SUNDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2010 “ T


KLMNO


B


B3


This is not a situation in which with a stroke of a pen I can simply end the policy.” — President Obama, who is against “don’t ask, don’t tell” but whose administration is fighting its repeal in the courts, on why he wants Congress to intervene


Myths about Sarah Palin 5 by Matthew Continetti


hink you know Sarah Palin? The former Alaska governor has been in the spotlight ever since John McCain named her as his


running mate on Aug. 29, 2008. Yet, while practically everybody has an opinion about Palin, not all of those opinions are grounded in reality. Many of them are based more on a “Saturday Night Live” caricature than on the living, breathing, 46-year-old mother of five. The real Sarah Palin is a complex woman who has risen in no time from obscurity to the stratosphere of American politics, fusing celebrity and populism in novel ways. Now that she’s laying the foundation for a possible presidential run in 2012, it’s worth taking a moment to separate the facts about Palin from the fables.


Palin cost McCain the 2008 election.


when they stepped into the voting booth. Those who said yes broke for McCain 56 percent to 43 percent. Before Palin’s selection, remember,


1


McCain suffered from an enthusiasm gap. Republicans were reluctant to vote for the senator from Arizona because of his reputation as a maverick who’d countered his party on taxes, immigration, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and “cap and trade” climate legislation. But Palin’s conservative record in Alaska and antiabortion advocacy changed the Republican mood. With her by his side, McCain’s fundraising and support from conservatives


She didn’t. CNN’s 2008 national exit poll, for example, asked voters whether Palin was a factor


improved. It wasn’t enough to beat Barack Obama — but McCain probably would have lost the presidency by a greater margin if he had, say, selected independent Sen. Joe Lieberman as his running mate, further alienating the GOP base. Yes, it’s possible that Palin’s


conservatism and uneven performance on the campaign trail shifted some voters to Obama’s column. But even if Obama picked up some anti-Palin votes, he surely didn’t need them: The economy was in recession, Wall Street was in meltdown, and the incumbent Republican president was incredibly unpopular. In the end, it’s impossible to know how McCain would have performed if he hadn’t selected Palin —politics does not allow for control experiments.


Paula Escobar Chavarría in santiago, chile


ed pen on white paper, stuck in a plastic bag, the six words went round the world. “Estamos bien en el refugio los 33.” (“The 33 of us are okay


in the refuge.”) It was Aug. 22, the 17th day of the saga of the miners, and until then Chile and the world did not know if the men trapped 2,000 feet underground were alive or dead. In this moment, we knew they lived. Their message — perfect in its con- cise, narrative elegance — spoke vol- umes for what it did not say. It did not say help us, get us out of here, we’re dy- ing. Their attitude was quite the oppo- site. We’re fine, all of us, they said. Keep on trying to get us out. Keep doing your job, because we’re still doing ours. It was something Chile needed to


hear. The dramatic story of our miners overlapped, coincidentally, with Chile’s bicentennial celebration. I had the good fortune to serve until last year on Chile’s Bicentennial Commission, a diverse group that debated the spirit and values that the nation’s 200th birthday party should reflect. When Chile reached its centennial 100 years ago, its citizens were looking across the Atlantic, trying to be more European. This time, as the occasion approached, we’d been talking about how to become a fully developed country by 2020, the first in Latin Amer- ica to achieve that status, a model for the region.


But suddenly, with a potential tragedy unfolding deep within our land, Chil- eans began to doubt. Should we even cel- ebrate the bicentennial if we have 33 compatriots underground, their fates unknown? How can we claim to join the top tier of nations if we allow private companies to subject their workers to the risks these men faced? Can society remain quiet before such injustice for those who are born without privilege? With their message, the miners them- selves gave us the beginnings of an an- swer. Their steely strength, that ability to avoid complaints or pleas and to re- veal dignity and confidence in the face of hardship — these offered the greatest emotional lesson of this affair. Where ut- ter despair was legitimate and under- standable, we saw calm, logic, strategy,


Resigning as governor was rash.


