Dr. Pat Deneen has done well in standing up for Palin. But he wonders if she’s the savior we need. To be fair, she doesn’t claim (unlike a candidate we know) to be a savior, and she was pretty funny in mocking contemporary political messianism. It seems that he was a bit grossed out by "Drill, baby, drill," missing her comment that she’s knows perfectly well that drilling isn’t enough. It’s true that Palin didn’t campaign against our happy and wasteful surburban lifestyle (as Dr. Pat would if he ever ran for office), and we have to admit that living in Alaska is, for obvious reasons, not particularly energy efficient. Still, no candidate is waging the type of campaign Deneen wants--certainly not Obama. And the only one of the candidates who might break out in support of patriotic conservationist self-restraint is McCain; he certainly, more than once, has said we’re not asking enough of ourselves in terms of sacrifice. And Palin was certainly tough in asserting our need for energy independence; she knows that international community is an oxymoron.
There's much to like in Deneen's post. His concerns about the energy policy debate, so called, are concerns I share. But let's face it, there's nothing like a majority willing to suffer $4/gallon gasoline as a matter of policy. Can Peter Lawler tell us the grounds of his cautious optimism that on this matter McCain/Palin is the ticket of national self-restraint?
One thing about the Palin commentary that bugs me. People keep saying she is a "natural". Well she clearly has alot of natural speaking ability but then so does Huck. But compare the Palin and Huck speeches yesterday. Even making allowances for the occasion and time constraints, it was clear that Palin was just the more disiplined, self-willed speaker. They both have Tiger Woods level talent, its just that Palin has Tiger Woods level drive.
Huck didn't just suffer from the comparison. Palin is the new face of American social conservatism. She appeals to all of Huck's constituency groups and shares his opinions on the social conservative issues (abortion, guns, gay marriage, stem cells) but without Huck's narrowly sectarian appeal and with much more of a free market, limited government orientation.
One of the worries of the primary season was that Huck portended a statist turn in social conservatism that would leave economic conservatism crippled and marginalized. Palin offers the hope that her approach (and maybe even her person)could help create a new synthesis of economic and social conservatism that is right for the times.
I cannot understand this new dislike of suburbia. I grew up in and love the surbubs. I find city life stifling and depressing. I have a hard time understanding where this strain of conservative (crunch cons?) disdain of suburbs comes from.
And Palin is absolutely right to say that while more drilling alone won't help, it has to be a major part of the solution, along with nuclear power. Drill baby, drill.
She appeals to all of Huck's constituency groups and shares his opinions on the social conservative issues (abortion, guns, gay marriage, stem cells) but without Huck's narrowly sectarian appeal and with much more of a free market, limited government orientation.
I like the way you put this.
One of the worries of the primary season was that Huck portended a statist turn in social conservatism that would leave economic conservatism crippled and marginalized. Palin offers the hope that her approach (and maybe even her person)could help create a new synthesis of economic and social conservatism that is right for the times.
While I think that "worry" was all in the Harvard "conservative" class, your point about Palin being a bit easier to swallow by them & (much more importantly) the Rockefellers is taken...