« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Hmmm… ‘Tis something in the Wind that makes me think Sarah Palin might be this Generation’s JFK…

Oh, I know, I know: This opens me up to the hackneyed Lloyd Bentsen trope about knowing John Kennedy, and you, Sarah Palin, are no John Kennedy… To which, one hopes, she would answer, “You’re right. I never cheated on my spouse, got involved with the Mob, and my Daddy never bought me a Pulitzer Prize.”

But, the analogy is this:

JFK created a whole new set or rules, a whole new road-map to the Presidential nomination of his party in 1960. And, we may be witnessing the same thing, fifty years later, from Sarah Palin.

John Kennedy went after the Vice Presidential nomination in 1956, in a failed attempt to be Adlai Stevenson’s running mate. It wasn’t so much that he was unsuccessful (the nomination went to Estes Kefauver instead), but what he learned along the way in setting himself up for his parties’ Presidential nomination in 1960.

What he learned was this: The grandees of the Democrat Party would not, under any circumstances, allow a Catholic on the national ticket. The Dixie-crats in particular where antipathetic. But, even the East Coast Elite found the young JFK too much to take: Elanor Roosevelt, in particular, found him loathsome (as, among other things, the second son of the then-reviled Joseph Kennedy), calling him “that little piss-ant”.

Believe me, pre-1964, you went absolutely nowhere in national Democrat politics without the blessing of Elanor Roosevelt. Think of her (before her death) as Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, Pinch Sulzberger and John Kerry all rolled into one big, fat ball of influence.

This put the entire power structure of the old New-Deal bosses out of reach to Senator Jack Kennedy. Now, remember, this was in the days before the ubiquitous state primary elections. Roughly half the states chose their nominee based on a caucus of the party bigwigs, New York in particular. Chatting up the friends of Elanor Roosevelt called for the retail politics that JFK and his family money had a hard time acquiring. So, JFK, having learned that his resources were better spent on the Wholesale politics of advertising, media manipulation and advance men, focused instead on the Wholesale politics– the popular elections held in Primary states.

Prior to JFK, most serious presidential politicians rather avoided the primary states. They accounted, at that time, for a minority of the delegates, and it made the election season somewhat longer and much more expensive. It required actual campaigning, movement, travel and advertising– things most presidential aspirants in the mid 20th-century had little of. JFK changed all that. Among other things, Jack Kennedy was the first to introduce the phenomenon of his own Campaign Jet, the “Caroline“. He could go as easily between Washington and San Francisco as Hubert Humphrey could go from Madison to Milwaukee.

Kennedy by-passed paying attention to Roosevelt and her tong. Instead, he spent his time in Wisconsin and West Virginia, slurping up chits in the form of donations to local races, and flooding the field with advertising and public relations. Hubert Humphrey complained that going up against JFK and his money made him feel like “a mom and pop grocery store going up against A&P”. These were the two states with early significant Primaries, and he knew he’d have a shot in heavily Catholic Wisconsin, which came first on the slate, and a week later in West Virginia, where his World War Two veteran status would come in handy. If he could make a big stink out of winning these primaries early, he’d have a shot at convincing the party leaders in the other, non-primary contests.

He won both states handily, and changed forever the way the public, and the party big-shots, looked at presidential primaries. And Elanor Roosevelt was politely shown the back of the bus.

*     *     *

Sarah Palin knows that any conservative won’t get an even break in the national press and media. She knows they despise not only her –and they show their contempt gleefully and openly with Sarah– they hate all conservatives. So trying to suck up to them can only lead (sooner or later) to any conservative’s Katie Couric moment. It is assured.

So, in watching her in the news coverage over the last forty-eight hours, we might be witnessing a “revolutionizing” of the way the whole process is done–; Just like JFK.

Just as JFK knew he’d never get the Elanor Roosevelt gang on his side, and he would thus have to figure out how to get the nomination without it, Sarah Palin knows she can’t use the old routes that involve the national press and media. They are off-limits to her. She must plow a new and untrod road.

I have sense, too, that this might be all very deliberate, cunning, and months in the planning. And in this thought process, she might actually be ten steps ahead of all the other potential candidates.

If I were her, and had the name recognition, the league upon league of mis-perceptions, and the financial and personnel resources, I think I might try to fashion a similar approach– that is, something that up-ends the way a nominee is chosen in totality.

