A brief thought or two after the "Nightline" continuation with Gov. Palin and Charles Gibson . . .

 

     First, Palin was very free and natural in her response to the ANWAR question, and was able to graciously say something that few, if any, Veeps have ever allowed themselves to do:  her and McCain have agreed to disagree about drilling there, and she's going to continue to work him over on the subject.  This suggests an easy and open relationship between the pair, and indicates that there will be a real exchange of ideas within a McCain-Palin administration. 

 

     The exchange also shows Palin's fundamental confidence in her own role as McCain's running-mate.  Whatever her learning-curve, she's not going to stand in silent awe of McCain or serve as window-dressing for the ticket in the way so many liberal antagonists suggest.  She will be a voice, at least in private, that offers its own candid views and works to be helpful on important policy.

 

     Gibson made himself a tad ridiculous in his efforts to underplay the significance of energy in our foreign policy.  If Hitler suffered repeated nightmares about his prized Ploesti oilfields burning in the night, that should remind us something about how energy is an absolute necessity in our security, in our very warmaking-capabilities, and by virtue of her familiarity with energy issues (which as governor of Alaska is a forthright part of her job description) she will be an important voice on national security. 

 

     Likewise, the Pakistan question is the kind of thing that no public servant can give an up-or-down answer on.  Palin has never been called on before to train herself in the Diplomatese that every ambassador, State Department official, or member of a Senate committee that has dealings abroad must observe.  She understands that her comments are already fair game for parsing by foreign leaders as a way of interpreting what could be official American policy in the months and years to come.  That struggle to put things into the properly ambiguous terms must be a constant struggle for any public figure-- and historians continue to parse the possible errors of nuance in official statements that might have encouraged, for instance, the Kaiser's prosecution of World War I.  Palin did what she had to do, and we saw her tires spinning as a result.  She cannot be faulted for declining to commit herself in black-and-white terms over what to do about removing Russian 'peacekeepers' from South Ossetia or going after Al-Qaeda in Pakistan.  To do so would be folly, as well as being, in Obama's inimitable trope, "above her pay-grade."