The Palin Edition

Some of you have written me to ask "WTF???"--or, more genteelly, to ask me what I think is going on with McCain's pick. I honestly have no idea. How you read it depends, in the end, on how smart (read: devious) you think the Rovian staffers running McCain's campaign are, how much control you think McCain has over his own campaign, how desperate you think he feels, and how much of a gambler you think he is.

Evil plot or impetuous hail mary pass?
I'm still trying to sort it out. It's been reported that Rove and McCain's staffers put the kibosh on McCain's preferred pick, Lieberman. It's also been reported that McCain has bowed to the advice of his handlers, in a significant break with his past behavior, now refusing to say much to reporters and being pretty "prickly" about it. Some analysts argue that the Palin pick shows McCain is desperate (and that his internal polling is giving him reason to be so). And we have heard about McCain's actual predilection for playing high-stakes craps, and for gambling. We know he only met her once in person before offering her the position, and that he made his decision after Bill and Hillary Clinton successfully brought together Democrats at the convention. But we also know that voters decide largely on emotional responses, not logical analysis, so we're cautioned to listen to the analysis of George Lakoff (who started us thinking about language and framing after Kerry's loss), which argues that Sarah Palin activates a whole lot of positive emotion in voters, no matter her stance on issues or her level of experience.

Plusses and minuses, and McCain's decision-making process.
One of the most balanced and rational commentaries I've seen is the response from a reporter from Anchorage, on the PBS Newshour (watch here). Many of the above indicators could sway you to believe that McCain is getting internal polling data that have convinced him that he needs to do something radical to shake up his campaign. And his pick will definitely solidify and energize his base, which can help him. It can also turn off women and independents, which can hurt him. This pick is not, foremost, about trying to sway Hillary holdouts. He may get a couple of votes from that group, but by and large Palin is too socially conservative and too inexperienced in comparison to Hillary to take Hillary's place. It does appear that Palin was not comprehensively vetted (an understatement, if there ever was one!). Her hometown paper's archives were not studied, and the McCain campaign did not know she originally supported the Bridge to Nowhere or that she supported a windfall tax on oil profits. Today, we learn that her 17 year old unmarried daughter is 5 months pregnant, and that her husband had a DUI. McCain's people might have known this, and decided to leak it when most of the country is watching Gustav. Who knows.

No matter what the rationale, or the way this plays out, here are some more substantive things you should know:

Dubious claims about reform. Palin is touting herself (and the brainless pundits and news-stenographers are happily parroting her claims) to be a reformer. She may be, to some extent. But two of her biggest claims are patently false:

1) She says she's against wasteful government spending and earmarks. USA Today reports:

While running for governor in 2006, though, Palin backed federal funding for the infamous [Bridge to Nowhere], which McCain helped make a symbol of pork barrel excess. And as mayor of the small town of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, Palin also hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, known as earmarks...

Palin supported the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere" before it became clear the bridge was not going to happen and would be a political liability, at which time she dropped her support of it. The millions that were allocated to Alaska have not been returned to the federal treasury; she has kept them for "other projects" for the state.

2) She says she's a fierce anti-corruption reformer, taking on her party (read: Ted Stevens, the head of the Alaskan GOP, currently under indictment). While it does appear that she did create a lot of enemies among Republican in Alaska, Palin was not out to take down Ted Stevens--in fact, she was one of the directors of a 527 (independent campaign group) that was created to support Stevens.

In addition, she's under ethics investigation for potentially exercising inappropriate influence to get her former brother-in-law fired (shorthand in the media: "Troopergate") and her mayoralty was troubled by inappropriate firings there, as well. She should be deposed in the ethics case in September, with the verdict expected by early November.

Dubious definition of feminism. Although she belongs to a group called Feminists for Life, Palin is far to the right on many social issues, including abortion and contraception, than what is conventionally associated with feminism.

Palin has said that she'd oppose abortion in all cases including rape and incest, even for her daughter were her daughter to be raped.
Palin strongly supports abstinence-only education; on the 2006 gubernatorial questionnaire, she was asked the question:

"Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?"

Her response: "Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support."

There is some confusion as to where she stands on birth control. I read initially that she is opposed to birth control for married couples; other reporting states that she supports birth control.

And the apparently low levels of support from some of the people who know her.
Two Alaskan newspapers are doubtful about her capacity for the VP position...
Her mother in law doesn't know what she brings to McCain's campaign....
First-hand account of a resident of Wasilla, where Palin was mayor.