In especial, I find it fascinating that all the Ed Gillespies, and the Karl Roves, and all the other antique professional party-men had already decided she wasn’t running because she was evidently eschewing the fifty-year old nostrums that simply everyone must follow to the nomination. It reminds me of the Polaroid people telling everyone not to buy a digital camera because you’ll need a computer to use it: They couldn’t see the future while it was happening in front of their faces.

Wouldn’t it be fascinating, though, to see Sarah Palin completely revolutionize the way a candidate connects with the public, and change forever the 2-year long process of finding a nominee. I don’t know what she’s got up her sleeve, but, I will say this:

It could be damned fun to watch, especially if she leaves the national, old-geezer media gasping for air in her wake… Just like Elanor Roosevelt was left by JFK back in 1960.

COMMENTS

  • azaeroprof

    Stupid like a fox, that is. Don’t know if it’ll work, but she’ll definitely keep everyone on their toes.

    I had bought into the meme that she wasn’t running…until the story about the movie yesterday. Now the bus tour story today (with no book to hawk). I would bet the farm that she’s running, and I wouldn’t dare bet against her for the nomination.

  • gekster

    I have heard rumers that she is about to jump in the race.
    Only rumers mind ya.
    Only rumers.
    We will see.

    • acat

      and .. just stands there while the various other candidates light up the phones and e-mails deciding which one(s) of them she won’t swamp… and several get out of the race…

      Sarah smiles, yells “Psych!”, and throws her support behind a Conservative who didn’t quit….

      And goes right on being a private citizen.

      This could all be a setup for her getting in, and she’s quite capable of re-defining how to get the nomination… but there are other possibilities.

      Mew

      • conservativecurmudgeon

        So, there I am, picturing all the aspirants in the pool, swimming about in their Speedos and water-wings– and then my eyes light on Chris Cristie, and the whole thing is shot to hell…

        eeeesh.

        • chbroussard
        • gekster

          question is, how much water will be left in the pool.

        • aesthete

          I feel violated, heh.

        • acat

          He’s in a tank top and board shorts over at the bar.

          Mew

      • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

        If you bllinked, you may have missed it.

        Anyhoo, Palin carrying water for someone else was SO 2008.

        • acat

          because that’s also the last time Palin’s family was a relatively private concern. Since she performed CPR on McCain’s campaign, the media has been unstoppably on her and her kids’ case.

          What I’m saying is, she could run, she could just be clearing the way for the conservative candidate she said, at one point, she’s waiting for.

          Mew

          • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

            Think of Palin as pre-smeared. Obama has boots on the ground in New Jersey digging dirt on someone else who has not said he’d run, and Herman Cain is getting press on anyone and everyone who expected a stock split while Wall Street burned or enough cheese on their pizza.

            Sounds like it would break your yeart (more than hers) if the conservative she’s waiting for never shows, and decides to run herself.

          • acat

            and I understand Scottsdale is closer to at least one kid. Perhaps she’s tired of winters. Maybe she’s got a newfound fascination for golf.

            If you’d read what I’ve said previously, you’d know I’m not concerned about Palin running. What concerns me is what her supporters will do if she runs and loses. Do they support the eventual nominee? Even if it’s Romney? Or do they stay home?

            Given the emotional overtones to the bond Palin has with her supporters, it’s .. concerning.

            Mew

          • Mary Beth

            …and I long ago committed to support whoever was our last line of defense against Obama. I’d pull the lever for ROMNEY if I had to.

            It’s not a matter of voting for me…but passion. Yes…I’ll vote for a squish, if that’s who’s left…because the alternative is a defacto half vote for O. But I’ll campaign for Palin. I’ll work for her in ways I’ve never supported a political figure and put some sweat equity into it.

            So a Romney would get my begrudging vote. Palin would get my time, energy and effort.

          • acat

            If most of Palin’s supporters are willing to vote for the eventual nominee, even if it’s not Palin, I’m a happy cat.

            I think we can do better, her resume is my major concern, but I’m willing to see what she has to say.

            That said, she still isn’t officially running – same issue as Huck, Fox hasn’t ended or suspended her contract.

            So far, she’s taking a historical tour and summer vacation. (school’s just about our here in suburban Chicago .. pretty sure other districts are wrapping up too… good time to pack up the kids and the husband and go see some history) This doesn’t mean she’s not going to jump in, but it does mean that – so far – she’s “lingering with intent” in the wings. (grin)

            Mew

          • http://AnnArborRealEstateTalk.com missyc

            You said it well and exactly how I feel. I will vote for who the nominee is but my time and energy will be given to her.

            I never for one moment believed she wouldn’t run, and will be shocked if she doesn’t.

