For Palin fans, love conquers all, and the winning ways of their heroine more than qualifies her for President. Truth be told, she is beautiful, but beauty requires proof, at least in our American culture, that the lady has more on the ball than surface appeal.
So the question arises, "Where's the beef?" Can she discuss issues with any great ideological depth? "Common-sense conservative solutions" remains an empty platitude without evidence she has thought widely and deeply about the intellectual foundations of our constitutional republic, about natural rights philosophy, limited government, and the primacy of the individual.Palin's debut on Fox News gave us the opportunity to see what she's been up to beyond earning some glorious and much needed profit on her best-selling book, Going Rogue, and the view has not been altogether re-assuring.
Does anyone honestly believe they would be making excuses for Ronald Reagan letting Bill O'Reilly interrupt him? Let's get real, people. Wouldn't happen and that's one--just one--of the many reasons we admire Reagan.
Palin is young, very young, and she is unseasoned. The hope has been expressed her gig on Fox would give her that seasoning and the further opportunity to develop the intellectual and rhetorical skills necessary to drop her opponent in a media-driven culture, where perception crystallizes conviction.
The ball is now in her court, she's been given a splendid opportunity, and if she drops the ball, let's not blame others as so many conservatives do at American Thinker.
The future of our country as a free, civilized society may well rest in the play. The fact our future appears to depend on the fortunes of one woman is our fault, not hers. We elected these leaders who now ride us as beasts of burden. Will we throw them off even if Palin disappoints?
Tom Anderson
January 2010
3 comments:
I like Sarah Palin a lot. I think she appeals to conservatives because she hasn't been corrupted by Washington. I do agree with your assessment however, that she's not yet ready for prime time.
I believe Palin has the intelligence, integrity and courage a president should possess, but lacks the depth of understanding on some of the major issues our society is facing. While I consider myself to be a conservative, I’m also pragmatic and believe that a president needs to government from the middle and not from the hard right or hard left.
Barack Obama is the perfect example of why we shouldn't elect neophytes and strict ideologues as president. Palin is young woman. If does her homework, she may be a viable candidate for president in 2016.
Pragmatism, the willingness to compromise on basic principles, is what has led to our present situation.
To say that a president "needs to govern from the middle" is to say, in essence, we need a person who has no fundamental principles or direction and that he holds his finger to the wind to decide what he is going to do.
The problem with Obama is not that he is an ideologue, but that his ideology is irrational, incoherent and delusional.
We need a person who believes in the principles of limited government, protection of individual rights, separation of church and state, as well as state and economy.
In short, we would benefit by having a president who acted consistently from a set of rational principles. The media tend to degrade such a person by calling him an "ideologue", as if everyone who thinks intelligently and consistently doesn't develop an ideology.
The fundamental question here is whether the ideology is true or false.
Post a Comment