Her hastily composed and clumsily delivered farewell address left many observers confused about her motives. Some of her critics were only too eager to fill in the gaps with conjecture and hearsay (She’s being investigated by the FBI! Sarah and Todd must be headed for divorce!). If there was one thing everybody knew for sure, it was that Palin’s career in politics was over. But none of the rumored scandals


2


ever broke. The Palins remain married. And as for Sarah Palin’s career, it’s taken off. She plays a far greater role in American public life than she did before she left office. When Palin returned to Alaska after the 2008 campaign, she confronted three problems. The political coalition on which she had based her governorship — a combination of Democrats and renegade “Palinista” Republicans — had collapsed. Her critics were using Alaska’s tough ethics laws to launch investigations into her behavior, sapping her finances and her energy. Finally, every time she traveled to the Lower 48, Alaskans criticized her for putting her political interests above the state’s. Palin’s solution was to resign. Her


agenda stood a better chance of passing if then-Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who shared Palin’s goals, succeeded her as governor. As a private citizen, meanwhile, Palin could make enough money to pay her legal bills. And she would no longer be accused of neglecting her official duties. Some might say that Palin’s


resignation was shortsighted and showed that she was not ready for the demands of executive office. But if Palin had remained governor, she would have been denied opportunities to rally the tea party and fight in the battle over the Obama agenda. She would have been stuck on a regional stage. Instead, she’s back on the national one.


Palin and the tea party are destroying the GOP.


3


You’ve heard the spiel: The Republican Party is in the midst of a civil war between


moderate incumbents and far-right challengers backed by Palin and the


No one expected Palin’s resignation on July 3, 2009, just 21


⁄2 years into her term.


tea party. Driving Charlie Crist from the GOP and defeating establishment figures such as Robert Bennett, Lisa Murkowski and Mike Castle spells electoral doom for the party. The only chance Republicans have for long-term success is to move to the center in a bid to win over millennials and Latinos. But demographics aren’t destiny, and no one knows what the future holds. The reality, right now, is that Palin and the tea party are saving the GOP by dragging it back to its roots and mobilizing conservative voters. Remember, by the time Palin arrived on the national scene, the Republican Party was depleted, exhausted and held in disrepute. An unpopular war in Iraq, an economy in recession and GOP corruption had driven away independents. Meanwhile, massive government spending and a liberal immigration policy had dispirited conservatives. This is where Palin came in. In the


wake of Obama’s historic victory, she and countless other grass-roots activists could have abandoned the GOP and turned the tea party into a conservative third party. They didn’t. They decided instead to refashion the Republican Party from the ground up, pressuring it to live up to its limited-government ideals. Now, two years after Obama’s win, Republicans are poised to reap major gains in the midterm elections. Palin and the tea party haven’t hurt the GOP one bit.


Palin is extreme. 4


On many of the most important issues of the day, Palin holds positions that are squarely in the center-right of American political discourse. And many of those positions, not incidentally, are held by a large segment or even a majority of the public. For instance, neither the public nor Palin believes the stimulus worked. And while most Americans may not share Palin’s views regarding “death panels,” many join her in opposing Obama’s health-care overhaul. Over the past two years, Pew and Gallup surveys have tracked the public as it has moved to the right — not on just one or two issues but on a whole constellation of them. Even on the controversial topics of abortion, guns and same-sex marriage, Palin is not as far away from the center as some suppose. A May 2009 Gallup poll, for example, found that a majority of


Americans identified as “pro-life” rather than “pro-choice.” In October 2009, Gallup measured record-low support for gun control. The public is divided on same-sex marriage, with about half the country joining Palin’s (and Obama’s) opposition.


Palin is unelectable. 5


Without question, a Palin 2012 campaign would be an uphill battle. Palin is unpopular — massively so among Democrats, decisively so among independents. Even many Republicans don’t believe she’s ready to be president. But opinions can change. Look at the political resuscitations of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Hillary Rodham Clinton. If Palin works hard and runs an impressive campaign, wavering Republicans and skeptical independents may give her a second look. To earn that second look, she may need to find a big idea. It’s hard to become president without one. Reagan had supply-side economics and the end of detente with the Soviets. Bill Clinton had the third way. George W. Bush had compassionate conservatism and the freedom agenda. Obama had national unity and hope and change. At the moment, however, Palin still


expresses her agenda mainly in negative terms, focusing on her opposition to Obama and the Washington establishment. She hasn’t defined her “common-sense conservatism” in positive language. And she hasn’t found a unifying, exhilarating theme. Then again, she just might get along without one. After all, a presidential contest is a choice. The public might not love Palin. But by 2012, Americans might absolutely despise Obama. Two more years of a bad economy and an unpopular Afghan war, and anything is possible. Yes, there’s a ceiling to Palin’s support. But in 2012, there also will be a ceiling to Obama’s. Whose will be higher?


