« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Palin in Wisconsin: Finally a potential 2012 Candidate With Something Good to Say!

By: Josh LeGuern (Diary)  |  April 17th, 2011 at 01:16 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Forgive me for being a bit obtuse when it comes to Donald Trump, but I just really don’t see the appeal for the guy. When he starts going on about birtherism, a conspiracy theory that has been disproven time and time again, and then leads the GOP pack according to several polls, frankly, it makes me sick.

If intense hatred of Barack Obama, the man, is what is going to be at the center of the activity on the right in 2012 and we nominate Trump because he’s willing to viciously attack the president, then we’ll loose. Hatred of the current president can not win the presidency for another. Just ask Democrats in 2004.

I would challenge those in our ranks (who, I believe are very few and far between) to stand back a little bit. If you hate President Obama, the man, fine. It’s a free country, you can feel how you’d like. But take a look at the record and the policy proposals of someone (especially someone who has never held accountable by the public in political office before) before you give them the presidential nomination of your party. Trump has been pro-choice, pro-universal health care, pro-tax increases and he has criticized President Bush as being the worst president ever, calling for his impeachment. Now, I’m not a big fan of George W. Bush and his ilk, but he did nothing to deserve impeachment and while he made some poor choices, calling him the worst president ever is a big overstatement. Now, you may say those are previous positions Trump has held. First off, how does that make him different than Mitt Romney? Secondly, Fine, let’s look at his current positions: he supports a 25% tariff on goods from China, he refuses to take a position on the Ryan budget, oh and he supports invading Libya as long as we can take their oil. Wow the man is the embodiment of conservatism.

I am absolutely relieved to see a serious and tried and true conservative potential presidential candidate take the stage today at a tea party rally in Madison, Wisconsin. Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s speech was absolutely terrific! She hit all the right notes and attacked President Obama not on personal hatred of him, but in disgust of his policies. To see it click here:

http://www.therightscoop.com/live-watch-sarah-palin-at-wisconsin-tea-party/

What I’d like to see now is Palin launch a presidential bid with her vision of what to do. We know what she’s against, we have an idea of what she’s for, now it’s time for her to present her vision for America. What would America be like after President Palin leaves office?

The “she can’t possibly win” argument, in my mind, is bull dust. Palin CAN win if conservatives would just get behind her. Is she someone who is 100% ideal? Is she the next Ronald Reagan? Is she someone who could potentially win a landslide election against President Obama? Well… the evidence on all accounts in this present time points to no. But, could she do the job? Yes. Is she sufficiently conservative? Oh, Lord Yes. And can she win in 2012, even if it’s a squeaker? I think so. Conservatives have looked for perfection for too long, and our dissatisfaction with the imperfections of the conservatives have led to presidential candidates like the Bushes, Bob Dole, and John McCain.  We can not afford this in 2012. We’ve got to realize that maybe adequate is an ok point to start from. We can work with adequate. With adequate there’s room for growth. If someone is adequate, it’s better than terrible. And when faced with adequate vs. terrible, one they have all the facts, people will choose adequate. We have got to unite behind someone. Something tells me Sarah Palin, while not perfect, might be an adequate choice. And Lord have mercy on us all, she’s a lot better than the host of “The Celebrity Apprentice.”

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • volunteerstate

    is more than an adequate candidate. She is a dynamic speaker . She frequently comes up with creative, catchy phrases much like Reagan. She has a backbone of steel when it comes to matters of integrity. She is an unabashed conservative on both economic and on social issues. And she scares the crap out of the MSM.

    Our country is conservative, we need to nominate a conservative rather than repeat the same process that has failed us over and over..

    • ruexperienced

      judge to the Alaska Supreme Court. The judicial commission selected to liberal pro-abortion candidates. She picked the one that was a board member for Planned Parenthood.

      She could have rejected both and sent them back. But she caved.

      And where was she on Dont Ask Dont Tell? Nowhere. The only thing she did was to re-Tweet a pro-gay message from her l3sbian friend Tammy Bruce.

      But I agree with you. She does talk a good game.

      • phlogiston

        Sarah Palin’s not a complete ideologue?As in, she’ll pick and choose the battles she ‘s going to fight? Do you seriously think for one minute that she’s either pro-choice or in favor of repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell? Really? You actually think her conservative bona fides are questionable?

        • ruexperienced

          She has the thinnest resume of anyone in the presidential race.

          Palin has learned to repeat catchy conservative phrases. But we do not know how she would perform under pressure.

          Why was she so cagey on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell?

          You tell me.

          • Josh LeGuern

            I was pro-repeal of DADT, I think it’s silly. We don’t ban people who have premarital sex from the military, we don’t ban people who tell little white lies, we don’t ban people who take the Lord’s name in vain from the military (which would disqualify every drill sergeant in America)

            If you have a moral objection to homosexual acts because of religious faith (as do I), then what makes that different from any of the above behaviors? The fact people aren’t comfortable with it? Get over it. We all have things in our life that aren’t 100% up to par with living a moral life. Besides, the actual acts of homosexuality would be banned regardless because of fraternizing rules.

            But that doesn’t disqualify myself or Palin from being a conservative.

            Can I just say something else as well. If you are a believer (I am), shouldn’t it be our goal to, you know, reach the homosexual community for Christ? Then, with compassion and grace, help them to help them find a path to living a moral life? I hate that the church has gotten so politicized with gay issues because whenever I have tried to minister to a gay person one of the first things they say is “God hates me” or “the church hates” the former of which isn’t true at all and the latter of which I HOPE isn’t true.

            I definitely think we need to stand up for traditional marriage, but not by tearing down gays and lesbians. That’s not going to be helpful to the conservative movement in the long term and it’s DEFINITELY not going to help The Church.

          • avgjo

            First off, with respect to your comment ‘get over it’, I think the ones that need to get over it are the people like you who object to people like me objecting to homosexuality. I claim to be a Christian, as you do. The Bible calls that act an abomination. Where does it say the same about fornication?

            You say it is not going to be helpful to the conservative movement in the longer term by standing against what many of us perceive to be a degradation in our culture? Why? Because in a few years everyone’s gonna be homosexual? And why on earth did you say it’s ‘DEFINITELY’ not going to help the church? Because observing God’s judgements on behavior is bad for the church?

            I can tell you what is never good for any principled movement: compromising with that which is wrong. And don’t start the ‘who are you to judge’ crap with me. God judged it bad; that’s why He put it in the Bible. I’m just citing His ruling.

          • lunaticrex

            Then you know nothing, or nearly that much, about how the best military the world has ever seen works. Your three arguments simply do not pass the smell test, and besides, ever tried to get a security clearance with a record of “little white lies?” Good luck with that.

            Do some research, find out some things, then maybe you’ll reevaluate the “silliness” of forbidding open homosexuality in an organization where tight-knit groups of humans must work toward a common goal. And that goal isn’t saving your boyfriend’s life over the good of all others. That is only one issue, BTW.

            Or, keep your head safely in the sand, keep trying to convince them God loves them, and, oh yeah: Palin 2012!

            Just kidding on that last. I’m with Becker: If she gets through the primary, she’ll get my vote. She won’t get my vote in the primary.

          • NHConservative0227

            Palin has over 9 years executive experience

            She cut taxes as mayor of Wasilla and turned a hole in the wall into a thriving city.

            Palin signed a deal to create a North American gas pipeline to deliver oil to the lower 48 from Alaska.

            She had 70% and above approval ratings as goveror.

            Palin is obviously the most throrougly vetted candidate. She has survived all the ridiculous smears and has refused to back down. Any candidate who becomes a serious threat to Obama will get smeared. The Left will always show you who they fear.

            She has been the one candidate who has consistently attacked Obama’s policies over the last 2 years.

            Palin has been right on a number of issues including the death panels, states rights, quantitative easing, and energy policy.

            Speaking of energy policy, she by far has the best record in terms on this— She has been outspoken in terms of an all of the above policy, drilling throughout the US, including Anwar. This will be a huge issue as gas continues to skyrocket.

            To defeat Obama, we need a candidate who’s not going to be PC and afraid to call him out. Sarah is that person as she will call it the way she sees it. The Establishment hates her for this and is trying to destory her.

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

            Palin has nine years of executive experience capped off by getting caught in her own little ethical web and she cut and ran. No plan, and absolute political cowardace at the end.

            The gas line is basically dead bubba. Other than tossing a hundred million or two to a Canadian company there’s nothing to show for it and won’t be, given that the current Governor is doing exactly nothing about it.

            Palin has not been “vetted”, except maybe in your alternate universe. She’s spent the last two plus years throwing bombs at Obama, note, not actually offering alternatives, just bombs. Of course, it’s not like she actually had an executive position where she might DO something, like maybe the Governors of NJ, SC, FL, WI, IN to name a few. In return for her little bombs, she’s been the recipient of a bunch of personal attacks. And she pretty well came unhinged responding to them. She’s yet to talk to a reporter who might ask a difficult or even a follow up question. I don’t expect good restults when that happens.

            Her record on energy isn’t a record. It’s a bunch of facebook entries. And the jist of them isn’t much different than about 90% of the current perceived field.

