To: Gov. Sarah Palin
From: The American Conservative Editors
Re: What Your Tutors Aren’t Telling You
Congratulations on being chosen as John McCain’s running mate. It’san honor, if a dubious one. As you know, conservatives havereservations about McCain. To your credit, they have few such concernsabout you.
You’ve given new life to a party whose brand was bankrupt. You’veenergized a campaign that was embarrassing its own partisans. AcrossAmerica, crowds flock to see you—not that old man who barely wheezedhis way through the primaries. If John McCain wins, he will owe you, asthe guy in the undisclosed location says, “Big time.”
Wonder why Middle America finds you irresistible? Maybe they’re bigTina Fey fans. More likely, you remind them of the conservative valuesthey feared lost: faith, family, independence. This impression owesmore to who you are than what you’ve done. But at least you keep Obamafrom cornering the market on hope. Conservatives have faith in you.Don’t fail them as George W. Bush has.
You see what happened: the president’s entire domestic agendacollapsed under the weight of his failed foreign policy. SocialSecurity reform stalled. Pro-lifers became political orphans. Andwhatever gains Bush’s tax cuts secured were wiped out by recordspending. Everything was subordinated to the war on terror.
Conservatives grasping for something to commend give the presidentpoints for his judicial picks. But he would have much preferredjustices like Alberto Gonzales and Harriet Miers—toadies whose topqualification was their willingness to give the executive more power.
The party that championed the things you prize—individual liberty,fiscal restraint, and a strong defense—has trampled civil rights,pushed us to the brink of insolvency, and broken our Armed Forces.After eight years of Bush, even diehard Republicans are glad to see himgo. You might have noticed the elephant not in the room in St. Paul.
There’s a better way. In fact, you figured it out in the 1996presidential primary when you sported the flair of the leading pro-lifecandidate. (Your minders would prefer that we not mention his name. Ittriggers their Tourette’s.) As you surely know, even beyond socialissues, he represents a strain of conservatism that offers a consistentethic of life and philosophy of limited government. It was not acoincidence that the most pro-life candidate in ’96 was alsopassionately noninterventionist.
It’s also no coincidence that those who want you to heed the sirencall of global democratization care little for traditionalist causes.Recall that second night of the Republican Convention when you weretold to blow off a reception in your honor hosted by Phyllis Schlaflyso Joe Lieberman could chaperone your debut before the directors ofAIPAC. Neoconservatives pay lip service to life, but, as theirenthusiasm for Lieberman shows, they have higher priorities. Now theyplan to make them yours.
You’ll find the new friends conducting your foreign-policy crashcourse pleasant enough, if a little dogmatic and a lot condescending.They call you “Project Sarah.” We saw that one staffer at AEI—thatmystery monogram on all your briefing books—said you’re “a blankslate.” He added, “She’s going places, and it’s worth going there withher.” That’s how they operate. They don’t implement their agendathemselves. Rather, they impose it on rising star. If things don’t workout, it’s because the Project wasn’t sufficiently committed. (Just askPresident Bush.)
Now you’re the latest object of their attention, and you’re probablyfinding the program a bit confusing. They tell you that the U.S. isfighting “World War IV,” a struggle against “Islamofascism.” We canwin, they say, as long as we’re prepared to bomb Iran and build up thenational-security establishment at home, just like Reagan did.
Trouble is, your tutors also believe we’re still engaged in “WorldWar III,” the Cold War with Russia. So maybe the Gipper didn’t win thatone after all. In fact, neoconservatives like Norman Podhoretz chidedReagan for appeasing Moscow. And when terrorists struck the Marinebarracks in Lebanon in 1983, Reagan, instead of “staying the course,”withdrew our troops. Your Beltway suitors prescribe the opposite ofReagan’s strategy.
And as they would have it, we’re not only waging World Wars III andIV, we’re still fighting World War II. At least, that’s the way itsounds when Robert Kagan opens a Washington Post op-ed by likeningRussia’s conflict with Georgia to Hitler’s invasion of Czechoslovakia.
But Russia is not Germany, Georgia is no innocent Czechoslovakia,and Vladimir Putin is not Adolf Hitler—no matter what your guru RandyScheunemann says. (He probably forgot to tell you that he used to lobbyfor the government of Georgia.)
Here’s a hint: don’t believe everything you read in the papers,especially if the byline is Kristol or Krauthammer. Russia is not anexpansionist, ideological empire. It’s a traditional,semi-authoritarian great power intent on preserving its influence inits own backyard and its prestige on the world stage. That’s why Russiaintercedes in the domestic disputes of unruly states on its periphery.Putin balks at Poland hosting our antimissile systems for the samereason we would bristle at Cuba or Mexico receiving Chinese antitankmissiles.
With more validity, some of the people whispering in your ear tellyou that Moscow wants to corner the European markets for oil andnatural gas. And what nefarious end does Putin have in mind? Raisingprices and reinforcing Moscow’s political clout, not with nuclearblackmail but with good, old-fashioned economic power. We have plentyof that ourselves (or at least we used to). Putin, far from being atotalitarian ideologue, is an economic nationalist, as the leaders ofgreat powers traditionally have been.
