 03/09/2010 8:28:51 PM PST by Brices Crossroads
I cannot tell how much of this outrage about Sarah Palin's endorsement of McCain is feigned by those who do not wish her well. It is not principally to those folks that this post is directed.
To those conservatives who are genuinely disappointed by Sarah Palin's decision to support McCain, let me say that I think Rush and Mark Levin understand it and have said that it is a question of loyalty and that loyalty is a virtue. That makes sense to me and, personally, I would be a little put off if she did otherwise, since it would look like rank ingratitude.
But, if you remain unappeased by this explanation, let me give you an historical analogy, based upon the supposition that Palin was wrong to endorse McCain to attempt to put the matter in perspective. In 1943, there was an American General who had taken the Seventh Army from a humiliating defeat at the Kasserine Pass to the conquest of all North Africa and then of Sicily. He appeared to be the overwhelmingly likely choice to lead the invasion of Europe, code-named Operation Overlord. The German General staff viewed him as, far and away, the best field commander in the Unnited States Army, and they feared and respected him enough to follow his every move.
He had no tolerance for shirkers, however. While visiting a field hospital, he saw a soldier suffering from battle fatigue, lost his temper and slapped the soldier, humiliating the man but not injuring him. I think that most anyone would agree that the General was wrong to slap the soldier. He was relieved of command of the Seventh Army and sent back to England. The invasion of Italy was commanded by a mediocre General whose lack of ability cost the lives of many Americans at Anzio and Cassino and the command of the Normandy Invasion forces fell to a less talented commander, who got bogged down in the hedge row country, again with heavy casualties. Just in the nick of time, this General was recalled to active duty, given command of the Third Army and carried out one of the most remarkable military campaigns in history, smashing huge German armies at Saint Lo, the Saar and finally the Ardennes Forest.
That little slap in Sicily cost the lives of many American soldiers and could have altered the war, because the response to it by the General Staff was DISPROPORTIONATE. In the larger scheme of things, it was no justification for removing a commander of this stature. In 1943, many a worried parent would have preferred to know that their son was under the command of this general because their boy's very life was at stake, and they would not have wanted a fracas in a field hospital to interfere with what they regarded as a matter of life and death. Great military commanders are a relatively rare commodity. They don't turn in long casualty lists and they have been known to save their countries.
Political geniuses are no less rare. They too have been known to save lives and to save their countries. The stakes in this upcoming election could not be higher. The Republican party, at this particular point in history, possesses a unique weapon, a political genius who so flummoxes the other side that they devote all their attention to her every move. Yet there are some sincere conservatives who believe that her endorsement of John McCain, a 75 year old Senator likely serving his last term, is so serious as to justify removing her from consideration for the GOP nomination. This strikes me as the political equivalent of "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face." The response is, once again, disproportionate.
My view is that the Obama White House would be as delighted to see Palin removed from the scene as the German General Staff was delighted to see Patton relieved in 1943. For the Germans, it was much easier to contend with the likes of Mark Clark and Omar Bradley than Patton. For Obama, it is much easier to contend with the likes of Pawlenty, Romney or Huckabee than Sarah Palin. With our country very likely at stake in 2012, can we as conservatives, even if we sincerely believe Palin to be wrong in this matter, afford to be so disproportionate in our response to it?
It’s your team that keeps bringing this up. LOL
Anyone trying to get McCain reelected is not my friend. He has caused incredible damage. McCain-Feingold gave use the Dem 2006/2008 Congress and Obama 2008.
Loyalty can also be a vice.
Nicely written, I’m hot and cold on McCain but see the Palin endorsement for what it is, a acknowledgement of a campaign partner.
As an aside, without McCain would Palin and Brown be national GOP figures today if he had not either selected nor supported them?
There is a lesson in there, McCain for his many flaws, is one of the precious few Republicans who...recognizes young talent..the GOP needs more of that ability moving forwards, not that McCain is “that” guy, but if we ever dissected how the Dhimmis are running everything in DC, lied to do so, and got away with it, perhaps we can offer a counter message?
Naah...let the bashing begin..JD Hayworth huzzah! huzzah!..