            What is most clear out of all of this is that Palin is at best a mediocre executive. She has no lasting accomplishments and it’s only two years out of her resignation as Governor. She has no record of fiscal conservatism, given that every budget she submitted as Governor was significantly higher than the one previous. She has no record of eliminating, trimming or even picking a fight with government units under her control. Additionally, she has no record of even attempting to work with legislators to get things done. You can feel free to whine about the quality or lack thereof of Republicans in the AK legislature (not that you’d actually know anything about them) but I can almost guarantee you that they are certainly no worse than what she’d have to deal with in DC.

          • NHConservative0227

            First, a bunch of frivolous ethics charges from left wing goons forced Palin to resign. It was Alaska law at the time that state money could not be used for her legal defenses. Neither were legal defense funds, as that money was returned back to those who donated. So Palin’s only option was to personally go bankrupt fighting these ridiculous charges. In addition, you have to look at the amount of wasted time for the governors office to be working on these ethics charges. They would literally have no time to do anything else. So instead of going bankrupt and wasting the people’s tax money, Palin did the courageous thing and resigned.

            I believe Palin has been running for President ever since she resigned. Unlike most other candidates, while ignore there current job while running for POTUS, Palin is not disregarding her current elected office to run.

            She was a lousy executive you say?? Apparently you havent researched her record at all. Maybe a quick wikipedia search will clear a few things up.
            As Governor:

            In June 2007, Palin signed a record $6.6 billion operating budget into law.[105] At the same time, she used her veto power to make the second-largest cuts of the construction budget in state history. The $237 million in cuts represented over 300 local projects, and reduced the construction budget to $1.6 billion.[106]
            In 2008, Palin vetoed $286 million, cutting or reducing funding for 350 projects from the FY09 capital budget.[107]
            Palin followed through on a campaign promise to sell the Westwind II jet, a purchase made by the Murkowski administration for $2.7 million in 2005 against the wishes of the legislature.[108] In August 2007, the jet was listed on eBay, but the sale fell through, and the plane was later sold for $2.1 million through a private brokerage firm.[109]
            In December 2008, an Alaska state commission recommended increasing the Governor?s annual salary from $125,000 to $150,000. Palin stated that she would not accept the pay raise.[116] In response, the commission dropped the recommendation.[117]
            In her State of the State address on January 17, 2008, Palin declared that the people of Alaska ?can and must continue to develop our economy, because we cannot and must not rely so heavily on federal government [funding].?[118] Alaska?s federal congressional representatives cut back on pork-barrel project requests during Palin?s time as governor; despite this, in 2008 Alaska was still the largest per-capita recipient of federal earmarks, requesting nearly $750 million in special federal spending over a period of two years.[119]
            While there is no sales tax or income tax in Alaska, state revenues doubled to $10 billion in 2008. For the 2009 budget, Palin gave a list of 31 proposed federal earmarks or requests for funding, totaling $197 million, to Alaska Senator Ted Stevens.[120][121]
            Palin has stated that her decreasing support for federal funding was a source of friction between her and the state?s congressional delegation; Palin requested less in federal funding each year than her predecessor Frank Murkowski requested in his last year.[122]
            As Mayor ?. First Term
            During her first year in office, Palin kept a jar with the names of Wasilla residents on her desk. Once a week, she pulled out a name, picked up the phone and asked: ?How?s the city doing??[63]
            Using income generated by a 2% sales tax that had been approved by Wasilla voters in October 1992,[64] Palin cut property taxes by 75% and eliminated personal property and business inventory taxes.[56][65] Using municipal bonds, she made improvements to the roads and sewers, and increased funding to the Police Department.[58]
            She also oversaw new bike paths and procured funding for storm-water treatment to protect freshwater resources.[56] At the same time, she shrank the local museum?s budget and deterred talk of a new library and city hall.[56]

            Second Term Mayor
            During her second term as mayor, Palin proposed and promoted the construction of a municipal sports center to be financed by a 0.5%[58] sales tax increase and $14.7 million bond issue.Voters approved the measure by a 20 vote margin and the Wasilla Multi-Use Sports Complex was built on time and under budget.
            In 2008, Wasilla?s current mayor credited Palin?s 75 percent property tax cuts and infrastructure improvements with bringing ?big-box stores? and 50,000 shoppers per day to Wasilla.
            A local gun store owner said Palin made the town ?more of a community ? It?s no longer a little strip town that you can blow through in a heartbeat.?[52] At the conclusion of Palin?s tenure as mayor in 2002, the city had about 6,300 residents.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

            Oh, and she spent ONE MILLION DOLLARS less than either Murkowski or Knowles (the previous two governors) did on the executive branch expenses.

          • aesthete

            especially compared to the amount that she jacked up the budget under her tenure. They are also not a constant expense of the office, meaning that her successors are in no way bound to follow her example. They’re really no different from what a reform-minded Dem would have done, in that regard. The only people who buy this as an example of fiscal conservatism are the same people who see Boehner’s “cuts” as significant.

            You neglect to mention that the ethics law in question was written by Palin’s cabinet, and shepherded through the AK legislature by her and her allies in the legislature (mainly Democrats). Her story of needing to pay for her own legal defense was and is utterly false; she just didn’t want to deal with the increased transparency that would be required by having the state pay for her legal expenses. If you don’t believe that the President will face even bigger media-driven witch-hunts, then you’re just not thinking.

          • AceInTX

            Don’t you know he’s the smartest guy in the room and anyone who disagrees with him is too stupid to live…don’t believe me…just look down this thread…

      • kestrel

        are Palin-bashing in one form or another, and few (if any) of them add anything constructive to the discussion.

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

          does add some interesting info. Why would an ardent pro-lifer, and Palin has history living that out in her life, appoiint a PP board member to a position in the judiciary?

        • Finrod

          .

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

            that the candidate in their basement shrine might have perceived issues that would have to be addressed.

          • NHConservative0227

            nt

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

            I don’t have a pick yet. Unlike some people, I actually think about who I’m going to support based on the issues that are rising at the time – which we don’t currently know; the mix of candidates in the race – and guess what, we don’t know them either; the history of each candidate with regard to the various issues; the experience of the candidates relative to their ability to actually accomplish something and how that relates to the issues at hand.

            Next, I look at the candidate’s minuses, what they will need to overcome them and how likely each is to be able to deal successfully with those issues.

            Then I’ll make a decision.

            Please note that no where in the equation is the ability whip up a red-meat partisian crowd. I don’t care about campaign speeches are now and have been for every candidate forever a pretty meaninigless exercise. Just ask the far left about BOs inspiring speeches. The only thing that matters to me is the ability of a candidate to put together a plan, to assemble a team to implent it and to follow through.

          • NHConservative0227

            That’s pretty hard to believe.

            Are you going to tell me that you’re still open to Gov. Palin or is she already crossed off your list? I’ve seen you trash her on a number of frivolous issues, the Planned Parenthood judge being one of them.

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

            Come primaries, we’ll see. There will have to be a major melt down for me to support Palin. She’s very well known, has a pretty well published record, and I don’t think she’d be any more competent in office – maybe less – than Obama.

            She was a lousy Governor. Bad executive record. Not a fiscal conservative. I don’t think Tina Fey was all that far off about her foreign policy experience. She’s in an enormous F/U hole with independents and every time she opens her mouth it gets worse. That’s a death sentence in the general election.

            She does many things well. Being President isn’t – and won’t – be one of them.

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

            I’ve not trashed Palin on “frivolous” issues, except that you define anything that cuts down the glow from your shrine to be “frivolous”. And most especially, with regard to the judge, if you’d bothered to read the thread you’d have noted that based on kestrel’s comments on the judicial process – which I didn’t know – I commented that I didn’t have any problems with the appointment.

            And I am not leaning toward anyone.

          • NHConservative0227

            With the judge appointment. You thought you had something else to bash Palin with.

            I don’t know why you don’t just go with it, since it has the same amount of credibility as all the things you use to attack her with on a regular basis.

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

            I was interested because it was a new issue (plus or minus, it was new) to me. I found it interesting because Palin’s been in the spotlight for a long time and after any potential candidate has been around for a while new stuff, especially of a historical nature, doesn’t rear it’s head often. So I asked some questions about it.

            Unlike you, kestrel was good enough to actually provide enough information for me to do some research, which I did, had a short discussion with kestrel and noted that, based on what he was saying about AK judicial appointment law being correct and based on the link I found, I had no issue with what Palin had done.

            Frankly, when the subject was first broached I had a hard time understanding why Palin would make the appointment she made. Some research made it clear why. Case closed.

            Unlike you, I actually do research on candidates and issues and if things aren’t issues I’m happy to note that they’re not. I don’t make up talking points and I don’t take take press releases – or books – at face value. I look at both sides of issues in reference to the historical record and the current situation on the ground before I make a decision and when I make a decision about an issue or a candidate, I will make every attempt to convey the decision as well as the process for making it.

            As far as attacking Palin on a regular basis, I show up once in a while when when the worshipers are cluttering up the site. RonPaul “supporters”, birthers, troofers and Palin worshipers are all pretty much of the same ilk. A case can be made for Palin, IMO not a particularly good one, but it isn’t being made by you or your “whatevers”. You do Palin no favors among the majority of people who come here who can actually think.

