Palin: What’s the Value of a Family?

Contrary to the age-old slogan, beggars can be choosers. Just ask the peddler if he would like to clean your room in return for food. You are likely to get bombarded with a billion reasons why you misread what they meant when saying “will work for food.”

But there are beggars who tend to be grateful for even a crumb or pre-chewed bubble gum. These would be your run-of-the-mill Christian conservatives. As reasonably outraged as they may be about various bills, so long as the language gives even a hint of a hint of hope, they jump on board with bells and whistles. The same can be said of political candidates. A politician may have failed them time and again, but so long as they can give due lip-service when lip-service is due, all is well and good. The crumb from the masters table may only be a crumb, but it’s better than starvation, right?

Take Governor Sarah Palin as an example. Social conservatives were on the edge of sanity until McCain shocked the political world with his pick for vice president. A pro-life, pro-gun, anti-gay feminist, and a Zionist to boot! Ignore for a second that the entire affair wreaks of political opportunism and unwarranted expectations, “she must be the one!”

Those with half a sense to them would approach the Palin matter with a teaspoon of caution. Well, make that a ton.

The governor stands accused of firing a top state law enforcement official who refused to dismiss a state trooper who just so happened to be in the midst of a rather nasty divorce dispute; a dispute that just so happened to include her sister. Worse yet, the dismissed officer, Walt Monegan, says he saved the emails sent to him by the governor. While the best case scenario is that she is found innocent, the possibility of being found guilty would a direct violation of the public trust and a gross abuse of her power. Worse yet, if found guilty, she will be found guilty of lying before an official investigation approved by the Alaskan state legislature.

Just as important as the judicial matter would be that of the role of women, and the role of mothers in particular. Religious conservatives have traditionally opposed the mother-on-the-run liberationists in the “Mommy War.” Believing that mothers are best at home with children, conservatives have fought to encourage policies where this would become the norm rather than the exception. Such sentiments may be little more than sentimental in this day and age. Palin is being heralded even by women such as Eagle Forum founder and long-time conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly. This doesn’t come without a bit of irony, as Schlafly said that she thinks “a hard-working, well-organized C.E.O. type can handle it very well.” Schlaffly is describing a certain type of woman, this much is sure, but not the type with kids living in the home, one with down syndrome, and another who is pregnant on account of pre-marital sex.

Some not-so traditional “conservatives” will reply by insisting that Palin may be able to juggle the two. This is a hard sell when her daughter’s moral depravity went under the radar. And this was done while Palin was the governor of Alaska. How much more is required of a mother acting as vice president of the United States? Will she be able to provide the kind of nearness, attention, and affection that is so detrimental to the development of children? This question becomes even more important in light of the fact that her youngest was born with Down syndrome. The issue here ends up being just as much about whether or not she should do it as it has been, thus far, about whether or not she could do it.

Let’s grant for the sake of argument that she should. The question of whether or not she could still has yet to be resolved. If history can teach us anything, and I am convinced that it can, than the answer would be in the negative. Take Jane Swift, the acting governor of Massachusetts at the turn of the millennium. She gave birth during her time in office, only soon to realize the difficulties facing mothers in that position. Swift dropped out of the race for governor in 2002. In an essay published in Boston magazine, Swift wrote, “I know now that it was virtually impossible for me to take advice and make decisions when I was responding emotionally as a mother, not thinking rationally as a public official.” And before conservatives go howling partisanship, Swift is a Republican.

It is here that we see conservatives, traditional conservatives in particular, between a rock and a hard place. Yes, Palin is pro-life, pro-gun, supports the president’s decision to invade and occupy Iraq, and flies a little Israeli flag in her office. Better yet, we know she hasn’t been stained by years in the beltway, though such time in the mire is being touted as “experience” in favor of McCain. But we cannot overlook the ethical aspects of this decision. We must not bat an eye when talking about the role of mothers in the family unity. Unfortunately, the party of “family values” is glossing over the effects Palin’s decision will have on her own home. It appears that irony – or should we say tragedy? – has not lost its sting.