            The good ole’ boys in DC and pundits on TV have no clue.

          • azaeroprof

            I hang out in both conservative and GOP circles. Of the hundreds of politically-active folks I know, every single one would vote for Romney (or Pawlenty, etc.) over Obama, and every single one would vote for Palin over Obama. I know a couple handfuls of folks who will pour in hundreds or thousands of hours no matter who the nominee is because, well, that’s what they do. But I know scores who will walk over broken glass to help out if Palin is the nominee.

            How do you quantify that? (Gallup tries with their “positive intensity” measure, but I think they only pick up a small portion of it.) And I think we ignore it at our peril.

            Certainly a lot has happened vis a vis Palin since 2008. But our county GOP has not forgotten the near riot on the morning of Palin’s Dayton introduction when we had folks lined up down the block to get into GOP HQ and sign up to help. They didn’t want to wait for the volunteer coordinator to arrive with a key. It stayed that busy right up to the election. People who have lived here much longer than me tell me that they remember only one time ever that was even in the same order of magnitude, and that was 1980.

            Yes, some of that intensity for Palin has waned over the last couple years. But I cannot conceive of even one-tenth of that phenomenon for ANY of the current crop of candidates. The only one I think could come close would be Rubio, but not in 2012.

          • aesthete

            is similar to what I’ve seen on RedState, other conservative sites and real life, then it’s more likely to be a liability than an asset for her, especially considering the strongly negative reaction that most of the voting public has for Palin. It will certainly be a problem in the general if her supporters and her continue to be as thin-skinned and vituperative towards conservatives and Republicans as they currently are. The best analogy here is Paul: yes, he has a base of fervent supporters, but they scare off others and his own presentation doesn’t help change matters.

          • azaeroprof

            Yes, there’s a few folks here who have shown a propensity for thin skin. But I’m talking about enthusiastic boots on the ground. Precinct walkers and callers, money donators. For every one Paulite I know in the “real world”, there are 30 Palin fans. And they’re largely pretty normal people. Older couples, younger couples, evangelicals, long-time Republicans and Tea Partiers alike.

            There’s no way that is a liability. In fact, it is a requirement to win a national election. Especially against the billion dollar man who, despite all his flaws, still has a lot of people who think he walks on water.

          • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Loren Heal

            Old party men ask me “So, what do you think of Sarah Palin?” I see the look in their eye. They are willing to accept someone else, but Sarah makes them feel more like Reagan made them feel than Reagan did.

            I don’t mean she’s Reagan. I mean she’s me. She’s us. She’s got the common man image wrapped up.

            There are legions of home school moms who would have their kids out walking precincts if someone could reach them. Gee, I wonder who could reach them? Sarah may not have been a home schooler, but she is thoroughly and completely one of them on a level none of the others can touch.

            She owns the pro-life issue.

            She owns the 2nd Amendment.

            She owns energy. We’ll see what she does with ethanol in Iowa, but given the above, if she says nothing about it millions will assume she agrees with them.

            Is that enough to win the nomination, and is it enough to beat Obama? I don’t know, and I don’t care. My support, which I have not declared, will not be based on who “can win” — letting everyone else decide my vote. It will also not be based on my identification with a candidate. It will go to whomever is best for the country.

          • azaeroprof

            Right now it isn’t “cool” to support Palin. But I know a lot of Republicans, and I suspect that there are many more, that would just take some kind of indication that it’s “ok” to back Palin and will jump back on the bandwagon.

            If she runs, and runs a solid campaign, she has a decent chance to be the conservative candidate that rallies the GOP. And as I wrote previously, if she were the candidate that united the conservatives and the GOP mainstream, all “electability” bets are off the table.

            The ball is in her court, though.

          • Mary Beth
          • Vegas_Rick

            I’m a fairly big supporter of Sarah Palin, but I rarely join any discussions about her viability. I will work tirelessly for her should she decide to run, and will do the same for whoever is selected as the eventual nominee. While the rhetoric can get heated and unreasonable, I think all Palin supporters, conservatives and most moderates and independents agree that saving the country from Obama and his political cohorts is the primary concern in the end.

          • aesthete

            but I just don’t see that *vocal* part of the fanbase as an asset. They are akin to the Ron Paul fans, in that they actively turn off potential supporters.

          • Mary Beth

            …but I’ve seen no indication that this is the case so far. She’s had the opportunity to “boost” others, and she demurs and gives the “it’s good they’re all in” standard line, which is all she can give really if she’s running.