          • NHConservative0227

            You’re one of the worst Palin-bashers I’ve seen in a long time and that’s saying something.

            When you say she’d only be marginally better than Obama or even worse— you lost all credibility.

            Unlike you, I’ve thorougly researched Palin’s record and her positions. That’s why I’ve realized that she is by far the best candidate to beat Obama and to get our country back on the right track.

            Yet, you don’t even have a slight indication of who you’re leaning towards? Sounds like you have to some serious homework to do. I find it amazing though you’re trying to paint yourself as some impartial observer who has yet to fully vet all the candidates. Yet, the only thing you’re sure of is that Sarah Palin need not apply. That she’s better off as kingmaker and all that other hot garbage. How noble of you.

            Here’s a hint, none of them stack up to Palin.

          • acat

            Your continued insistence that she’s the best, without supporting facts, is .. embarassing.

            Serioiusly, if you’re above average caliber as a Palin supporter, and if she decides to run, she’s in deep trouble. You can’t convince someone who is willing to consider her, on a Conservative Republican forum.

            How the pock are you going to convince your neighbors and co-workers?

            Mew

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

            I cite facts from the historical record, I lay out some opinion – which is clearly labeled as opinion – and you sit in your basement typing from Palin’s press releases with one hand and I’m “full of it” and a “Palin basher”. In point of fact, I am impartial in the analysis. I don’t appear to you to be impartical about Palin because there’s lots of facts, lots of history already out that simply isn’t available on most other candidates which makes conclusions about her fairly easy to draw, assuming you can evaluate information and think. If she manages to do something to make inrodes with Independents and her F/Us turn around over the next several months, I’ll reevaluate my opinion of her.

            You’re no better than a troofer or a birther. You do nothing more than read stuff and either find content that fits your preconception or you twist content to fit, you obviously don’t know how to evaluate content. Maybe if survive puberty you’ll eventually learn something about research and writing, but I’m not optimistic.

          • NHConservative0227

            Again the fact that you said that Palin would only by “marginally better than Obama, if at all” says all one really needs to know about you.

            I’ve given plenty of facts yet all you do is ignore them. You keep posting the same old “but she quit, she quit” talking points despite the fact that this have been disproven as a negative countless time. You’d fit in well over at Ace of Spades since Ace does the same as you in using tabloid talking points to attack Palin on a constant basis.

            You call her a mediocre governor? What mediocre governor creates a $12 B surplus?

            Nice job btw on the lame lines that “I’m typing this from my basement” or “if I survive puberty”. It’s not funny, it’s just lame high school humor that’s not anymore original than the tripe you’ve been using to attack Palin over the last 6+ months.

            Keep up the good work!

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

            print one sonny. What you have done is establish a very solid reputation as an ignorant fool.

            You’re Franz Rule’d.

          • NHConservative0227

            Again what mediocre governor has a $12B surplus???

          • aesthete

            and a tax structure that lets her state take advantage of that. Pretty much the same reason that Norway’s way-too-generous welfare system hasn’t collapsed in on itself.

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

            “Hinz Rule” was propagated by the late David Hinz, during the 08 primaries as I recall.

            “Don’t feed the trolls.”

            In other words, just ignore fools.

            “Franz Rule”, named for the late Franz Prince of Dogness by Neil as I recall simply requires the posting of funny pictures in response to stupid comments.

          • ruexperienced

            Two years later and Palin still has to convince conservatives that quitting was a smart thing?

            How is she going to convince independents that quitting was a good thing? And how long will that take? Six months? One year? Up until November 2012?

            And if you think her Republican opponents would give her a free ride on this you should think again. This will be the number one issue she gets hammered on. If she makes it through the primary, Obama is going to start in on it again…. “She quit” … “blood libel”…. “Kate Gosselin” …. “plus she quit.” Every interview is going to have a resignation question…. “You opponent says that you quit because…. What do you have to say about that?”

            While she is busy explaining and re-explaining her resignation, her opponent (R or D) is going to be talking about his campaign issues. Plain will continue to sink.

          • article345

            This person is a blowhard who seems to spend all his time wandering around comments/post finding fault in everything and everyone. He gets away with it with the kids but his type is all to recognizable to those who have been around a while.I notice he raved on about the business he owned but now works for others so he is no measure of success. Best to ignore him.

          • kestrel

            for judicial selection. I’m tired of explaining it.

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

            Is this the exact plan that AK uses? Specifically…

            Regardless of the commission handling the applications, the constitutional process of filling a judicial vacancy is the same. With any vacancy, the appropriate commission reviews applications of lawyers who wish to join the court and interviews the applicants. It then submits the names of three qualified candidates ? called the ?panel? of candidates ? to the Missouri governor.

            Normally, the governor will interview the three candidates and review their backgrounds before selecting one for the vacancy. If the governor does not appoint one of the three panelists within 60 days of submission, the commission selects one of the three panelists to fill the vacancy.

            If this exact process is the case, then the only question would be one of offsets and given an opportunity to study the rationale for the appointment I don’t have any particular problem with the appointment.

          • kestrel

            and the part you quote is the crux of the matter; although why she was only given two choices, instead of three, I don’t know. (The second one appears to have been a radical environmentalist.) A writer from Legal Newsline via Hot Air states : “A total of six judges applied, but only two were elected by the Judicial Council.”

            ruexperienced comments above, “She could have rejected both and sent them back. But she caved” but I’m not sure it’s as simple as that. Ed Morrisey says (linked above), “She could have pushed back by refusing to appoint either, but her predecessor tried that and got roasted for it.”

            The Missouri Plan ties the governors hands, which is why George Soros is trying to get it implemented in more states. See here. From the article:

            “Soros has contributed
            more than $45 million over the past decade
            to several dozen special interest advocacy
            groups affiliated with an umbrella 501(c)(3)
            organization called Justice at Stake (JAS).
            JAS, which styles itself a ?non-partisan,
            watchdog group,? has as its mission the
            ?reform? of the process for selecting state
            judges. It is an opponent of state judicial
            elections.
            “A principal goal for JAS is to replace judicial
            elections with a system of ?merit selection.?
            JAS believes a model system, such
            as one used in Missouri since 1940, would
            strengthen the role of state bar associations
            in providing advice on court selections. Since
            1999, OSI has given just over $5 million
            to the American Bar Association (ABA) to
            promote the Missouri model.”

            BTW, I’d appreciate if someone would tell me how to do a block quote (assuming the one above doesn’t turn out right).

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

            unless the other candidate was measurably better in some way and we don’t have that info.

            To do a blockquote, (blockquote) xyz (/blockquote), replacing “” for “)” where “xyz” is the information to be quoted.

            There’s a pretty good online tutorial on HTML here. Note that for whatever reason, not all HTML code seems to work at RS, but the basics will and the tutorial is pretty easy to use.

            If you are using Firefox 3.x there is a Text Formatting Toolbar addon that takes care of everything for you. It doesn’t work with FF4.0 yet.

          • kestrel
          • ruexperienced

            ********** “ruexperienced comments above, ?She could have rejected both and sent them back. But she caved? but I?m not sure it?s as simple as that. Ed Morrisey says (linked above), ?She could have pushed back by refusing to appoint either, but her predecessor tried that and got roasted for it.?*************

            Her predecessor “got roasted” for taking a stand….. Well at least the predecessor MADE a stand.

            What would President Palin do if presented a bad budget? Or any other non-conservative legislation?

            Would she retreat like she did with the Planned Parenthood Supreme Court judge? Or would she reload and stand up for those common sense conservative values she keeps talking about?

        • powertothepeople

          and it does not mean all agree with your assessment. I think he hit some nails on the head above. Don’t like it, don’t respond. Think he is not adding to the site, hit the contact button. But pious does not suit you well. Seems hypocritical of you to take the time to count his posts and whine about him speaking his opinion on Palin when quite a few of your overall posts are nothing more than RA RA Palin cheers. Is it only pro Palin people who are allowed to post anything about her in your opinion?

          • kestrel

            You didn’t even look at my history, or you might see that only 5 of my 30 latest comments make any reference at all to Palin.

            I generally stay out of Palin comment threads because there is seldom anything new in them (as here), and they usually degenerate (as here). I appreciate that you are a frequent commenter, p2p, and I understand your point. Thanks. I’ll to back to staying out unless I can actually bring something new.

          • powertothepeople

            you need to stay out, nor that you always cheer for her. But you have made quite a few comments for her, this guy has made more against her but at the end of the day it is all opinion.

            My issue with both sides is that there tends to be a group on the pro palin side that if you say anything negative about here you are called a misogynist, a lefty, etc. Dare question her leadership abilities and or her past as gov, and they cry like a kicked school boy, Then you have the group on the other side that if you dare praise her, you get nailed to the wall. A person does not even have to say they support her for president and the attack machine comes out.

            I do not support her for president at all. Would only support her in the general. But I have also stated many times there are numerous things I respect about her with the biggest being the fact that with all the pressure that came against her, she chose to keep Trig. I also respect beyond measure how she has loved that boy both in private life and in the public eye.