I thought it was because the Dems increased their total registration numbers, coupled that with a plan for raising money along with 4yrs of Republican power that ran away from Conservatism?
Gosh...McCain and Feindgold are the two most powerful men in the world if they themselves could create wins and losses in elections..
As I’ve posted before we must ignore the situation that necessitates Sarah Palin’s involvement with John McCain at this point in time, and concentrate upon his defeat in spite of her obligation to him. It is her obligation, not ours.
We must all say sorry Sarah, but ol’ John’s gotta go, wish her well, and bid John McPain buh bye.
You’re a broken record. Marked you off a long while ago.
Sarah Palin seems to have studied Reagan’s rise and is replicating it. Reagan supported Republicans and that means incumbents of stature. His purpose was to get elected. Ultimately he got elected. MCain is perhaps somewhat disgraced but he is still a Big Gun in the Party and will be considerable help for Palin’s election- in the primaries, especially. She is the principled and political best we have. She is arguably the only possibility of avoiding a Romney “It’s His Turn” presidency.
Agreed. A McCain endorsement of Palin in 2012 would be very valuable to Palin politically.
It isn’t that I don’t wish her well. I really do like the woman.
I just believe she isn’t fit for the office of the presidency. She obviously couldn’t handle being governor of Alaska(I could be governor of Alaska), because she quit even before serving a full term.
If shoe DOES have hopes for being president, it disturbs me a little that she thinks quitting governor, going on a book tour, and hitting the talk show scene is a better path to the presidency. Sure 0bama has been a mockery for who can be president, but his shouldn’t be a baseline for future candidates.
That is exactly how I feel about it. I wouldn’t vote for McCain. But I do give him a “hat tip” for introducing Palin on the national stage.
Stop apologizing for Vichy RINOs. It's conduct unbecoming of a FReeper and a conservative in good standing.
McCain is a nightmare for those of us who are conservatives but he is a master poltician — he will destroy Hayworth in the primary and Palin’s role will be negligible.
On the other hand, had she NOT endorsed him the MSM would be killing her for reocmmending him as prez in ‘08 but not senator in ‘10.
By 2012, this will all be meaningless and mainly forgotten. Palin is the only one who can beat Obamsky and if we fail to nominate her we lose.
P.S. The opposition to Palin here at FR is mainly people who cling to the notion that either Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter will get the 2012 nomination and win. God bless ‘em but what can you say to that?
“A McCain endorsement of Palin in 2012 would be very valuable to Palin politically.”
That is ridiculous. A McCain endorsement would do her no good. It might even do her harm. She has nothing to gain politically by endorsing him.
How exactly? Reagan didn't quit his job as governor early on. Just about anyone could support Republican candidates. Does that make anyone that supports Republican candidates(like McCain) "studied" in "Reagan's rise", and worthy of the presidency?
Why do you think I'm clueless. Please be specific.
How did I get on a ping list?
You are either a liar or an idiot. The Democrats were waging a personal war against her in Alaska and as Governor she had both hands tied behind her back. They made it impossible for her govern and raise money for her personal legal bills.
Her decision to resign was a win/win for the people of Alaska and for herself. Real leaders improvise, adapt and overcome. That is what she is doing now and that looks like leadership to me.
There is no list. I thought you might be interested. If you are not, I won’t ping you again.
No, it is the PaulBots and other wishful thinkers who keep
“But I do give him a hat tip for introducing Palin on the national stage.”
Yes. I remember well his announcement brought my wife out with “do you know of this Sarah Palin?”
Fortunately having been a member at FRee Republic for some time, I was able to respond knowledgeably, and positively to her question, and for a few weeks after to many others whose heads were spinning at the time not knowing who she was.
She is certainly one in a million.
Real leaders get the job done.
No, I really do like her, and agree with her on just about every issue. I also like someone I work with, and I agree with them on every issue, but I also believe they aren't fit for being POTUS.
Brices is a Ron Paul guy? Why does he have so many vanities promoting Sarah?
Thanks, I try to stay off ping lists.
You purposely twist my respnse to you.
“She is certainly one in a million.”