            The movie, the tour, the house, the new chief of staff, the new website, the new foreign policy advisors…suggest to me that she’s in this and she is going to run the unconventional claim she said she would.

            My two cents for what it’s worth. :)

          • acat

            Gov. Perry of Texas, if he gets in.

            And he’s apparently thinking about doing just that.

            Time will tell.

            Mew

  • carolina

    I think this will empower all grass-roots (TEA party) folks.
    It will be interesting to watch what she does. Ron Paul and his energetic youthfull suporters may have invented a more significant change in the process than the “antique professional party-men” ever envisioned.

  • luvnthebigsites

    “End-Around-Rope-a-Dope” of Epic proportion’s. If its true, I say Run Sarah Run (and when you win) Drill Baby Drill. Good diary. /Salute

  • article345

    This is an excellent column. I would like to re-present it on my blog with due credit. Please OK (or not)
    Thanks
    M J Sheppard
    (Blog M Joseph Sheppard’s A Point Of View)

    • conservativecurmudgeon

      Hope y’all enjoy it!

      • article345

        Conservatives for Plain have linked to your article and I have commented at
        http://recovering-liberal.blogspot.com/2011/05/palin-is-this-generations-jfklike-him.html
        Well done

        • article345

          and it is up at SPIB
          http://sarahpalininformation.wordpress.com/

          • article345

            This is one of your best, MJS – a terrific eye-opener and analysis of what can only be described as the Palin phenomonen! I was around – but only as a first-time voter – in 1960, and a Republican, to boot, so I was not aware of the Eleanor Roosevelt factor as you have so colorfully described! A really interesting bit of history, for which, thank you much!

          • conservativecurmudgeon

            And thank you for your kind words. In an odd bit of coincidence, Elanor Roosevelt died on the same day in the fall of 1964 that Richard Nixon gave his famous “last press conference”, after losing to Jerry Brown’s dad for California’s governorship, in which he said, “You won’t have Nixon to kick around any more, because this, gentlemen, is my last press conference!”

            The death of the ol’ dame was full-blast above-the-fold screaming, eight-column headlines across the country. The bowing out of politics forever (seemingly) of the former VP was barely noticed.

            Nothing changes so much as it stays the same, eh?

  • swvapatriot

    will get the nomination if she runs, and win the election following:

    the life of King David, and his prayers in the Psalms. Sarah follows the same God, which is also the Providence of the founders.

    I wonder who thought Washington could possibly defeat the British when he and 4000 half-clothed, sickly, and under-fed citizen soldiers were holed up in Valley Forge during a brutal winter. The same Providence was invoked to give victory because of the rightness of the cause.

    Never, ever underestimate the power of a praying Patriot. Never, ever scoff at a natural leader with a vision.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
      • powertothepeople

        and God does not jump just because someone wants him to, Many a solid Christian has lost their election race because God deemed it not their path. If God was intent on having Christians win just because they serve him, many on the list of American presidents would have different names.

        • Christine (Trelaina)

          How does your response relate in any way with the comment Neil made?

          • powertothepeople

            My response was two fold. I agreed with his sarcastic response the the drivel contained in the guys post and then added my own referring to the original posters claim that God will make sure she wins.

            Why do so many here just hands down refuse to comprehend simple English. Is it in the water?

            But just in case you still do not understand, let me pull a Beck here:

            See Neil wrote this

            “Washington didn’t resign two years into the war. (nt) ”

            In response to this

            “I wonder who thought Washington could possibly defeat the British when he and 4000 half-clothed, sickly, and under-fed citizen soldiers were holed up in Valley Forge during a brutal winter. The same Providence was invoked to give victory because of the rightness of the cause.”

            I agreed and then added in my own response

            “and God does not jump just because someone wants him to, Many a solid Christian has lost their election race because God deemed it not their path. If God was intent on having Christians win just because they serve him, many on the list of American presidents would have different names.”

            To this

            “Why I believe Sarah will get the nomination if she runs, and win the election following:

            the life of King David, and his prayers in the Psalms. Sarah follows the same God, which is also the Providence of the founders. ”

            Got it? Good!

          • Christine (Trelaina)

            But given this response, you are obviously not worth the continued effort. Excuse me for my intrusion into your greatness.

          • powertothepeople

            time stating you are wrong much? And please, do not play the victim part here, if you want to throw you condescending nose in and correct what did not need correcting, do not expect nice flowery responses.

            And in your spare time, learn what the word “and” does when used between two separate statements.

