In terms of the doctrine of vocation, people leave their callings all the time when God calls them to something else, including retirement. But to leave one’s vocation out of ambition for another vocation that one does not have but merely desires seems wrong. For Sarah Palin to step down from such an important office as governor to which she has been elected seems an abdication of responsibility. I suspect some big financial backer has persuaded her that running for president is a full-time job and that she can win the prize if she starts even earlier than our previous early runners. This, though, would seem to put politics over the actual exercise of an office, which is a distortion we need to change. Of course, she may have some other reason for stepping down, which could be a different story.
What’s the deal with Sarah Palin?
Previous post: Why did economists miss the economic meltdown?
Next post: Home again
{ 29 comments… read them below or add one }
Could be that the media and frivilous law suits got to her. I think she just got discouraged with her country. She won’t ever be president because people won’t believe she would stick it out when the going gets tough. Do you know of any other politician whom the media has tormented as
much as Sarah Palin?
I, like everyone except her inner circle of family and advisors, don’t know what her reasoning and plans are. I do know that I’m sick of people being elected to do a job and then prioritizing partisan politics rather than their service to the people. We see this in the current governor of VA, Tim Kaine, who spends a significant amount of his time out-of-state, galavanting around the country raising money as chairman of the DNC. He has refused to release his travel history or plans, despite calls for such disclosure by citizens and the media.
As Christians, I believe we should give people the benefit of the doubt and believe what they say unless proven otherwise, especially in the case of fellow believers, such as Gov. Palin. I honor her commitment to the people of her state that they deserve a full-time governor, not one busy with political engagements around the country and partisan legal challenges at home.
Everyone seems to think she may be running for President in 2012, but I wonder if she may be angling to challenge pro-abortion moderate GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the GOP primary next year. That would set her up with six years in the Senate before the 2016 elections, more experience at the national level then BHO had. She beat Murkowski’s daddy to get the governorship, it might be time to continue building her legacy of busting up moderates, cronyism, and corruption.
I was greatly saddened when I first read this about Palin. I do not think that it is a political move to allow her to maneuver for the presidency, especially since this move would make it look like her enemies merely need to lean on her to get her to quit. Very sad.
Per the news this a.m. (CNN), Palin’s explanation was that all of the attention generated by the endless ethics complaints (that she described as frivolous) and the media hounding had made her an ineffective governor and that she thought stepping down was the best way to return effective leadership to Alaskans. She also added that she will continue to fight for what she believes in through different channels.
There is a rumor floated that she may be planning to forgo elected office to become the “Evangelical Oprah.”
I thoroughly enjoy you website, the commentary and observations. Almost always right on. The post on Palin is out of bounds. How would you know her motivations? And if you do not, then why suggest several that diminish her character and judgment? “I suspect some big financial backer….” In reality, her prospects for a presidential run in 2012 are most likely non-existent at this point. The resignation does not help her, but has injured her. You might look at some the state laws in Alaska concerning her liability as Governor for a more possible motivation, as well as her family concerns.
My first response to her (pre)resignation statement, is that she will be able to focus solely on the Senate or White House. This may be good for the state of Alaska. Then again maybe she wants to move away from Alaska, I couldn’t blame her (8 months of winter and darkness). Veith makes a great point though, especially if she is doing nothing, but focusing on running for political office. She needs to find a vocation in the interim.
?”Sarah Palin for President, 2012-2014 1/2″
IMHO, Mrs. Palin was never ready for prime time.
She says the Letterman dustup was a factor in her leaving
the governorship?
That looks to me like someone not ready for the big leagues.
It all goes back to John McCain and his “hail Sarah”
pass.
I think it tipped a lot of people off that McCain wasn’t trustworthy and was a factor in Barack Obama’s almost 10 million vote winning margin.
Karl Rove is right that Palin now will receive more vicious attention from the liberal media that fears and loathes her.
She has been an excellent governor in Alaska and would have been much better off focusing her talent and energy on Alaska matters.
I’m afraid that this good women has made a serious mistake.
I am kinding of hoping that her “higher calling” I think I saw that phrase mentioned in one her recents tweets will be to be a stay at home mom and MAYBE do talk radio in the afternoon while her baby takes a nap.
Good for her, and I wish her well. May she, like Cincinnatus (the Roman patriot, not the occasional contributor here), find peace and fulfillment in home and family after her public service.
I feel a bit like I did on the day Barry Sanders retired, when he could easily have gone on to demolish the records for nfl running backs. Though disappointed, I wished him well, too.
As an aside, Dr. Veith, how can retirement be a vocation if Mrs. Palin’s retirement is an abdication? How does God call one to retirement?
I agree with Gene Veith that if her desire is to pursue the presidential nomination in 2012, Sarah Palin should not have resigned from the office of governor, to which she had been elected and had repeatedly said she had a duty to fulfill. Serving as governor also is the best way to demonstrate her executive leadership abilities.
I doubt it was the scurrilous attacks from the hell-spawned leftists, including a late-night talk show statutory rapist advocate, that caused Palin to resign. She had been through several brutal political campaigns in becoming governor, including taking on her own political party and the 2008 VP campaign.