            I just think that yourself and others would do the site and your side much better if you debate the person who has spoke something you do not agree with without starting in with the names or the “thats all you type about” nonsense. We can all tell the difference between the people who will back up “I support her” or “I do not support her” with a reason or reasons and the ones who just bobble head and act as if she is Jesus or the Devil.

          • ruexperienced

            Palin is good at what she does. But she would be a train wreck for the Republican Party and the conservative movement if she won the nomination.

    • rsu65

      entry is; some on the right are killing Palin with faint praise. Fred Barnes (weekly standard) repeats the political template very well when he falls in line with the so-called GOP “establishment” and alludes she is not a serious threat to win the 2112 primary election.

      LeGuern serves the same purpose here by severly downgrading Palin’s chances in an election and her executive experiences and abilities. She will make an excellent President of the United States. She will bring passion, clear thinking and decisiveness to the job. Palin is on the right side of the issues and will unite the country in the same way that Ronald Regan did. She has the ability to shatter the propaganda screen set up by our establishment friends and other nay sayers.

    • Doc Holliday

      The first question any conservative or Republican should be able to answer about a candidate is this; “Do you see this person as the Commander in Chief of the most powerful military in human history”.

  • Goldwater_Conservative

    the same as Tump and in fact she is trying to out-trump Donald as she is now weighing in on the birther issue. She is not a serious anything except publicity magnet. The Palinistas that continue to follow her prove that they suffer from severe koolaid brain damage. Lets put down the pom poms, smell the roses and realize that the quitta from wasilla is not a factor, nor should she be.

    • ruexperienced

      When it was not cool for candidates to talk about the Obama birth certificate, she called it a “distraction.”

      Now when Trump is stealing her headlines, she now wants to talk about it.

    • phlogiston

      As in pro-choicer Barry Goldwater? That WOULD explain your opposition to Palin. As if the rest of your comment doesn’t sound like something from the Daily Kos.

      • Goldwater_Conservative

        and I love people that actually have stood for that cause like Bauchmann. She has been a fearless advocate of life her entire life, not just when people paid her lots of money for it. My problem is I can spot frauds a mile away, and Palin is a classic fraud.

        • Josh LeGuern

          She quit because she could not effectively run her state because Democratic operatives where sent there to drive her Governorship into the ground by hounding her with abusive law suits. When she tried to do stuff to help her raise money to pay for the suits (like set up a legal defense fund, write a book) they sued her over the defense fund and threaten to sue if she went on a book tour.

          Palin was a great Governor. She left her state in good shape with a $12 billion surplus. She was committed to making sure that Alaska became more self sufficient, which is also why she supported Joe Miller in last year’s senate race, which he would have won, by the way, had Princess Lisa not thrown a hissy-fit.

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

            You don’t do facts do you.

            She quit because she got caught in the web of her own ethics bill. were most of the charges frivolous? Absolutely. The email mess isn’t. Using private email accounts for business will get you walked out the door – immediately – in about any regulated business in the country. In my company, use a private email account or call a client on a telephone that isn’t connected to a monitored, recorded line and you’ll last about 10 minutes after the discovery. That goes from the lowliest person on the org chart to the CEO.

            All she had to do to avoid any possible liability was have the State AG – her guy – certify that what she’d done conformed to her duties as Governor and she could have washed her hands of the charges. Game over.

            As far as Joe Miller is concerned, he lost because he is an idiot. Oh, and “not a good candidate” either. He won the primary most because Lisa was a no-show and more because there was “values” proposition on the ballot that brought out big numbers in Palin’s hometown who voted for Joe. The rest of the State has no use for him. Or her. She likely won’t carry AK if she is our candidate.

          • NHConservative0227

            How many regulars here at Redstate have logged on and made posts while at work? According to Becker’s logic they should all be walked out the door right?

            Palin wouldn’t carry her own state? Be honest, is this a cut and paste from the Huffington Post or Daily Kos?

            She was only the governor with the highest approval ratings in the country with an above 90% rating before Obama’s minions and the media started the attacks.

            Since then Palin has withstood all the attacks, refused to back down, and is the only one who’s been taking the fight to Obama over the last two and a half years.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            I know a severe koolaid rush can attack brain cells and such, but this is too much even for a palinista. How can you say she “refused to back down” she is EX govenor, and how did that happen? She backed down. Now she wont back down from saying Trump-like things to make money off of the koolaiders, but she does back down when it really matters. The ironic thing is she is giving a speech about how great Walker is, and he is, but the main key is instead of being talking clown Walker is making a difference from his seat as executive of his state. Palin had that chance, she could have been a true warrior like Walker but she choose the easy and self-serving route instead.

          • NHConservative0227

            That has been attacked as relentlessly as Palin has over the last 2 and a half years. No one comes even close.

            She’s accused of causing mass murder and instead of shutting her mouth, Palin doubled down and right right after the lamestream media.

            Why can’t you acknowledge the obvious? That Alaska law required Palin to use her own finances to fight the bogus ethics charges? Would you have rather she went bankrupt? Should she have completely wasted the taxpayers money by having the govenors office do nothing but process paperwork for these bogus charges?

            Who is your candidate btw? Who are you leaning towards?

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            quite a lot, and would agree with that, but to say that it doesnt make her back down is not consistent with reality. If she were still governor, then yes, I would be with you. And yes, if I would have fought that charge all the way into bankruptcy ala Rangel. If you cant stand for your integrity, what will you stand for?

            I’m leaning towards Pawlenty or Daniels but Ryan has always been my guy if he decides to jump in.

          • NHConservative0227

            That is insane. How high and mighty of you to say someone else should go bankrupt to prove a point!

            It also neglects that fact that the governors office was bogged down in all the paperwork for the bogus charges. That means they’d be wasting the taxpayers money while really getting nothing done. Palin stayed through the end of the legislation session and left it in good hands with Gov. Parnell.

            I’ll give you credit for at least mentioning who you’re leaning towards unlike mbecker.

            Pawlenty: former supporter of state-wide cap and tax in Minnesota. This right here is worse than any “supposed” negative for Palin. Also, Pawlenty piled on when everyone was attacking Palin after Tucson. Pawlenty told the lamestream media that he wouldn’t have used crosshairs! Does that sound like a leader to you?

            Daniels: Is is one of the establishment picks. He was Bush’s Budget director for about 4 years under which we saw a dramatic increase in spending. Daniels supports a VAT tax, wants a truce on social issues, and doesn’t view illegal immigration as a top priority in Indiana. In his first term as govenor, he wanted to tax those making over $250 K, but it was shot down by the GOP legislature.

            I also recently just learned this from listening to Mark Levin, easily the worst thing about Daniels:

            http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261285/mitch-daniels-s-obamacare-problem-michael-f-cannon

            Ryan: He’s the best of the three you mentioned. I think he’s very smart and has put forth some very good proposals. It should be noted that Palin supported his original Roadmap. However, I don’t think a congressman can make the jump to the oval office. He has no executive experience, period.

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

            All she had to do was pick up the phone when the s*storm started, call HER Attorney General or HER chief ethics officer (I can’t recall the official title) and have them officially certify – no legislative action required – that her actions in the matters in question were within the scope of her official duties as Governor. Game over. She has no liability whatsoever. The State would have defended the State against any liability and overall legal cost for that, in the world of legal defense, would have been chump change and she would not have “had to” resign from office.

            Gee, I wonder why she never made the call? Or maybe she did and was told no.

          • NHConservative0227

            What Alaska Statute does your argument fall under and where did you get this info?

            Since you’re accusing the Palin of failing to go to the AG for certification that the matters were within the scope of her official duties, why didn’t the AG step forward with this so-called certification if that were the case? The state was affected to the tune of almost $2 million dollars in wasted time & resources defending the bogus complaints & Palin’s personal legal fees
            added up to around $500,000.

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

            The relevant statutes are as follows: Alaska Statute (AS) 09.50.250 and .253 and the implementing regulations at 9 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 33.010. Bottom line, state law provides both legal defense and indemnification in actions filed against a State officer or employee if the complained of act was within the scope of the officer or employee?s employment.

            Why didn’t the AG step up? I have no idea, I’m not a mind reader. I’ll guess for you though and my guess would be that the AG might have thought that her actions weren’t within the scope of her duties as Governor. The state had a long standing policy on email that predated Palin and I would guess that was a minefield the AG didn’t want to waltz through. In addition, since the AG is technically a subordinate of the Governor, there could possibly be some serious conflict of interest issues if he stepped up.

            The real questiion though, since it was Palin’s tuckis and Palin’s money if she didn’t as for indemnification, is why didn’t she step up? I can guarantee you that if I had half a mil on the line I wouldn’t think twice about making that phone call. Unless, of course, I had a pretty good idea I wouldn’t get it…

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            office that isnt “bogged” down in FOIMR, ethics compliants, and other such issues? Thats part of the job, and thats why those with legal backgrounds usually inhabit those offices. How much worse do you think it would be if she became President? So you are saying she should go out there and say “well I had to quit as govennor of Alaska because of all the paper work, but I think I’m ready for President of the US”?