          • Christine (Trelaina)
          • powertothepeople

            that hurts my feelings. Nothing worse than a nosy busy body telling you wrongly that you are wrong then telling you that you are not worth the time.

            What shall I do without your approval……….

  • treadnot

    Her mistake was supporting the ineptly crafted legislation that made it possible for her enemies to bring endless lawsuits against her personally in office and which required officeholder to bear costs. She didn’t leave the office to a democrat, but to her lieutenant governor who was philosophically on the same page and would be able to function where she no longer could as effectively. To dismiss her as a quitter is pure BS. Palin is as bold, right minded and engaging a leader as we’ve seen in a long while. and we should certainly have learned by now (think Reagan, Bush) that when we see and hear enraged, spittle foamed lips spewing “stupid, she’s stupid”, they’ve discerned her intellect and abilities are anything but and she is a serious force to be reckoned with. and they will continue to do all they can to destroy her. For any conservative to be complicit in that is shameful.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      If you criticize any OTHER Republican, are you shamefully complicit in the left’s schemes?

    • aesthete

      the “ineptly crafted legislation”. The first draft of the bill came from the executive office, and subsequent drafts were examined and heavily influenced by the executive branch.

  • David_Rasbold

    nt

  • sully14

    Yes, I would support Palin for US senate from AZ. But if she ran for POTUS, our party would get a 1964 Goldwater type beating. Also, FOX fired Newt and Santorum because they were potential candidates. Huck was forced to choose and he decided to stay at Fox. Palin is at Fox and they announced yesterday her satus at Fox is unchanged. So how can Palin be running if she works at Fox? There would be legal issues, including Newt and Santorum possible having grounds to sue Fox.

    • http://theheartlander.wordpress.com/ heartlander

      THAT is scary.
      I’m actually old enough to remember that stomping. Pretty awful.

      Having said that, though, if she DID get the nomination, I would be working my heart out for her.

    • Doc Holliday

      that is two or three times recently people have spoken of a “Goldwater Type Beating” as if it was just some stupid shellacking the Repubs took one time. No, we can not allow false and incomplete history here. Goldwater was a sea change, his run paved the way for a conservative only Republican party and the nomination of Ronald Reagan. Goldwater marginalized the liberal Republicans and gave our party a new life.

      If you want to talk about meaningless beatings, how about Mondale, how about Dukakis.

      • Doc Holliday

        http://www.amazon.com/Glorious-Disaster-Goldwaters-Presidential-Conservative/dp/B00121E1FQ/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1306557512&sr=8-4

        I have not read it yet because I already know Goldwater’s importance. But I will read it when I get the chance.

      • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

        he also gave us the War on Poverty, The Great Society and government expanded beyond what anybody ever thought could happen.

        Lose to Obama in like fashion and we’ll no longer be the “United States”, we’ll the “Union of States”.

        • Doc Holliday

          how do we get everyone to understand this? People are already in love with 5 or 6 equals as if they are the next Messiah, bad news guys, so far they aint. We MUST defeat Obama, there are no style points this time. And I will take any Repub over Obama including Ron Paul (that was to you Aesthete). The reason is any Repub would bring in major Repub wins in the Congress, even Ron Paul (who will never win) could not have his way, LSD would still be illegal, the military would still exist.

          Ok, where was I? Oh yeah, I agree, we MUST defeat Obama, and for that reason this group of understudies need to show us the money, they don’t deserve adoration yet, they have to EARN IT.

          • azaeroprof

            Yes, they must earn it!! All I ask is that we don’t let the media pre-define for us who is “electable”. Give them all a chance, including Palin (if she runs), including Romney, and any other comers. If they don’t earn it, don’t support them!

    • conservativecurmudgeon

      First reason among them:

      –The landslide elections of Ronald Reagan, and the maturing of the conservative movement. Prior to Reagan, the GOP DID suffer a bit from the caricature of being the white, rich-man’s party. Many future Republicans would tell you in their later years that Johnson in 1964 was the last Democrat for whom they voted. By 1980, and in the years since. the Republicans have become a truly national party, with a broad spectrum of folks representing a huge strata of economic and cultural interests.

      –The influence of the New Deal was broken by the Democrat Convention of 1968. The Left has since been defined as a radical statist party since then, with only varying degrees of intensity that most Americans can easily detect.

