Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > September > 01
Monday, September 1, 2008
Palin candidacy takes another turn
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Sarah and Todd Palin released the following statement today:
“We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us. Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support.
“Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family. We ask the media to respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates.”
The announcement adds yet another twist to an already complicated presidential campaign. Steve Schmidt, senior adviser to the McCain campaign, made an appropriate point:
“It’s a private family matter. Life happens in families,” Schmidt said. “If people try to politicize this, the American people will be appalled by it. The fact is that the American people, who are decent people, don’t appreciate intrusions into the private space of good families.”
That was echoed by Barack Obama, himself the father of two daughters.
“This shouldn’t be part of our politics, it has no relevance to Governor Palin’s performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president, and so I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories,” he said.
All of that is true. As the Palins, Schmidt and Obama emphasized, it is a private matter. The young girl in question has parents who love her and will support her, and “are proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby.” She also has a boyfriend who apparently intends to marry her and help her raise their child. Bristol has made the decision that she believes is right for her, and the Christian right has every reason to applaud her for that decision.
But that’s the crucial point, a point that can indeed by debated without casting aspersions on Bristol or her parents. While this is indeed a private matter, other young women in very different circumstances might feel compelled to make a different decision. The Roe v. Wade decision was based on the right to privacy, the concept that this is an area in which government interference is not appropriate and indeed unconstitutional. To quote Schmidt, “the American people, who are decent people, don’t appreciate intrusions into the private space of good families.”
I’ll also add this observation: The McCain campaign is trying to cast the announcement as a decision forced on the Palin family by squalid rumors in the left-wing blogosphere. That claim itself is an effort to politicize this situation. To believe Schmidt is to believe that Bristol’s pregnancy would otherwise had gone unnoticed, and that is impossible. This announcement had to be made, and the sooner it was made the better, so the nation, the campaign and the family can move on.
Finally, a reminder. Be gentle and appropriate in your comments, which will be monitored more closely than usual given the subject matter. Posting here is a privilege, not a right, and it is a privilege that can be lost.
Permalink | Comments (179) | Post your comment |
Iraq slips from U.S. control — and that’s good
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
While America’s attention has understandably drawn inward with the presidential contest, events unfolding elsewhere are changing the landscape that will confront whoever takes office next January.
Some of the most profound changes have occurred in Iraq, where the surge has produced a real and unexpected success. And while it’s important to note that change, it’s also important to acknowledge the limits of what “success” in Iraq really means.
The surge has bought the Iraqis the time to create at least rudimentary institutions of power with which to control their country. It has created an opportunity for U.S. forces to withdraw from Iraq with honor within the foreseeable future. And it has helped to give Iraq hope of a tenuous stability where little had existed.
Those are not by any means minor accomplishments, not when you consider the bleak prospects in Iraq two years ago. Credit for that improvement goes to Gen. David Petraeus, who helped conceive and implement the U.S. military’s counterinsurgency program; to Iraqis themselves, who helped pull their nation back from the abyss; and to President Bush, whose inherent stubbornness in this case led him to make a last-ditch gamble that paid off.
But as the surge ends, where does that leave us? With violence down, will democracy begin to take root in Iraq? Will the Iraqis become strong U.S. allies in the oil-rich region, allowing U.S. forces to remain to serve as a check on neighboring Iran?
Those were once the benchmarks of what advocates of the invasion would term victory, and the success of the surge has allowed some to cling to those goals still. But it ain’t gonna happen.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is publicly insisting that by 2011, all foreign troops will be removed from Iraqi soil. While that deadline is unlikely to be met, al-Maliki’s stance is a pretty strong indication of long-term trends.
It also indicates a newfound confidence among Iraqi officials in the ability of the Iraqi army to defend the nation, at least against internal enemies. And as the Iraqi army improves in both ability and confidence, U.S. military officials acknowledge now that it is no longer under American control.
While in one sense that is a great development, it means the Iraqi army is available for uses that contradict U.S. policy and interests, with little we can do about it.
As a result, it is becoming increasingly clear that within five years and perhaps sooner, Iraq will have abandoned democracy in all but form and reverted to some type of dictatorship, with Kurdistan effectively operating as a separate nation.
Already, provincial elections scheduled to be held in October have been canceled, with July now mentioned as the next earliest date. The initial elections almost four years ago had been boycotted by Sunni voters, who are now eager to make their voice heard. But the Shiites and Kurds who control the current government are in no hurry, understanding that new elections might weaken their grip on power and all the financial benefits that power brings.
In fact, Maliki is trying to consolidate his power not through the ballot box but at gunpoint, increasingly using the Iraqi army as a political weapon. He used it against Shiite rivals in southern Iraq, and is now turning it against the Sons of Iraq, the Sunni groups organized, armed and paid by the U.S. military to reduce terrorism.
“What it looks like we are getting is a Maliki government that won’t behave itself and wants to crush the Sons of Iraq,” Stephen Biddle, a defense expert and former advisor to Petreaus, told the Los Angeles Times.
Those trends suggest that Iraq is already reverting to form, with a strongman likely to emerge who uses democracy much like Vladimir Putin uses it in Russia, as a front to disguise his authoritarianism.
Maliki is attempting to become that strongman, but if he doesn’t succeed, somebody else likely will.
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