            And you can play RHINOplasty with all my candidates, I dont really care. I’m not a utopian pureist, I realize whoever we pick will have a few fleas on them. But what I am after is someone who has exibited strong executive leadership over a long period of time, having to deal with both republican and democrats. The may not have a perfectly scorecard with the tea party, but then again they wont be voting, they will be leading and I want a leader to do that, not a spit baller.

          • acat

            You’re going to have to learn to do a better job of explaining that one away…

            Further, I don’t accept “being attacked by the media” as a reason to vote for someone for POTUS.

            The process of “being vetted by the media” is supposed to weed out candidates who”won’t play in Peoria” … but the Fourth Estate have become a bit too political for our own good and deliberately botched the vetting of Obama.

            This is all the ore reason to be very skeptical of both what they have to say and what they don’t have to say about any GOP candidate. Including Palin.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            which really says all you need to know.

            Palin didn’t anticipate that that a bunch of leftist hacks would take advantage of it to try to ruin her.

            Just like I didn’t anticipate that you guys at Redstate would still harp on a leftist talking point that has already been disproven countless times.

          • acat

            Yes, they changed the law she championed and signed after they used it against her. If she didn’t see that flaw in the law, then yes, that is her problem.

            Further, aAre you really saying bankrupcy was her only option? I don’t believe it. What of her legal defense fund? What of using campaign funds? What of countersuing for damages? If the charges were baseless, she should be able to recover her expenses. What of requiring the state to pay for it?

            It’s not the talking points that are the problem, NHCon. It’s that you lack the ability to effectively refute them.

            Mew

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

            Give me a break. She wrote the law to wrap up her Republican targets, she used the law against Republicans in exactly the same way she got caught.

            And, the one issue that is still outstanding although with no liability attached – the private emails – was an ethics violation long before her new law.

            As far as “didn’t anticipate”, the woman is a hard ball politician. If she missed something this obvious I sure don’t want her dealing with either the Democrats in DC or negotiating with Middle Eastern Islamists.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            explaination way too many times to count. And everytime we hear it, we all become a little bit dumber in the process.

            When you have been charged with an official ethics violation, thats an attack on your credibility, your character. You fight that all the way to the end like Rangel did, you dont pull an OJ and jump in the Bronco and speed off. We will never know if she really is guilty or not, but her actions indicate guilt.

          • Finrod

            Sarah Palin was completely cleared on all of the ethics violation charges. If you actually paid attention to things said here about her, you’d know this already– the below url was quoted the last time this was brought up.

            http://doa.alaska.gov/dop/fileadmin/PersonnelBoardReports/MoneganComplaint.pdf

          • Finrod

            I’m eating my words now. That url concerns ‘Troopergate’, not the ethics stuff. As far as I know none of the ethics charges ever stuck, or else I’m sure someone would be trumpeting that fact to the heavens by now.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            to not quit. If I’m govenor and I get accused of something I didnt do, I can promise you, the last thing I’m going to do is resign.

          • acat

            And, as I said to NHCon above, it’s not just that there are narratives that explain these things away… it’s also that her supporters have to figure out what the narratives are, and be willing and able to keep repeating them ad nauseum if they want to change her terrible poliing numbers in the “squishy middle”.

            Either that, or .. get used to Candidate RINO.

            Mew

          • AceInTX

            I doubt any of us could stand the scrutiny of an investigation of our use of official email…

            I suspect that charge will quietly slip away into the night becuase if they blow that horn too loudly…they’ll end up blowing their own ear drums.

            Palin has some answering to do before I’ll support her…but using official email to conduct private business will get nowhere with most voters because there would be too many looking in the mirror…I suspect some here who are trashing her over the issue have dirty hands as well.

          • aesthete

            that she herself wrote, promoted, and ensnared other Reps with that would be the clincher — rules for thee, but not for me and that sort of thing. That, the lack of transparency, and (potentially) the content of those emails would make it hard to sympathize with Ms Palin, methinks.

            (With that said, I have essentially the same experience as ‘becker with official email — even as a wet behind the ears Airman, I had it drilled into my head not to use official computers, email, etc to do anything that would embarrass you or that you would rather have revealed public or to your boss.)

          • AceInTX

            I see one side making the argument that all the charges made against Paling by the Dem Smear machine have been thrown out to which the anti Palins reply with the bit about emails…I make the point that that one will wither on the vine because there isn’t a sole in this country who haven’t used official emails to ask hubby or wife to pick up a gallon of milk or a dozen eggs on the way home…so you move the goal posts that it’s not the emails but the double standard…

            I’ve got my issues with Palin but I go along with someone in this thread that said…she’d not Lucifer…not is she Jesus….I don’t have her at the top of my list…nor is she at the bottom…

            Let’s just say, I’m amused by the level of hyperventilating vitriol that spews forth at the mere mention of her name or anything anyone says in praise of her by some here…I’m equally amused by the sycophants who believe she can do no wrong and doesn’t have anything at all to answer for before she can be anointed as the “Anti-One” and savior of the Republican Party and the great Republic.

          • acat
          • AceInTX

            but I could be wrong…we’ll see then where I land on her

          • acat

            She’s doing a really good job of faking it…

            Mew

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

            a really major problem, I’ve been subject to the same rules for 20 years and I understand the rationale behind the rule. Personally, for that alone I wouldn’t hire her to sweep the floor in my office.

            The real problem for isn’t going to be the blatant ethics violation because frankly, I doubt most people will either understand or care. And while the violation will certainly get some play, it will be secondary and won’t last long. What will be in the media for a loooooooooooong time will be individual email exchanges that will be, if not damning, certainly embarrassing. As you can guess, people put on a totally different hat when using private email v company monitored email. There will be all kinds of juicy stuff in the thousands of emails and Palin will be front page news for weeks and I seriously doubt she’ll be talking to the media about the issue which will really fuel the fires. And further drop her F/U with Indies.

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

            resigned.

            Troopergate refers to the use of private, eg: Yahoo, email accounts to conduct state business. I’m pretty sure there is no outstanding charge or liability for Palin, but there is a fairly large batch of emails that are scheduled to be released by the State of Alaska sometime in May.

            A couple of points on this one…

            • Firing the trooper in question, based on what I remember about the incident, should have been a no-brainer administrative task for a fairly low level HR gnome.
            • Palin got personally involved in the details when she should have handed off a rountine personnel matter.
            • Because of Palin’s direct involvement, the whole thing spun out of control.
            • Palin and several of her administrative folk for reasons I won’t speculate on, decided to use private email accounts for apparently extensive discussions of the issue likely including some personal attacks on the trooper in question since he was personally known to some if not all.
            • The State ethics law, written and passed by Palin, forbids the use of private email for state business. That is a rule that is consistent with every government agency I know anything about (and that’s just a few, but they are consistent), and every private business that operates in a highly regulated environment. In my current company (I’m an employee not an owner), send a client a private email or make a call to a client on a non-monitored, non-recorded line and your career is instantly over. It literally takes about 10 minutes from the time the infraction is discovered to get approval of the General Counsel to terminate someone for this, no second chances.
            • I have no idea what the status of the trooper is currently or whether he is still being investigated, although I doubt it.
            • Palin’s problem will be the content of the private emails. Use of the private accounts is a clear, blackletter violation of the ethics law she wrote. It can be perceived that the people involved used private accounts to avoid transparency in the personnel process regarding the trooper.

            I will be real surprised if there are any “smoking guns” found in the emails when they are released in May. What there will be however, is tons of fodder that will be stitched together and a bunch of questions which will hit the front pages and, if history is any guide, Palin will either blow them off or strike back as if they are a personal attack. Given that her F/U numbers with Independents, most of whom get their news from the MSM, are huge minuses across the board, I don’t think the press coverage and her probable reaction to it will help her at all.

            I’m obviously guessing at her reaction, but given that she hasn’t talked to a single reporter in two plus years who could be considered “hostile” nor has she taken questions from anybody other than fans who don’t ask hard questions and don’t follow up on blase answers, I don’t see her changing her mode of operation for this. But we’ll see.

          • ruexperienced

            We already know a little more about Palin from the few emails that were released by her aide in February.

            Palin emailed: “I HATE THIS D@MN JOB!!!” two months before she quit. That will come back to haunt her.

            Palin also stated in an email that Newt Gingrich, who was coming to Alaska to help her raise money, was “an egotistical, narrow minded machine goon.”

            I think there will be LOTS more gems in the emails that have yet to be released.

          • AceInTX

            Bah!!! I wish the title box had spell check

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

            He deals in partisan bs press releases – much like the Palin worshipers – I deal in fact. When I deal in opinion, I label it as such. Unlike both Begala and Palin zipper crowd who are showing off their ignorance and stupidity on a post by post basis.

            I’m not trying to take Palin down, and you and I both know i couldn’t if I wanted to. And, I don’t even want to. She’s a valuable commodity and has the ability to do some good things. Running for POTUS isn’t, and won’t, be one of them.

          • AceInTX

            I know you’re capable of making a point without being insulting and acting like an ass…but you refuse to do so.

            I share a lot of the concerns you have about Palin and there are good arguments to be made about why she shouldn’t be POTUS…but calling anyone who supports her stupid adults living in their basement with their zipper down and their member in their hand at the thought of Palin being President isn’t a legitimate way to debate.