I think when all is said and done, the damage (and any good) McCain has done will be long forgotten. He will be a footnote in the history books for having introduced her. That will be the only thing that keeps him from being forgotten altogether.
You’re on the right track but our fitful reasoning is immaterial; God will annoint a leader if we are to have one.
He once selected a shepherd boy to lead his nation when no man of stature was up to the task.
What job isn't getting done? The last time I checked Alaska still has a governor and Gov Palin is continuing to create an energy that no one else in the Republican Party seems to be able to match.
I’m missing something. Both my statements and your response seemed pretty cut and dry.
“Brices is a Ron Paul guy?”
NOT GUILTY. Paul is the ultimate loon.
OK. Well that’s settled.
Nicely done and well written.
Attacks on Sarah Palin for her support of her former running mate are “now” made by people who trying to keep her out election 2012 because they support someone else, and want to do everything they can do tarnish Sarah Palin.
Ron Paultards, Mitt Romneybots and maybe a couple of Hucksters.
Open minded and honest conservatives do not trash other conservative candidates or potential candidates just because we’re for someone else. You won’t find me trashing Jim DeMint, for example. In fact, I have defended his ‘08 endorsement of Romney, which I saw as a whack at McCain.
No policitian is perfect and no politician will ever make all of us 100% happy, but the bashing of Sarah Palin for her endorsement and fundraiser for McCain has run its course and then some. There’s more of an agenda in play here than “defeat McCain.”
Thank you for your essay!!!
A large group of Freepers are not living in the real world.
I don’t much care that she endorsed McCain, he’s not the devil in my mind like, say Arlen Specter.
But then again, I’m not the purity police, while most of Palin’s supporters are.
I do think she is wrong, and I think the “loyalty” argument is weak. Strong leaders put loyalty in it’s proper place. Remember that one of Bush’s flaws was to be too loyal, to put that loyalty above doing what was best.
The biger problem for the Palin fans who argue “loyalty” is that Palin has never mention “loyalty” as the reason for her endorsement. Instead, she has said many positive things about McCain. She has argued, forcefully, that she truly believes McCain is the best candidate for the job.
Now, I guess you could argue that loyalty would cause someone to lie about another candidate. But then the problem isn’t whether Palin is “loyal”, but whether she is lying about her opinion of McCain.
I don’t think she is. I think she really believes that McCain is a good man, and would be good for the country. I think she really supported him in the election last year, and wouldn’t have accepted the VP slot if she didn’t.
I’ve listened to most of her book now, and everything she says about McCain makes it clear she admires him, trusts him, and thinks he is a good and honorable man who deserved to be president, and deserves to be re-elected as Senator.
And her supporters who insist she is lying out of loyalty do her a great disservice. I think some of her supporters treat her more condescendingly than her adversaries. For example, see the ones who insisted that she didn’t say her family went to Canada for treatment when she was a child, because “that would be stupid politically”.
Palin doesn’t speak politically, she speaks what is in her heart. If she says she supports McCain, it’s because she really supports McCain.
Imagine if he'd had facebook back then and what entries he'd have made for the Germans to mull over?
The effect Sarah has on liberals is priceless. They know when they've seen a natural leader and they know how inept Obungler is and will continue to be until 2012- if he lasts that long.
Heck, he's about to go lame duck with a two-house majority when CommieCare fails (Waterloo). November will just seal the deal. Lesson number one: Never elect someone who's smooth talkin' without the walkin'.
After Clinton, it was "character matters". After Bush, "conservatism matters". After Obama it'll be, "experience matters". After Sarah, "How do you like them apples?"
That’s an insult to loons.
What if he is not around in 2012?
We just make him feel important by acknowledging him.
The only place a McCain endorsement does anyone harm is here on Free Republic as of late ...
McCain is kinda lame at times, but there are HUNDREDS of worst politicians to bash ...
-She is certainly one in a million.-
I say two million and counting.
Paultards: they must be fought at every turn. Like the ones on this thread.
More Joyous News: Crazy Uncle Paul had his Airport Moonies buy 800 tickets to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference so he can win the straw poll. Madness! Madness!
Your essay is very meaningful and spot on.
Mark, check out Brices’s gread read.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.