Family friendly tickets

In response to John McCain's selection of Alaska governor (and granny to be) Sarah Palin as his running mate, public opinion varied. Some cynically sneered that the Republicans were pandering to the electorate, merely copying the Democratic party's youth movement. Few were even surprised and confused by the selection, but the whole country knows McCain likes younger women, so where's the shock value? Another seeming middle ground majority fancying itself as the voice of reason expressed a more neutral, open-minded view that her background made the Republican ticket more family friendly - more to come on whatever the heck that means. 

 

What stands out is the lack of consensus over the Palin selection, and that seems queer to Yardage. French doctor, author and crackpot Louis-Ferdinand Celine wrote, "Public opinion is always right, especially when it's really idiotic." Selecting a female running mate is a watershed moment in the history of the political party known as a rich, old, white, male preserve. To be fair, the Democrats have their share of that breed, but they are more ashamed to admit that any entrenched political party truly stands for the preservation of the status quo, and its members fear egalitarian upward mobility of lower classes. The public response should have had some more unity such as, "It's about time," or "Finally." Instead, a female figurehead, the governor with gorgeous gams and a killer smile, come off the pine to invigorate a campaign which trails in preliminary polling. 

 

As governor of a geographically vast state, as head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Palin has accomplished much at a young age. There is no question regarding her administrative competence or at least her ability to rise quickly from local to state office. So, why is so much import placed on a family friendly ticket? Moreover, what on earth might that be?

 

For society to function, good government fills in where people, cooperation, and markets cannot. Sound infrastructure, public safety, and predictable regulation provide a conducive environment for families to thrive. When commutes are efficient, the laws enforced equally and schools free of violence, families do well. Totalitarian governments in Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany were surprisingly family friendly. Had the domestic economy not imploded due to excessive central planning or limited trade, the models might have endured. Perhaps linking the concept to the fundamental duties of government is not the best proof, but carping about populist issues does not solve policy and market failures.

 

So, in modern America, a family friendly political party ticket must constitute rhetoric about schools, healthcare, tax breaks. Wrap it up with a pretty, prolific lady, and the party has a product. As long as wages stagnate, no long term incentive to save exists, and no commitment to the well-information of the citizenry predominates, the concept of the family faces assault practcially and ideologically. Governor Palin certainly brings with her a telegenic phenotype of the family concept, but what in her gubernatorial record qualifies her as a champion of working families? According to Andrew Romano's Stumper blog, the record is "still pretty thin." Other than her vehement anti-abortion position, little ink has been spilled over her policy notions on government and market involvement in healthcare, national educational curriculum standards, and the expansion of benefits for the poverty stricken.

 

For someone who will represent the deciding vote in the Senate, how reassuring is it to middle class Americans that she is a dyed in the wool conservative with no discernible agenda? Such factors are of greater consequence given that Senator McCain may succumb to the vicissitudes of average life expectancy, and Mrs. Palin may wind up in the top job. She cannot remain a political enigma, and her slight record on 'bread and butter' issues only confirm a madman's epigram.