            As far as the Dem/Parker/Begala talking points you’re laying out here, she was exonerated in the investigation. And as I recall…she was exonerated in that investigation BEFORE she resigned.

            I’d stick to the relevant points that she was naive when she pushed all those investigations and ethics rules through to think they wouldn’t be used on her and she shouldn’t be POTUS because of her Naivet?. I would also stick with the quitting aspect…if she won’t stand and fight wen she’s under the gun as Gov then how could she be counted on as POTUS….she quit once so we can expect the same tactics employ by the Demoncrats to be used on her in Washington as were used in AK.

            you told me once I was better than that…my advice to you is the same…you can do better than you’ve done for quite a while here being an insulting bafoon

          • AceInTX
    • 20jan2013

      You’re a freak. She’s a good woman and a damn sight better than Nobama. I agree with everything mbecker said about the negatives she does have, but she aint no damn freak!

      No pom poms here, and I’d be able to smell the roses a lot better if the stench from your bullcrap wasn’t overwhelming them!!!

      • Goldwater_Conservative

        recent one anyway….Donald Trump, Dennis Kuchinich, Jesse Ventrua, the Govinator, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanon, Ross Perot, and yes Sarah Palin.

        All of these people are side-shows, they are funny, they may make some good points from time to time, but no one should ever take them seriously about anything.

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

    Following an equally excellent introduction by Breitbart.

    They both did well what they do well, and that’s throw red meat to a friendly crowd while insiting the Democrats. There’s no better twosome that I can think of at doing what they did yesterday.

    I’m not sure that translates into an ability to prioritize, make cogent policy and build legislative coalitions to actually accomplish anything. I also don’t know how it plays with the vast unwashed middle who happen to be the folks who will elect the next President. I’ve never doubted Palin’s ability to pull out a primary win. It’s the general, OTOH, where she’s got to make huge strides.

    We’ll see how things lay out over the next week or so with her F/U polling numbers and then there’s still May coming up.

    • calvin58

      Well put Mr. Becker

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

      we have had , and persist in sending forth year after year, far too many who want to build legislative coalitions. It is not a lack of cogent policy it is a conservative policy that we need.

      Neither the polls nor the constant attacks by the MSM scare me. Polls are like a yo-yo. What does scare me is sending forth another Rino candidate, a coalition builder, someone who will make no effort to defeat and destroy the socialist wave our nation now rides toward it’s destruction. Palin may not even run, who knows? But if the can of socialism and financial disaster keeps getting kicked down the road because Republicans just want to ride the wave, then God help us.

      • Josh LeGuern

        This is exactly what I was originally referring to, Palin isn’t “ideal” she isn’t Reagan II, but she’s good enough. She’s got the right principles and she’s done a similar job before.

        Let’s give her a go!

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

        is because you don’t know anything about polling.

        • Finrod

          Then you’re the one that doesn’t know anything about polling.

          Look at my most recent diary post, where I go over Rasmussen’s 2012 numbers, such as they are, so far. First of all, they have Ron Paul matching up best against Obama at this point, and if you believe that, I have some beachfront property in Oklahoma to sell you. Second, thanks to the margin of error involved, about the only thing solid that could be gotten out of them is that Ron Paul is polling better than Newt Gingrich against Obama.

          Pretty much all the scary polls at this point are polls of Adults, which are only useful for putting a ceiling on Dem support and a floor on Rep support, and perhaps not even for that.

          Anyone that can draw conclusions from 2012 polls at this point, other than that Gingrich and Palin have been demagogued by the media, and that some Republicans like Herman Cain aren’t very well known yet, well, that person is lying to your face.

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

            What I’m looking at are the F/U polls over time as they trend. I put no stock whatsoever in head to head polling because we don’t officially have candidates and we don’t even know what the real issues will be.

            Individual matchups at this point – and for a long time to come – are meaningless.

            Watching the F/U trend is very valuable because it measures the personal impression an individual candidate makes on various groups of voters. It’s especially useful because polling firms do these over time so you can get a solid trend. The other thing that’s useful is that the political bent of the polling firm doesn’t so much matter since it’s a trend over time and you can also measure the trend lines of a group of pollsters from a variety of political perspectives.

            Specifically for Palin, she’s in trouble with Independent voters. Her F/Us are in the minus double digits and are consistently going down. If she doesn’t do something to turn that trend around, she’s toast, no matter the price of gas.

          • ruexperienced

            How does Palin get the support of everyone she has spent the last two years mocking?

            How does she get the support of RINOs like Murkowski, Snowe, etc? Blue Bloods who support the Bush family? Independent voters who like Michelle Obama? Conservative Democrats who like and respect Gabrielle Giffords?

            Does she go back to all of them and say, “…Just kidding! Now I need your vote.”

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

            she’s built a pretty high wall that will have to be taken down in order for her to be competitive in the General. We don’t know how or if she can do it because she hasn’t tried.

    • kestrel

      “America By Heart” has reappeared on the Washing Post’s list of political best-sellers. The WaPo’s writer says, “the fact that it?s selling well again (at least this past week) seems to defy the notion, popping up in scores of articles lately, that her influence is waning and she?s less of a force than she once was.” Here.

    • NHConservative0227

      Palin has an excellent record, contrary to what you believe.

      Also, polls mean nothing at this point.

      Finally, we need someone with some backbone to take on Obama. Unless you want to vote for Trump, Palin is that candidate.

      • acat

        Palin has a mediocre record as an executive, she was no hero of fiscal conservatism while an executive. All that has come after.

        Becker’s said it repeatedly – polls showing head-to-head matchups are useless, but polls that show how the squishy middle feel about a candidate do matter.. and Palin’s unfavorable numbers are going to be very hard for her to overcome without some narratives to explain why she made various boneheaded moves.

        As for backbone, quitting – twice – does not, to me, speak of having a spine. Instead, it shows a tendency to run away and live to fight another day. I don’t have a problem with her quititng, but I do have a problem with the lack of narrative to explain why, after getting caught by an ethics law that she herself championed, Palin “was forced to quit”.

        Mew

        • NHConservative0227

          In fact, they’re not even mediocre.

          As Governor:

          Palin passed ACES resulted which resulted in a $12B surplus, she saved 8.5%, and cut 85% of earmarks.

          Palin also cut spending during boom times of 9.5%, cut earmarks by 86%, and created jobs in her state.

          Doesn’t sound like a mediocre executive to me.

          Quitting twice?

          As Oil and Gas Commissioner she took at corruption in the GOP. She refused to play ball with Murkowski and resigned instead. Most others, including most in the House right now, would’ve simply went along. At the time many thought it was the end of Palin’s political career….

          Which is funny since many thought the same when she resigned as governor.

          These were bogus charges from Obama’s thugs. Nothing has come out of it! All you’re doing is repeating the same old tired, leftist talking points on the “she quit” mantra. What was she supposed to do? Go personally bankrupt? Have the state waste the taxpayers money while wasting time dealing with these bogus charges instead of doing real work?

          Please come back with something stronger than this.

          • acat

            It’s not the talking points that are hurting Palin, or that really concern me. I’d be happy to support Palin in the general. I don’t think she’s the best candidate, but she’s far from the worst.

            No, my problem isn’t with her – it’s with her supporters. There’s no concept of how to do an effective rejection of the Dem talking points by, among others, you. There’s no way to win the middle without that rejection taking place, and ads and a reality show won’t cut it. The grass roots supporters – you – have to get this or she’s toast.

            Palin’s budgets were each larger than the one before, each grew the size of government, each paid out more State money to the citizens (in something that walks and quacks like the welfare duck…) than the one before. Yes, she did some arguably good things, some of which have bene undone by her Repub. successor. How do you explain this?

            Palin did quit. Twice. You have to come up with a narrative that explains this. Yes, the first time did not end her career because she was able to take what she knew and break up the Murkowski old-boy-network somewhat. Not enough to get Lisa to retired from the Senate, mind, but enough to make a name for herself as a reformer.

            The second time she quit, it was in the face of frivolous complaints, true. The problem is that she couldn’t figure out how to get rid of the complaints.. and she’s going to face much harsher criticism if she actually wins the GOP nomination. You have to come up with a way to explain how this makes sense.

            “Protecting her family” does not wash; if that were true, she would have just retired. Nothing more protective than going quiet. She didn’t do that, so…

            “Couldn’t win” does not wash; there’s always a way to win.

            “Costing the taxpayers money” does not wash; filing countersuits for damages is within the ability of the A.G.’s office.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            You guys just keep repeating the same leftist talking points.

            As for the “she quit” line. I already addressed that. Most reasonable people will be able to understand why she didn’t go bankrupt spending her own money and wasting time in the govenors office with the paperwork for these bogus charges. It’s not really that hard to understand, well maybe it is for you and mbecker.

            As for the budget, you have to at the least mention how the fedearl government owns close to 99% of the land in Alaska. There is no state tax, sales tax, or property tax. Kind of hard to generate revenue!