      There never again will be a Goldwater-type conservative blowout for these reasons, without regard to the candidate, Sarah Palin or whomever; Unless there is a 23rd-hour public revelation on the eve of the vote about something so hideous of a personal nature that skews the election (for reasons that clearly aren’t political)

      • jeffreywturner

        I’d also throw in the caveat of a split vote. For instance, there could have been such a blow-out in 1992. With 20% of the vote going to a relatively conservative third candidate, it would be possible for the GOP to lose by 20 points.

        However, like you say, head-to-head, I couldn’t see a Dem in 2015 cracking 55%.

  • Darin_H

    you went a different path that I thought you were going to with the title. :)

    Sarah Palin’s not the top of my list for the nomination (Perry and Pawlenty are superior IMO), but this is at least an interesting and new look at what she’s doing these days. I still don’t quite believe that she’s running, but will back Perry when he jumps in (in the next couple of weeks).

    Kudos.

    • runner12

      Palin is not at the top of my list (i am leaning more towards Pawlenty, Cain, or Perry), but I do like how she is exploring new ways to interact with real Americans versus the old and establishment type venues.

      She is realizing tnat it will take many everyday Americans to quit sitting on the sidelines and vote GOP in order to beat Obama.Palin is taking politics to them versus expecting them to come to her. I have to give her credit for this one.

      I hope whoever she backs will take some hints from her in tnis area.

  • carriep

    I was intrigued by this analogy – the ‘Reagan was an outsider’ comparison to Palin – while accurate – was beginning to wear on me. I never knew these things about JFK so I enjoyed the behind-the-scenes history lesson at the lead-up to his election.

    I think she’s running and have thought so for quite some time. There’s a quiet, yet powerful, grassroots movement that’s been organizing quietly, lying dormant for many, many months – just waiting to get the formal “game on” words from the Governor- and when that happens, all holy heck is gonna break loose.

    One other thing, don’t know if this has been mentioned yet, as I haven’t read many of the other comments, so if it has, I apologize. But the former 1st lady’s name was spelled E-L-E-A-N-O-R Roosevelt, not Elanor.

    You could probably point out a few spelling/grammatical errors in my post here; however, please forgive my pointing this out. It’s just that you used the name Eleanor many times – and the high school from which I graduated was named Eleanor Roosevelt High School.

    • conservativecurmudgeon

      ..that, and up-post, I accidentally referred to Nixon’s failed California Governor’s race as taking place in 1964. It was 1962. Oh, well. Time for bed…

  • http://theheartlander.wordpress.com/ heartlander

    …Sarah might be the one who will finally talk honestly with Americans about abortion, that “peculiar institution” that has warped our politics so badly in so many ways, SOMEONE needs to stop all the dancing around the subject that politicians do, and break through the polarization. Something like “Let’s be frank. Millions of you have had abortions. And many, if not most, of you, feel really bad about it — and yet, back at the time, you felt you had to. Look, neither you as an individual, nor this country as a whole, is going to make any progress as long as we stay in denial. So let’s talk….”

    This is a conversation that HAS to happen. Just as an individual who represses guilt gets neurotic, our country just gets sicker and sicker as long as we let this evil fester in our midst even as we keep trying to sweep it under the rug. Like Lady MacBeth, “out, damned spot!” It doesn’t work.

    I would give my life for the politician who will initiate the big, honest, national conversation about our modern-day equivalent of the slavery issue of Lincoln’s day.

    • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

      isn’t hard.

      Finding someone who can actually communicate with them is another story. Palin hasn’t been able to communicate with a broad section of Americans, heck, she hasn’t even tried.

  • ragstoriches

    last year, heck even as late as early this year, I was absolutely against the idea of Palin winning the nomination let alone running .But I’ve been watching her subtle transformation from the “lady next door” to the “lady to be reckoned with” and am slowly but surely being won over.

    She is started to act in a manner more consistent with what I’d expect from a highly driven, intelligent and most importantly passionate conservative woman. And maybe when I analyze my own slow but sure “coming over to her side” process, the key is going to be that passionate factor coupled with her sudden desire to actually act her IQ rather than playing Lucy to whomever is designated the GOP’s Ricky of late.

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    she does the following after announcing here intention to run:

    Makes appeals directly to the “mama grizzlies” and all of her other supporters in the grass roots conservative groups to do more than just show up to vote but to actually get involved in GOTV on her behalf with her campaign. All the while, she explains the concept of civic duty and the idea that when the country is in crisis, conservatives need to get involved in party politics by, if at all possible, spending a few hours a month at their local party committee meetings and by becoming a voting member of their party — a precinct committeeman.