Then there’s the Middle East, where only American arms (and lives)can prevent little Israel from being swept into the sea by Muslimhordes. Surely that’s what AIPAC told you that night you left Phylliscooling her heels. But again, it isn’t true. Israel has nuclearweapons, for one thing, and can outfight her neighbors even withoutresort to atom bombs. Israel’s problem isn’t external threat so much asinternal security and demographics. When the Jewish state was founded,tens of thousands of Palestinians—Christians as well as Muslims—losttheir homes. Palestine was no wide-open Alaskan frontier: when thenewcomers moved in, Arabs were moved out, often by force. Terrorismdidn’t come to the region with Hamas or Hezbollah; decades earliergroups like the Stern Gang and Irgun used violence to clear the way forIsrael’s creation. Nor was Palestinian Authority leader Yassar Arafatthe first terrorist to lead a state in the Holy Land. Israeli PrimeMinisters Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir had unclean hands as well.
While your minders probably don’t put much stock in his work,University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape has shown thatsuicide terrorism develops almost always among occupied peoples. Thetask before the Israelis is not to defend themselves against aggressiveneighbors but to give justice to the Palestinians already in theirmidst—to suppress terrorism without suppressing civil liberties andhuman rights, which only leads to more bloodshed. The most helpful rolethe United States can play is that of impartial mediator in theconflict. There is injustice and suffering on both sides.
No doubt you’ve been told (again and again) that Iran wants to “wipeIsrael off the map.” Here’s something to keep in mind: Iran does nothave nuclear weapons and is far from attaining them. Ironically, theBush Doctrine’s pledge that “America is committed to keeping theworld’s most dangerous weapons out of the hands of the most dangerousregimes” makes rogue states like Iran more likely to seek nucleardevices, as a deterrent against pre-emptive U.S. strikes. This is avicious circle. Instead of boxing Iran into a corner, we should engagewith Ahmadinejad, unsavory fellow though he is. Even with nuclearweapons, Iran would not pose an existential threat to Israel, let aloneAmerica.
Since you had some difficulties in your oral exam with CharlieGibson, your new friends will no doubt ramp up their lessons. (For therecord, you can scarcely be blamed for fumbling the answer about theBush Doctrine. Your tutors were clearly reluctant to bring it up, eventhough the whole scheme was theirs, not Project George’s.)
They may even start assigning you book reports. It will feel likethe third grade, except the subjects won’t be charming orphans. Nowit’s rogue states against America the Benevolent. Near the top of thelist will be An End to Evil by Richard Perle and David Frum. They’dhave you think that Muslims will impose Islamic law on America if wedon’t go to war with 18 different countries. But you know that a bunchof Muslims can’t make red-blooded, moose-hunting Americans wear burqas.Think what happens if you try to get a book pulled out of the library.
That’s only the beginning of the curriculum. You’ll be handed titleslike Present Dangers and The Return of History. Thankfully, just likethird grade, you don’t really have to read them. If they ask, just say,“The enemies of freedom won’t be appeased. We must stand firm, likeChurchill.”
Meanwhile, we suggest sneaking a look at The Limits of Power byAndrew Bacevich. It’s stern stuff, but he gets to the point: Americacan’t spend money it doesn’t have, beat everyone up, and expect to stayhealthy, wealthy, and wise. If you want a good book on how Americascrewed up in Iraq, there is Fiasco by Thomas Ricks. You said some nicethings about Ron Paul during the primary. He gave Giuliani a list ofbooks that might be worth your time.
You’ll have to keep your extracurriculars quiet. We know how thesethings work. Since he helped you break into the big leagues, you haveto toe McCain’s line. But the outgoing administration has shown us howpowerful a veep can be. If you go all the way, President McCain will bein your debt. (If he forgets, ask him how many rallies he held whileyou were home in Alaska. He wisely opted not to deliver speeches inphone booths.) Don’t leave your maverick spirit on the campaign trail.
Despite all the briefing books being thrown at you, you know yourown mind—and you realize that the neoconservative agenda doesn’t squarewith your worldview. You prize localism, their vision is grandiose. Youvalue fiscal discipline, neocons will ruin the country to financeendless war. You honor life, and they think nothing of killing hundredsof thousands in the service of ideology. But they’ll tell you thisalien vision—imported from the Left—is coherent and conservative.
It is neither, but your supporters are both. They’ve turned againstthis war and definitely don’t want another. Yet your running mate does.Perhaps you’ve noticed that his interest in domestic policy palesalongside his foreign-policy ambitions. Or maybe you caught hisvirtuoso performance of “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”
You surely see that the Bush policies have come to a dead end. Ifthe millions poised to vote for you wanted four more years, thepresident’s approval rating wouldn’t be 25 percent. This isn’t becauseRepublicans dislike Bush personally or disagree with his positions onenergy and taxes. It’s because they know that his main legacy—the IraqWar—is a disaster.
Thankfully, they don’t think you’re like him. They see in yousomeone like themselves—a patriot and a mother. The Middle Americanswaiting hours to hear you speak don’t want the United States to bedefeated, and they don’t want Iraq to be a haven for al-Qaeda—somethingit never was before the invasion. They are pleased that the surge hasmade it more possible to leave because they don’t want to send theirboys back for a third or fourth tour. They want America to comehome—not because she’s weak but because she’s wise. They hope that youare, too.
SOURCE: The American Conservative Magazine