Unless she and her advisors have gone completely wacko (no doubt a secret dream of the above leftists), the only legitimate reason I can think of is that there has been some threat or danger to the safety or health of her family, which could only be resolved by her resignation. If that is true, then that threat would also preclude her pursuing any national political offices.
Of course it has been argued on one conservative list that by Sarah Palin’s stepping down as governor, it will allow Todd to go to New York and punch Letterman’s teeth out. That argument definitely has its pursuasive components.
I tend to agree the Gov. Palin wasn’t as ready for prime time as her supporters had hoped. I think that Gov. Palin will spend her time after leaving office trying to get ready for prime time in any one of several ways.
She will be able to become familiar with economic and international issues without having to worry about running a state; she will be able to build a political organization by helping Republicans around the country in 2010 (she is one of the best fund raisers for the Republicans today, and the people she helps won’t forget it); she will be free to make some serious money giving speeches or appearing in the conservative media; she could run for national political office other than the presidency, such as congresswoman or senator from Alaska. Any combination of these would give Gov. Palin greater credibility and national stature. Meanwhile she can get her family financially stable and organized for any political campaign to come. She may still not be ready by 2012, but if she really wants the presidency at some point, she has it within her power to make a credible try for it.
I do not think that Sarah Palin is angling for president in either 2012 or 2016. She is a young woman, still with a young family. She has been subject to a vicious and undeserved series of personal attacks, which have not been limited to her or even her husband, but which have leveled her children as well. The series of unfounded ethics attacks, the legal bills, the distractions, clearly overwhelmed her at this stage in her life.
I believe her motivation in resigning from the office of governor was two-fold. First, she wanted to take the heat off of her family. As she mentioned in her statement, her family was unanimously and strongly in favor of this decision. Second, she wanted to make herself available to make paid appearances as a spokesperson for conservative causes, in order to place her family on a better financial footing.
As far as the presidency goes, since she is only 45, she can still run, conceivably, in 2024 or 2028, for example. This episode will be long forgotten by then.
She’s a chronic liar and bully, but because she is a Republican, reads a good in-your-face speech, and claims to be pro life, the religious right overlooks her, well, unfitness for public office and still champions her as a victim of the bad media.
I’m an American Christian, and I’m tired of the most overtly pro-family Christian politicians (Palin, Sanford, Ensign, etc.) being among the most unethical and weird. Sometimes I think that God is spewing the white evangelical American church out of his mouth. (Revelation 3.)
When your employer puts you out to pasture and/or are too old to work, you are retired whether you want to be or not. I think old age is God-given, along with the other callings, such as family, it gives time for. Sarah Palin left when she could work. When a professional football player “retires” in his 30′s, I still think he should pursue productive labor. (We passed through Stillwater, Oklahoma, during our vacation, home of Oklahoma State University, and we went by the Barry Sanders Ford dealership: he went to where his alma mater was and started a business, which was a good use of what he earned during his NFL days.)
Dr. Veith at #15,
If I read the blog of a man who drove by a car dealership that is owned by Barry Sanders, does that still count as a brush with greatness? Never mind. (Greatest pure runner I’ve ever seen play the game. . .)
I do not object to retirement as vocation, nor to questioning the decision of Sarah Palin, but I found it odd that you would question–of all things–the vocation of a woman who left the work place to care for her family. I’m not sure I understand your thinking.
Aside from the specifics of Mrs. Palin, it almost sounds as though you would negate ambition with vocation. Are the two exclusive? Is it always wrong to seek a different vocation? Should a capable garbage man remain a garbage man, rather than start a business of his own?
It is my understanding that one’s vocation is a divine calling de facto, not de iure. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts more completely.
whilst here in Australia there was interest in sarah palin,it was perceived that she was the epitome of the American world view,a mile wide and an inch thick,in that she seemed to have no idea of international issues. For us here ,there is importance placed upon our relationship with the USA, and both major political parties-i do not count the greens as anything but pagan rabble- stress this point.Our greatest Prime Minister John Curtin ,in the dark days of 1941,made the comment that Australia would be defended to the last shilling ,and that we looked to America.we have been doing so ever since,in things defence wise
I agree with #14,in that i think Palin is a bully,having read about her time as a mayor and the way she treated those who opposed her. I also wonder if the current Governor of Louisiana would not make a better Presidential candidate,as he appears to me to have a great amount of sticakability.
No, Dan, if Sarah Palin is stepping out of her office as governor in favor of her office as mother, that is wholly commendable, going from one vocation to another that is arguably higher. The point of the post was predicated on her leaving her office in order to spend all that time running for president.
As for the garbage collector, he is probably doing more to serve his neighbor than most other professions (including football player). I see no problem with ambition, per se, and if the garbage collector wants to apply for a different job, if he receives one, he should accept it as his new calling. But to just quit out of disgust for his job or some sense that it is beneath him without any other prospects is to denigrate a God-pleasing vocation.
“If Sarah Palin is stepping out of her office as governor in favor of her office as mother, that is wholly commendable.”
Is it? Certainly, motherhood is a wholly commendable vocation. But is there no consideration of the commitment made to serve a term for those in the vocation of politician?