    Runs an unconventional media campaign, making the Democrat Media the issue. She can refuse to go onto the programs of the “leftist, lamestream media” (her words) and instead use Fox and the internet to communicate directly with the primary voters. By going on the war path against the “leftist, lamestream media” she will appear stronger than all of the other candidates who don’t have the testicular fortitude to do so. She does not need to go on ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC — she can do just fine with Fox, talk radio, and the net’s social media tools.

    Along the same lines, refuses to participate in the “non-debates” and explains why. She challenges each of the other Republican candidates to real, one-on-one, debates, where each gets to ask each other questions, with a referee to keep track of the time each gets for each answer . She broadcasts these debates on Fox or whichever networks will carry them, live, and also broadcasts them over the internet. She posts the debates on a YouTube channel and then creates “highlight reels” of her best answers and the worst answers of her adversaries.

    If she gets no takers (highly unlikely), she then debates cardboard cut-outs of the cowards. She takes the questions that were asked of her adversaries at the “beauty contest non-debates” and explains how bad the questions were and then fashions new, better questions and answers them. And then critiques the answers of her adversaries.

    The internet has changed the rules. Clearly, she understands this. She’s an unconventional, non-Establishment candidate and must run an unconventional campaign if she has a chance to win out over her Establishment rivals. If she runs a conventional campaign, according to the “rules” of the Democrat Media, she will be chewed up. She needs to make the Democrat Media the issue and appeal directly to the grass roots conservatives who caused the McCain/Palin ticket to do as well as it did despite the onslaughts against it by the Democrat Media and the Establishment “conservative” talking heads (Noonan, Chris Buckley, Kathleen Parker, et al.) after she got onto the ticket in 2008.

    Thank you,

    ColdWarrior

    • rightwingmom52

      I know there has been some debate about whether you block out the liberal media outlets or confront them head-on. If we follow your advice and marginalize them, I happen to think their narcissism has a slight edge over their bias, so they would eventually be forced to join the debate in a more balanced way because they don’t want to be left out and confirm they are nowhere near as relevant as they think. Especially this year and next when more people than ever are following the process and just aren’t as dependent on them as before.

      A bonus for taking your advice is that conservative candidates would be urging conservative constituents to get more involved. That should get the attention of the GOP leadership and would hopefully force them to stand more on principle and less on compromise.

    • azaeroprof

      Your advice is excellent. The big question is, what happens in the general? I assume a different strategy would be necessary.

  • jeffreywturner

    You mean she will get into the White House by stealing an election, host orgies at the White House pool, be President for less than 3 years accomplishing next to nothing and still somehow have the media posthumously invent a myth that she was an awesome President?

    • msctex

      They applied an extant story to a laughably inappropriate situation, but damned if it didn’t stick to some degree.

      Because the same people who came up with the Kennedy/”Camelot” trope are also the ones who control the perception of how such a thing is received. And if it was bad then, it is potentially a hundred times worse today, because they are saddled with an almost unfathomable failure whom they hailed as something approaching the Second Coming.

    • conservativecurmudgeon

      …the White House Press Room now sits where JFK’s pool did.

      I made no reference whatsoever to the chaos known as the Kennedy presidency. Actually, JFK accomplished a lot, depending on your definition of “accomplishment”: He cemented Cuba as a sworn enemy, he got the US involved in south east Asia without any strategic goal beyond billboarding his own massive ego and, because his every move was a political calculation, his assassination resulted in the further distancing of the President from the public he serves (he was in Dallas only to stop the Connally/Yarborough –conservative vs. liberal Democrat– feud, and shore up his awful Texas poll numbers)

      Had he been minding the affairs of the nation a little closer, rather than trying to get re-elected, he likely wouldn’t have been under the muzzle of Oswald’s Manlicher-Carcano on November 22nd, 1963… But, who knows?

      • conservativecurmudgeon

        taking a bit of the Ron Paul line be blaming the victim. JFK was not in any way complicit in his own murder–That was entirely Oswald’s fault. But, what I am saying is that actions have consequences, most of them unforeseen. And JFK was a political animal, first, last and always.

  • libertyfreedom

    Or should that role go to Levi?

    • jeffreywturner

      n/t

  • progressivelibertarian

    and a callous disregard for the intelligence of her audience.

    The problem with Sarah Palin is the endlessness of her demagoguery. She drones on and on with essentially content-free platitudes, attacks and pablum. In that process, she disrespects her own intelligence and, probably without realizing, insults the intelligence and discernment of her audience. Donald Trump’s Modus Operandii during his brief, disreputable and possibly fake motions towards a presidential run was quite similar; he also went on and on throwing BS out there, instead of making sound and cogent arguments. People got sick of it and turned sour towards him in no time.

