Palin and the General (Putting the McCain Endorsement in Perspective)

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?

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.

The Ethos of Ethics

When the Governor announced her decision to resign on July 3, she pointed out the then 15 frivolous ethics complaints that had been filed against her and dismissed.

It was intended to explain, in part, her decision to resign as well to educate the public about the abuse of the Alaska Ethics Act through a repetitive stream of baseless partisan accusations, each one seemingly more pointless and frivolous than the next.

The Governor’s message was not intended as an invitation to run off half-cocked and file more baseless ethics complaints, but not everyone understood that message—or wanted to understand. In August 2009, largely in response to the abuse of Alaska’s Ethics Act by partisan shills and low level lackeys, the Attorney General issued an opinion recommending changes to the Ethics Act ”to prevent another potential harm—abuse of the process.

Some Alaskans have argued that the Ethics Act has been used inappropriately in some circumstances to politically damage the subject of the complaint.” (August 5, 2009 Attorney General Opinion). That argument was asserted by the Anchorage Daily News. “Our View: Abuse of Ethics Complaints Turns Good Law Into Bad Politics,” Anchorage Daily News, May 3, 2009. The Attorney General further recommended “another safeguard to discourage habitual complaint filers who use the Ethics Act process to harass executive branch employees.

Statutory amendments could provide authority to the personnel board to decline to process further complaints filed by a person who has abused the Act in this way.” Though it is encouraging to see an impartial evaluation of the problem, it is ultimately up to the Legislature to implement any of these recommended changes.

Governor Palin has been subjected to 24 ethics complaints, several lawsuits, and dozens and dozens of public information act requests, few of which raised even a scintilla of a good faith issue, and most of which were simply done to garner a headline or promote opposition research for political gain.

Recently we learned that two more ethics complaints against Governor Palin have been dismissed—complaints that were filed after the Governor announced her plans to step down. One complaint asserted that it was unethical for the state to follow its own per diem regulations and pay per diem to the Governor as set forth by law. Of course, the complainant conveniently overlooked that the Governor and her family received less per diem than they were entitled to under State law—why let such details stand in the way of an ethics complaint? The other complaint that was dismissed asserted that the Governor, through me, supposedly violated the constitution because we informed a person who falsely implied that the Governor was “under investigation” by the FBI, that such statements are defamatory.

It is notable to watch those who agitate on all things Palin—locally and even across the Atlantic—as they Huff and puff falsehoods about Sarah Palin under the guise of free speech, which brings us to a teachable moment. All too often we hear about constitutional rights—as we should—but many forget about constitutional responsibilities.

As citizens we have both rights and responsibilities. Though we have the right to exercise free speech, we have the responsibility to exercise that right without defaming people. I like the way our Alaska Constitution describes it: “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.

” Ak. Const. Art. I, Sec. 5. The irony of filing an ethics complaint because of a reminder about the constitutional parameters of free speech is no doubt lost on those consumed by irrationality when it comes to Sarah Palin; but one does not need an ethics law to know that positive political discourse depends on a robust debate about facts and the policy implications stemming from such facts.

The nation is not helped by calumnious ad hominem attacks against Sarah Palin, matrilineal conspiracy theories, and aberrant notions of ethics.

- Thomas Van Flein, Personal Attorney for Sarah Palin

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.