Not that Palin herself has mentioned family as her main motivation. Thus far, she has named the ethics probes and — of course — the media as factors.
Still, I would think that those who consider, run for, and are elected to office would keep in mind that the vocation of politician, unlike many other vocations, includes a time frame.
Palin made a commitment, implicit or otherwise, that she would serve the people of Alaska for four years. It would have been commendable for her to serve the full term and return to motherhood. Or never to have run in the first place, putting her vocation as mother first to begin with. But backing out of a commitment — especially for the reasons she has given — is not something I could see labeled as commendable.
J: “She’s a chronic liar and bully”
Documentation, please?
Thanks for the clarification, Dr. Veith.
Todd,
A discussion of Mrs. Palin’s motives is, necessarily, theoretical. While your point about commitment is valid, it should also be conceded that the birth of a child–particularly a special needs child–is a “game changer.” Such an eventuality could not have been foreseen, and if her commitment to serve public office comes into conflict with her commitment to her child, then it is the former that should give way. It would even be commendable.
Speaking theoretically, of course. For all I know this could be part of some vast and dark conspiracy that has nothing to do with her family.
Dan (@21), “A discussion of Mrs. Palin’s motives is, necessarily, theoretical.” Well, we do have her words to go by. Read this interview from a couple days ago and tell me if you think her family is the reason she’s resigning. Frankly, based on that, it seems arguments of family reasons are more “theoretical” than arguments of political reasons.
Furthermore, Trig was a “game changer” four months before Palin was selected as McCain’s VP! If “commitment to her child” is the paramount concern, then what business did she have trying to act as both Alaska’s governor and run for Vice President, much less to seek the latter office? Trig had special needs then, and would have had them had McCain won the election. If she’s right to step down now, then she was deeply wrong to accept that nomination.
“it was perceived that she was the epitome of the American world view,a mile wide and an inch thick,in that she seemed to have no idea of international issues.”
I think she is an epitome of a (hopefully) small section of Americans. In several ways I admire her, but I am equally embarrassed by her. I would never vote for someone who vocally uses a public platform to tie his or her particular religious beliefs into to the governance of the country, state or city. I would, however, expect a Christian public servant to spend time in prayer each day asking for guidance.
Todd, (#22)
I don’t disagree with your fundamental point. Her son was born prior to accepting the nomination for VP. Your take on the matter is, as always, very precise.
Referring to the motives of Mrs. Palin as “theoretical,” however, was a euphemistic way of saying that I don’t really care to parse or discuss her. I frankly don’t care whether her decisions were good or bad. It does not interest me. My interest lies in the discussion of vocation with her unique situation as a foil.
Sarah Palin aside, what do you think of a woman in significant public office resigning if it became clear in the midst of serving that the duties of office were detrimental to family? (A true theoretical inspired by the news, so to speak.)
It should tell us something about Palin’s ability to articulate (surely a requisite for the vocation of public leader) that days after she announced her resignation, nobody can really understand why she did it.
She spoke for almost half an hour on 7/3 and has given follow-up interviews. Still, not even her fans can, even now, explain her reason for resigning.
Dan (@24), it’s not often that I’m encouraged to not adhere to the topic under discussion, but …
As to your, er, “hypothetical” question, I don’t suppose there’s a single right answer, because the details matter. Still, I feel that commitments mean something, and should not be entered into lightly.
The situation you describe is no different to me than asking what about a father in the military who decides to leave in order to better care for his family. The nature of the commitments may vary in each case, but it would seem that if the person has made the right choice for his/her family, then they made the wrong choice in entering into the commitment they abandoned.
Of course, in any specific case, one could assess whether the person’s situation had changed significantly enough to justify the decision, or any number of extenuating circumstances. But at the vague, hypothetical level, all I can say is that people should strongly consider the ramifications of any position they’re seeking before they enter into it, before people come to expect something from you.
Thanks for your comments, Todd. Life gets pretty messy, and it can be tough to distinguish priorities in the midst of it–particularly when the mess is one of your own making.
I tend to think that the priority of vocation moves from the most basic and central outward. (e.g. God, family, neighbor, personal ambition . . .) It is rarely simple in any given case, as you point out.
This has been a thread full of little more than speculation, based on preconceptions that Sarah Palin was and is an intended 2012 presidential candidate. I agree that, were she to run in 2012, this resignation would reflect poorly on her judgment and sense of duty. But, as I stated in comment #13 above, I don’t think she intends to run in 2012, and I would be very surprised if she ran in 2016. I think it is her intention to get out of public life, given the abominable and undeserved way in which she has been treated, and regroup, privately and professionally. John Fund, of the Wall Street Journal, has the same take: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124700261179807839.html
So why don’t we let her leave the scene, as gracefully as she can, and see what happens?
Here’s another column of interest on the subject of Sarah Palin and media bias in general: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/07/08/sarah-barracuda-palin-and-the-piranhas-of-the-press/?icid=main|hp-laptop|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politicsdaily.com%2F2009%2F07%2F08%2Fsarah-barracuda-palin-and-the-piranhas-of-the-press%2F