    There’s a reason both Trump and Palin have obscenely high unfavorables (60-70%) with the general public. As a consequence of those unfavorables, if the 2012 election were held today and Palin were the GOP nominee, Obama would undoubtedly trounce her in a 40+ state rout, regardless of the state of the economy.

    Moral of story is the following: when holding a stage in public, especially when you might be seeking to become the leader of the free world, take that privilege sufficiently seriously. Serious enough to earn the *respect* of your audience.

    I see her recent overtures as primarily “brand” building exercises, with the door being slightly ajar for a possible run. Regardless of what her intentions are, if she wants to reach beyond her loyal following (of about 10-15% of the GOP primary electorate), she needs to start, like it was yesterday, making sense with what she says. Even Bachmann projects a dose of seriousness, and hence a trace of credibility, that Palin doesn’t. Heck, with what I have seen of her thus far, I’d vote for an intelligent and level-headed teenager in his or her late teen years, or even her own daughter Bristol, over Palin for just about any office.

    I know this is a very harsh assessment, but unless she shapes up, hones her own mind (as I think she is capable of) and presents herself as a serious and competent adult, I don’t want to see her anywhere near the oval office. Shape up, Sarah (if you ever want to be the POTUS)!

    I am an independent voter who’d like to see Obama become a one-termer. I am still hoping that Gov. Mike Huckabee can be somehow persuaded to run (note to the eventual GOP nominee: as shown by a variety of polls, Huckabee’s pull is very strong in many swing states, and so Huckabee really should be on GOP ticket in 2012, if you’re serious about winning), but in the current field, I like Pawlenty (seems like an all-around good guy who is capable of throwing effective punches when needed, but can he inspire people enough to defeat Obama?), Gov. Huntsman (an obviously honest, honorable and capable person, but does he have what it takes to take on China?), and Herman Cain (his math and Purdue computer science degrees, pretty good business experience and his confidence are the main draws presently, but is he too cozy with the Fed and the Banking establishment, both of which are in need of close scrutiny and reforms?), with some unanswered questions pertaining to each of them. Although I am not inclined to support Bachmann for President at this time, I like the sunnier enthusiasm and self-confidence that she’s been showing lately, and I view her favorably because of the amazing fact that her heart is big and generous enough to give home to and parent some 23 foster kids.

  • crimsonandclover

    Yeah, and so what?! A woman – especially a reality teevee star – has every right to quit public office if she wants to – especially if there are more lucrative opportunities for her! The Lamestream Media just doesn’t get it!

    Like her bus tour. Okay, it’s not really a bus tour, because she just shows up in her limo to be photographed getting off the bus…but compare that to Romney flip-flopping on Romneycare! Who’s looking good now?!

    Fact is, there is absolutely no chance our Palin Princess is going to run – but as long as she can trick the Lamestreamers into thinking she might, her value on the talk show circuit (and on Fox) will continue to rise from the depths to which she’d previously plummeted!

    Take that Liberals! We’ve got a non-candidate who can run a self-promotion better than anybody! And there’s nothing you can do to stop her, as long as she sticks to the private sector!!

    • conservativecurmudgeon

      Huh? What? Over here! No, over there! Aaargghh! Whiplash!

      The thing that’s rather disheartening about this sort of sentiment is how dismissively snarky it is of Mrs. Palin’s accomplishments (Palin Princess??), when compared to the vast bulk of us.

      She’s put her worldview and first principals out in the marketplace (something far too many of us are uncomfortable doing) and taken on all comers, come what may– all while raising a family, creating a home, and becoming a cottage industry in and of herself. I cannot imagine the foul, disgusting garbage that’s been hurled at her for nearly two years being aimed at ME, and not curling up in a ball, and moving to Mongolia. I’ve had run ins with political campaigning, and when it gets nasty, it’s really tough to take on a personal level. It really does.

      I really don’t know how I feel about a Palin candidacy; but I do know I very much admire her work ethic, her political viewpoint, her love of America, her personal discipline, her faith-life; and I know I admire practically NONE of these characteristics in the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

      And, for what it’s worth, I believe she IS running, and in so doing, is quite possibly setting the orthodoxy up for a good crushing, as I described.

  • MikeG (Icythus)

    God, I hope not. Last thing we need is another serial adulterer in the White House. ;-)