Sarah Palin articulates the meaning of America

Spencer Warren writes:

You must see an entire Palin speech. I watched one she gave at Fort Wayne last week on the C-Span website. (Go here and then go to the second page; or else try this.) We only see the candidates as filtered by the news channels, not “in the whole.”

Sarah is very impressive. She articulates very well and persuasively the meaning of America—as well as Tocqueville, and in a way McCain and most Republicans are incapable of. This filled most of her 35 minute speech. She is commanding, intelligent, supremely confident and very charismatic. And genuine—her words come from her soul, they are not the platitudes mouthed by a Washington politician. It really is moving to see her begin her rallies by asking veterans and serving members of the armed forces to raise their hands, then lead the audience in applause.

Seeing her this way, I think most of the attacks on her are a product of prejudice. She is the first very attractive, feminine, wholesome lady to be a national candidate, and it is strange to accept her as such. One has to get used to this. I think she is terrific.

I understand your criticisms about her pregnant daughter and her special needs baby. I think one must give her the benefit of any doubt on how she cares for her baby. No candidate is perfect, but she has a great deal going for her—not least having given birth to this child.

Finally, she has not been afraid to make very tough attacks on the opposition, unlike previous Republican v-p candidates. And she is quoted in the New York Post as complaining about the campaign’s failure to make Rev. Wright an issue.

Spencer Warren continues:

Don’t you think this is put beautifully, showing her rock-like faith? Especially the last two paragraphs:

One of the most wonderful experiences in this campaign has been to see all the families of children with special needs who come out to rallies and events just like this. We have a bond there. We know that children with special needs inspire a special love. You bring your sons and daughters with you, because you are proud of them, as I am of my son.

My little fella sleeps during most of these rallies, even when they get pretty rowdy. He would be amazed to know how many folks come out to see him instead of me.

When I learned that Trig would have special needs, honestly, I had to prepare my heart. At first I was scared, and Todd and I had to ask for strength and understanding. I did a lot of praying for that understanding, and strength, and to see purpose.

And what’s been confirmed in me is every child has something to contribute to the world, if we give them that chance. You know that there are the world’s standards of perfection, and then there are God’s, and these are the final measure. Every child is beautiful before God, and dear to Him for their own sake. And the truest measure of any society is how it treats those who are most vulnerable.

As for our baby boy, Trig, for Todd and me he is only more precious because he is vulnerable. In some ways, I think we stand to learn more from him than he does from us. When we hold Trig and care for him, we don’t feel scared anymore. We feel blessed.

[end of quote.]

If from Busheron, it would be boilerplate, if from McCain completely bland. (McCain does not even speak about the pro-life issue. And when he mentions judges, he doesn’t tie them to the issue of homosexual marriage. Sarah broke with him in endorsing a federal amendment to ban it.)

LA replies:

“McCain does not even speak about the pro-life issue.”

Not true. He always says, through gritted teeth, and in a dead, robotic voice, “I’m a proud pro-life conservative,” just before taking the Democrats’ side on some issue or other.

Nora Brinker writes:

I am sure it is my fault, but I am missing something here. I am seeking for it since Mrs. Palin and her family entered the political stage and I can’t find it. She says:

One of the most wonderful experiences in this campaign has been to see all the families of children with special needs who come out to rallies and events just like this. We have a bond there. We know that children with special needs inspire a special love. You bring your sons and daughters with you, because you are proud of them, as I am of my son.

Apart from that awful PC-ism (“special needs child” instead of “handicapped”) what is there to be specifically proud of? One is proud of things one has achieved. She has conceived him, carried him nine months and given birth to him, just like her other four children who do obviously NOT inspire her with such emotions. Why should this child in any way make her feel any more special than her other children? There is certainly no need whatsoever to be ashamed of such a child. It is a gift from God like any other child and that’s where it all ought to end. If she has, as a mother, at the end of the day turned the life of that little boy into one of dignity and happiness, she can be justifiably proud of HERSELF. That the position she chose to accept will make such an effort difficult is another matter. To me, it just sounds like all the other tawdry and corny sentimentalities which rule the American political discourse and which ought to be kept safely within an inner circle of family and most intimate friends. This lack of understanding may be a cultural thing, or maybe I am just lacking human empathy, or both. I just don’t understand what Palin is telling us. I am not trying to be awkward, I seriously don’t get it. If she isn’t trying to score points with the public (which would be cynical to assume) all this sounds defiant and defensive (“Don’t you dare NOT to find my child wonderful!”), and THAT is one thing little Trig doesn’t deserve.

LA replies:

I for one don’t think you’re lacking human empathy, I think you’re asking legitimate points.

Nora Brinker replies:

Thank you! I am relieved and I mean it.

Nora Brinker writes:

I just saw Mr. Warren’s comment: “No candidate is perfect, but she has a great deal going for her—not least having given birth to this child.” So that she did the only thing an ethical human being would, could, do, nameley NOT murdering a handicapped child, is “having a great deal going for her”? I am stunned.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 28, 2008 12:12 PM | Send