Matthew Continetti is opinion editor of the Weekly Standard and the author of “The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star.”


on washingtonpost.com


Matthew Continetti will discuss this article Monday at


1 p.m. at washingtonpost.com/liveonline.


For 69 days, digging deep into Chile’s soul R


they had no choice but to become he- roes, each one. But what about the rest of Chile and our aspirations to become a first-world, developed nation? If it was not clear be- fore, it is now: We will not achieve true development if we don’t overcome the inequality in our country and our conti- nent, if we don’t achieve a society in which all work carries dignity, one in which a father does not need to travel deep beneath the ground to provide for his children, with no certainty that he will once again see the light. We must celebrate the 33 miners but must recognize that we failed them from the beginning, long before they were fa- mous. We failed them when the indiffer- ence of the mine owners joined that of a society seemingly unable, perhaps until now, to take better care of those among us born without privilege yet capable of so much.


“Estamos bien el refugio los 33.” That MARTIN MEJIA/ASSOCIATED PRESS


As the rescue operation ended at the San Jose mine last week, residents of nearby Copiapo, Chile, gathered to celebrate. But the social conditions that led to the miners’ saga raise questions for Chile, which is striving to become a fully developed nation.


perseverance. For the bicentennial celebration, no one could have imagined a better sym- bol than the 33. Forget Europe. Now we just wanted to be Chileans. Better Chileans.


our national condition. These were ordi- nary laborers, hard-working men who lacked much formal education, strong men hardened by the northern sun, by a life underground and by the physical and mental stress their work required. Mining is known as Chile’s “salary,” ac- counting for much of our gross domestic product. This mine, owned by two Chil- ean entrepreneurs, offered better pay than most but was rumored to be riskier


I


n a mining country such as ours, the accident on Aug. 5 at the San Jose mine near Copiapo was symbolic of


for workers. We all know what happened after the thundering mine collapse buried the 33; the actions and reactions have already achieved mythic status. The foreman, Luis Urzua, taking control, rationing canned tuna and milk. The relatives, coming to get news of their loved ones and deciding not to leave until they learned what was happening, them- selves enduring the sun, then the cold, then the wind. President Sebastian Piñ- era, insisting that the miners were alive when others assured him it was impos- sible; then, on the same day his father- in-law died, holding triumphant the message from the miners. We celebrated the Sept. 18 bicentenni- al in their honor, and they danced a cue- ca on our national day.


While the men remained below us,


here on the surface there was no other topic of conversation — and there still isn’t— beyond the fate and future of the miners. Their rescue last week, as dra- matic as it was methodical, may be the memory that most endures in the world’s imagination, but for us it will be those black Chilean eyes in the first vid- eo, looking at us. Here we are, alive, they seemed to say, waiting patiently. Or their correspondence with their families. Or their request to watch soccer and our national team dedicating matches to them. Their paper chess sets. The prayers of Pope Benedict XVI. Steve Jobs sending iPods. A Chilean millionaire of- fering each family $10,000. Their laugh- ter even through sadness, stress and suf- fering. We will remember ordinary men be- having in extraordinary ways because


phrase returned the soul to our bodies, as we say here. That was the spirit of the bicentennial, the spirit of those whom life sends unexpected, impossible trials, but who emerge victorious. These miners never took a crisis lead- ership class, but they managed to sur- vive in the depths, united, for more than two months. And above ground, a team of unsurpassed excellence worked: engi- neers and other professionals, rescue ex- perts and machinery operators, along with the president and Mining Minister Laurence Golborne — our new political star, our new Michelle Bachelet — gave the best of themselves, nonstop, in an unprecedented and audacious effort to bring them back. And while all of Chile feels proud of how this ended, some questions mingle with our emotions. Will we be truly developed by 2020, with the sort of development that is not measured in GDP per capita but in the chance for all citizens — regardless of the crib into which they were born — to live lives of dignity? The story of the 33 combines the best and the worst of us. What will be the epilogue? Will we pass, like the miners’ rescue capsule, from the darkness to the light? Will we have the courage to illuminate those places that so far have remained shrouded?


Paula Escobar Chavarría is magazines editor of the Chilean daily El Mercurio. This essay was translated from the Spanish by Outlook editor Carlos Lozada.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188