            Overall Palin’s budgets were still better than the two previous governors:

            Governor Murkowski?s last budget FY2007: $11,697,400,000
            http://gov.state.ak.us/omb/08_…
            Governor Palin?s latest budget FY2010: $10,570,000,000
            http://www.gov.state.ak.us/omb…
            Total reduction in spending between 2007 and 2010: a whopping 9.5% or $1,127,400,000
            FFY07- Murkowski?s federal requests total: 63 projects @ $349,497,000
            FFY10- Governor Palin?s federal requests total: 8 projects @ $69,100,000
            That was a gigantic 80% drop in federal requests by the Alaska governor?s office.
            FFY2007- Gov. Murkowski 63 projects at $349,497,000
            FFY08- Gov. Palin 52 projects at $256,037,000
            FFY09- Gov. Palin 31 projects at $195,094,900
            FFY10- Gov. Palin: 8 projects @ $69,100,000

          • NHConservative0227

            Who are you supporting or leaning towards?

            I’d like to compare their records and chances to that of Gov. Palin!

          • Doc Holliday

            you tell a guy he is repeating “leftist talking points”, then ask him who he is supporting so you can compare the records? I don’t speak for anyone but myself, but I have seen that ambush a thousand times on the net. I would not give you anything, all that would come back is bile.

          • acat

            On one paw, you say that Palin reduced the number of Fed projects.
            On the other paw, you say that most of Alaska is owned by the Fed.

            Seems to me that, in this, Murkowski had the right idea – the Fed darn well better pony up, since they’re property owners.

            As for 2012, I’m not leaning at this time, I’m still evaluating. I’m looking at Barbour and Cain and Daniels and Gingrich and Giuliani and Palin and Pawlenty and Romney and Roemer and finding that none of them are really all that great.

            I like that Pawlenty has done a solid job of balacing the Minnesota budget using the line item veto, and in the face of a hostile Dem statehouse. IIRC, Palin had a GOP-led statehouse…

            I like that Barbour has run successful nationwide campaigns before, and knows both the other GOP governors and many in the Senate and House. That kind of synergy will serve him well, if the non-southerners can get over their anti-Foghorn-Leghorn-phobia… (hat tip to G.C. for the term)

            I like that Daniels is a budget hawk – we really need one at the Federal level. I’m not sure he can turn around the flak he’s taking over the “truce” statement.

            Palin and Cain can both give a tremendous, fire-breathing conservative speech.

            Gingrich is a policy wonk of the first order, and knows how congress actually works, having run the House. He was also quite involved in turning Tip O’Neil’s axiom that all politics is local politics on its’ head by helping win local races based on a national idea – the Contract with America. His personal life is messy, though, which will hurt him in the South.

            Giuliani’s record on crime is outstanding, and as he comes from NY, he’s likely got a better handle on Wall Street shenanigans than any other GOP candidate. We could really use that skill set. His personal life is also messy, and he’s a liberal or moderate on many non-fiscal issues, though, so I don’t see how he wins the nomination.

            Cain has serous business cred, has run a nationwide trade group, and has a successful radio show on a major southern station. Cain can think on his feet, and has a good bit of “free” goodwill.

            Far as I can tell, Roemer is looking to pad his retirement income.

            Romney is better, on Wall Street, than Giuliani, but lacks the law enforcement background. He’s also weaker than Daniels as a budget hawk, and he has yet to come up with a good way to shed the Romneycare albatross.

            Unlike you, NHCon, who have settled on one candidate and are satisfied to make up stories, I’m looking at all of them, seeing their strengths and weaknesses, and will make my decision once the time is right. What you’re doing is like watching the first week of American Idol auditions, and trying to pick the winner.

            Mew

          • Doc Holliday

            what about Bachman? She has my vote now, but their is a long way to go.

          • NHConservative0227

            If Palin doesn’t run then I’d support Bachmann. I respect MB for fighting the GOP establishment. She’s been sounding the alarm about the $105B in Obamacare that was in the CR and fighting for incandescent light bulbs.

            I choose Palin over MB due to executive experience. Palin has a great record as a two term mayor and as governor. MB has never held an executive position in public office. Plus she’s only shown the ability to win her congsessional district, not the ability to even win state-wide as a senator or governor does.

          • Doc Holliday

            and she does not have the Palin family baggage. In the end, I doubt Sarah runs, she is better as a lightning rod and I think she knows it.

          • acat

            I’d like to see some additional executive experience, but she’s doing a great job of shining light on the dreadful state of GOP house leadership.

            I’m hesitant to support any current House or Senate conservative rock stars (DeMint, forex) for POTUS simply because we need ‘em where they are.

            Mew

          • Doc Holliday

            .

          • Doc Holliday

            it seems like we are playing double A right now. Romney could not do it last time, so why would he pull it off now? Pence, Pawlenty et al just seem like empty suits to me. I would think Rubio is better than all of them at this point, but he can’t run. I wonder how serious the Repubs are about taking Obama down.

          • acat

            The problem with the GOP, especially the D.C. wing, is the excess of big-government, statist types. They want to change the names on the Czars’ doors, not get rid of the Czars altogether….

            I’m disgusted with the group. The only chance for success that I can see, though, is for Coldwarrior and the Precinct Project to succeed in getting more conservatives into the process early enough to kick some of the statists to the curb where they belong.

            Mew

          • Doc Holliday

            and you are right. In fact, I think things are getting quite serious now. Obama is going to build the largest war chest in the history of politics. And we have more people focused on Donald Trump than anyone else. It seems we don’t have serious people for serious times. And Americans just blindly watch the teevee as report after report says America is becoming a second rate nation.

          • Doc Holliday

            http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/18/dod-probe-doubts-remarks-attributed-by-rolling-stone-to-mcchrystal-aides/

            I don’t know his politics, but I do love a warrior. It would be so sweet if he ran and brought big ears down.

          • acat

            He’s apparently running for POTUS in 2012. I figure he’s looking for the Fed matching funds for his retirement account.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Palin wants to reduce federal ownership of the land in Alaska so they don’t have to depend so much on the federal gov’t. The links I provided shows that the budget was reduced more under her than it did under the previous two governors despite tremendous obstacles.

            Since you’re still evaluating all the candidates, compare Palin to these guys:

            1. Romney: Romneycare pretty much says it all. It’s the father to Obamacare, pretty much the same thing but on the state level. Even though 59% of American favor repeal of Obamacare, if Romney is the nominee the issue is taken off the table. I mean I can’t help but fear that Romney would seek to “fix and improve” Obamacare instead of repealing it. Plus where has this guy been the last few years? Has he been outspoken on anything? Finally, Mitt flip flops so much he makes John Kerry look firm in his positions. Mitt has changed his mind on abortion, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and even Reagan (he said he didn’t want to go back to Reagan-Bush while debating Teddy Kennedy).

            2. Trump: This guy is nothing but a fraud seeking attention. He talks a big game now but what was he doing last year? Has anyone seen him at any previous Tea Parties? In February 2010 he donated to Anthony Weiner– Congressman from NY who’s one of the writers of Obamacare! Trump has also donated to Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emmanuel. While Bush was in office Trump said Bush was the worst president of all time. That Obama had a chance to be a really good president. Now Trump is saying Obama is the worst!!! In the 90′s Trump was a proponent of single payer health care.

            3. Huckabee: He still supports cap and tax. As Ark governor he weighed kids in public schools. He supports Moochelle Obama’s food police program. Huckabee has given numerous clemencies to violent criminals who should’ve remained in prison (including the killer of the 4 dead cops on Seattle). He also raised alot of taxes as governor.

            4. Gingrich: He supports ethanol subsidies. He supported Dede Scozzafavva in the NY23rd (one of the worst RINO’s ever who supported Acorn!). Newt even sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi in a stop global warming ad ! Usually I don’t talk about candidates personal lives, but I found it pathetic that Newt said one of the reasons for his affairs was that he loved his country so much!

            5. Pawlenty: Former support of statewide cap and tax in Minnesota. Also, while everyone was blaming Sarah Palin for Tucson, Pawlenty piled on by saying he wouldn’t have used cross-hairs himself!

            6. Daniels is one of the establishment picks. He was Bush’s Budget director for about 4 years under which we saw a dramatic increase in spending. Daniels supports a VAT tax, wants a truce on social issues, and doesn’t view illegal immigration as a top priority in Indiana.

            I also recently just learned this from listening to Mark Levin, easily the worst thing about Daniels:

            http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261285/mitch-daniels-s-obamacare-problem-michael-f-cannon

            7. Barbour: He supports Moochelle Obama’s food police program just like Huckabee. He also doesn’t think of illegal immigration as too much of a problem, he won’t go after employers of illegals:

            http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/14/barbour-lobbied-for-mini-amnesty/

            As you can see all 7 of the candidates listed above have serious questions in regards to their conservative credentials. Palin does not, all she has is a bunch of bogus smears from the media and mbecker.

          • acat

            Your reply above is full of crap.

            I am not watching Huckabee or Trump, not sure why you bothered to list them.

            Pawlenty was concerned about global warming before the scope of the scam “science” was made public, and did so in a blue state that’s quite dependent on the environment – both tourism and agriculture. The Dems in Minnesota have been out to get him for years and .. that’s all you got?

            You’re right that Gingrich has some problems, he may have been in D.C. too long, but his negatives are paltry compared to Palin’s.

