Joan Ball is a business professor at St. John’s University in New York and the author of Flirting with Faith: My Spiritual Journey from Atheism to a Faith-Filled Life.
Warning: This post is based
on a series of assumptions.
Yesterday, Sarah Palin
resigned from her position as governor of Alaska. Her supporters are left
reeling in confusion, and her critics are chalking this up to more bizarre
behavior from the 2008 vice-presidential candidate.
To some, such as the
Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse, her motives are
completely self-involved:
“Either Sarah Palin is
leaving the people of Alaska high and dry
to pursue her long-shot national political ambitions, or she simply can’t
handle the job now that her popularity has dimmed and oil revenues are
down.”
Palin,
however, said in her announcement that she wants to work for all Americans, not
just Alaskans:
“And finally, I polled the most important people
in my life, my kids. And the count was unanimous. While in response to asking,
‘Hey, do you want me to be a positive influence and fight for all our
children’s futures from outside the governor’s office?’ it was four yeses and
one ‘Hell, yeah.’ The ‘Hell, yeah’ sold it.”
I’m just as intrigued by this sudden and surprising move as the next person,
but I’m also wondering whether abandoning one cause (the Alaskan people and
state) for a higher cause (the future of America) is the type of ethical
behavior we want from a future leader.
Obviously
this is assuming that Palin is resigning to better her chances in 2012. It’s
also assuming she’s doing this because she feels she can “be a positive
influence and fight for all our children’s futures”.
One
of the qualities we look for in a leader is the ability to sometimes put aside the needs of the
few in order to serve the needs of the many. However we rarely look for a
leader who has a history of abandonment, regardless of the reasons behind that
abandonment.
What
do you think? If Palin made this decision in order to
enact positive change in America, was it the ethical choice? Or should she have
respected her commitment to the people of Alaska and finished out her term?
posted July 4, 2009 at 2:32 pm
She should have completed the job she was elected to do. That is always a good work ethic.
Maybe she should give Rush Limbaugh some competition on another network and have a show much like his. She studied Journalism in one of her colleges she attended, didn’t she? Also pays well.
posted July 4, 2009 at 5:57 pm
I would like to abstract the discussion for a moment.
I find it interesting the way that we sometimes place people in an untenable position. We decide (sometimes arbitrarily) that we do not like them, or do not like what they believe in, and so we want to marginalize them or see them fail. In politics, they cannot win us over, no matter what choices they make, because they do not believe in what we believe.
We criticize them for their perceived or actual shortcomings and minimize their successes. If they persist, we call them stubborn; if they adapt, we call them weak-willed or hypocrites; if they withdraw, we call them quitters; if they fail, we call them losers; and if they succeed, we call them cheaters. If we cannot find fault with their job performance, we attack their character, or their families, or whatever group they belong to.
In politics, such poor behavior crosses party lines. Every politician has skeletons in the closet, some are better at concealing them, others seem to leave the door open. Concentrating on the politician rather than the politics merely dilutes any meaningful discussion of the issues.
I have said elsewhere that right and wrong transcends politics. Neither of the major political parties is “right” on every issue. As such, the best interests of this Nation (as a collective), and its citizens (as individuals) will not be found by exclusively following Democratic or Republican ideology. The sooner we all realize this, stop playing party politics, and work to reestablish our position in the world, the better off we will be as a country.
posted July 4, 2009 at 9:42 pm
She didn’t seem too upset in her small press conference that she was basicly quiting the job that we assume she worked hard to be elected to..governor of Alaska. If somehow in a land far, far away , she was elected leader of a whole, entire country, would she quit when times got tough? IMO the Republicans would be out of their tiny brains if they even thought of Palin as a possible candidate for 2012!
Even if you agreed with her politics, (which I most certainly don’t) why would you vote for someone as unreliable as she now seems to be?
posted July 5, 2009 at 12:33 am
To expect ethical behavior from a politician is to expect the Sun to stand still in the heavens. I’m waiting for the scandal to break.