            Daniels may have some issues, but he’s also the best on the budget, hands down. Also, Indiana doesn’t have an illegal immigration problem – they have an illegal-and-drug-smuggling problem – straight up I-65 – to Chicago.

            You didn’t address Cain or Giuliani or Roemer, who I specifically brought up.

            And you *still* haven’t convinced me that Palin is significantly better than any except Romney.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            1. I list Newt sitting on that couch with Pelosi, supporting ethanol, and supporting Scozzafavva yet his negatives are paltry compared to Palin’s??? I didn’t think you were as bad as mbecker, but you may be getting close with this kind of a statement?

            That’s not to mention that Newt has ZERO executive experience.

            2. Nice job defending Pawlenty. FYI: Palin has always been against cap and tax and does not believe in global warming. She actually sued the Bush administration for trying to add polar bears to the extinction list. Also, I noticed you completely ignored Pawlenty throwing Palin under the bus with the “I wouldn’t have used crosshairs” remark. Does character not matter? What about sucking up to the liberal media?

            3. Nice job ignoring Daniels Romneycare problem. The guy increases a gov’t health care program and has the rest of the country pay for it, but he’s still better than Sarah! Also, listen to Mark Levin sometime to hear what he thinks about Daniels.

            4. Rudy: I like the guy. Would’ve supported him 2008 if it weren’t for the fact that NYC was a sanctuary city under him and he would not go after the employers of illegals. Plus, Rudy has alot of work to do to make up the gap with social issues he has with many social conservatives. I don’t think he’ll run anyways and think he actually likes Palin.

            5. Cain: I like him alot better than the others I listed. I don’t think the first ever office he’ll win is the presidency. Especially when the only time he ever ran for office, he couldn’t beat a RINO in his home state of Georgia.

            6. Roemer: Who???

          • acat

            Palin is about mid-tier in the list. Better than Romney, Roemer or Ron Paul for sure. She could, at this point, win the nomination.

            What I don’t see is how she converts that into a general election win since it immediately becomes all about her and her negatives, instead of a referendum on Obama’s policies. Her negatives among non-aligned voters – i.e. the ones who actually *matter* – are terrible and getting worse.

            One of the reasons they’re getting worse is that her own supporters aren’t effective in defending her. Case in point – you want to go off and talk about everyone elses’ flaws instead of addressing hers. Bob Dole tried that against Clinton, didn’t work.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Do you honestly think that in terms of being a conservative that the guys below have serious flaws for worse than any supposed flaws for Palin?

            Newt, Pawlenty, Daniels, Barbour?

            Palin is not in the middle of the pack, she’s way above it buddy. She hasn’t strayed from conservative principles and she’s been the only one attacking Obama for the last two and half years.

            As for winning the General. I think McCain could’ve won had he actually gone after Obama for his radical past. Except McCain actually sued the NC GOP for running an ad mentioning Rev Wright!

            We need someone not afraid to take the gloves off and go after Obama. People need to be reminded about the truth because we know the media will do everything it can to hide it. Palin will not back down. She’s proven that over the last few years. She’ll remind voters of Obamacare, the Stimulus that flushed a trillion down the drain, of becoming a joke to other countries, and causing sky-high gas prices by refusing to drill.

            Whoever takes it to Obama the most will win. Palin is that candidate.

          • acat

            is if you’re purely talking about social conservatism – and then only if you ignore that men can’t carry children to term.

            Hint. The squishy middle don’t vote on social conservative issues in the general election.

            Another hint. Throwing red meat to the conservatives is what the vice president does, the president needs to be able to represent the whole country.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Acat,

            You seem to think that Palin is not more conservative than Newt who caved in on the global warming scam with Pelosi, supports ethanol subsides, and supported one of the biggest RINO”s of all time in Scozzafavva?

            Are you kidding me?

            Also, Daniels gets a pass in Indianacare and Pawlenty is off the hook for his past cap and tax support.

            Notice, this has NOTHING to do with social issues. It’s all about the meat and potatoes of what it means to be a conservative.

          • acat

            Seriously, I’d love to know what definition of conservatism you’re using that puts Palin ahead of the pack.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            This is getting really old having to repeat the same thing again. When you do the following you have serious flaws in terms of being a conservative:

            Newt caved in on the global warming scam with Pelosi, supports ethanol subsides, and supported one of the biggest RINO?s of all time in Scozzafavva?

            How can anyone seriously think that Palin is not more conservative when you consider this??

            Also, Daniels gets a pass in Indianacare and Pawlenty is off the hook for his past cap and tax support. This should send off some major red flags about Daniels!! Indianacare = promoting socialism. It put more people in the state on state run health care and has the rest of the country pay the bill!

            Palin doesnt have any of these major flaws… ie: she hasn’t caved in on any major core principles like the guys I mentioned above have.

            What is so hard to understand about this??

          • acat

            Go ahead. I’m patient.

            What “conservative principles” in particular are you meaning?

            Mew

          • ruexperienced

            to the Alaska Supreme Court.

            And you don’t think that she caved?

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

            which is outlined somewhere in this diary and I’m in no mood to look it up and link it, the process generally works like this…

            1. A panel selects a group of nominees and the Governor must pick one.
            2. If the Governor doesn’t make a pick the panel makes the pick.

            Palin chose what she apparently considered the best of a bad lot. I have no problem with what she did, given the process.

          • ruexperienced

            The panel was going to over rule me anyway, so I signed off on it.

            Is that how a President Palin would operate? “It looked like Congress was going to over ride my veto, so I went ahead and signed the bill.”

            We hear over and over again about the Super Woman who will never back down. She will never go back on her principles. She will go down fighting….etc.

            My point is this- ALL the candidate have some baggage and have made some bad decisions. And the longer they have been in office, the more bad decisions they have made. Palin has the shortest and flimsiest record, and even she has baggage from bad decisions.

            In the Bailey book due out in May, Palin’s longtime aide claims that the reason the Planned Parenthood justice was chosen was because that judge ruled in favor of Palin’s sister in law (?) in the trooper scandal. We will see if he has proof to back it up.

            His book Blind Allegiance, plus the Joe McGinniss book PLUS tens of thousands of emails are all due to hit next month. Should be interesting.

            (btw, I have NEVER seen any documentation that the panel could appoint a justice all by themselves.)

          • acat

            Who, in no particular order, are your top four candidates?

            And why?

            Mew

          • aesthete

            Seriously. The plans you’re talking about are as follows:

            1) The addition of HMOs — essentially a voucher of sorts for healthcare — to the options of health care for state employees, was a vast improvement on the status quo. It has save the state of IN save money, utilizes market processes and the price mechanism, and is very popular among the state employees in question (over 60% are enrolled in it right now). This is a big win, IMO.

            2) A program wherein a modified version of the HMO program was made available to the poor in IN as a substitute for Medicaid — essentially, government and the poor person in question both put some money into an account owned by the person in question (the amount put in by both varies depending on a sliding scale of income). Again, a marked improvement over the status quo given that the state (through Medicaid) was already subsidizing the health of poor folks.

            If HMOs and/or vouchers were implemented to a major extent in any “repeal and replace” bill for ObamaCare, it would be a dramatic improvement on both ObamaCare and on the system that existed before ObamaCare. I’m not saying this because I like Daniels; HMOs and vouchers, while not a silver bullet, are a great way to manage costs and increase consumer choice. (Ryan in his plan is attempting to move MediCare to being a voucher-based system, for example.) They’re essentially the equivalent of private school vouchers for schooling, and have worked very well where they’ve been tried (PR is trying to get them implemented right now, and will hopefully succeed.)

            I get the tax criticisms of Daniels (though his problems with taxation pale in comparison with Palin’s and Huck’s, IMO), but the healthcare critique is perplexing.

          • aesthete

            HSAs, not HMOs. Duh.

            Also, while I’m not quite as well-versed in Barbour and Pawlenty’s records, I don’t recall Pawlenty actually *doing* anything to stem climate change in his state. I sure don’t trust your characterization of Pawlenty, given your characterization of Daniels’ truly excellent healthcare reforms (quite honestly, one of the most impressive things about his Governorship).

            The fact is, you’re just blatantly ignoring the fact that in Palin’s 2 years as Gov, her three big accomplishments a) were not particularly conservative (a progressive tax hike, an ethics law, and a public-private oil pipeline partnership with a Canadian corp), b) were proven to be train wrecks (especially in the case of ACES and the ethics bills), and c) are in the process of being replaced or politely ignored. The rest of her record, particularly her spending hikes, leave much to be desired, and there’s very little to show that she was particularly distinguishable from her peers in AK or in other states (as far as that comparison can be made).

          • NHConservative0227

            First, please enlighten me why Daniels tax probles “pale in comparison” to Palin’s? Let me guess, you’re going to mention ACES? If so, I’ll gladly explain that to put all doubts to rest.

            As for Indiana-care:

            http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261285/mitch-daniels-s-obamacare-problem-michael-f-cannon?page=1

            From the article:

            “Daniels?s decision to accept Obamacare funds and move forward with implementation is further undermining the repeal effort. Yesterday, federal judge Roger Vinson reversed his initial order forbidding the Obama administration to implement the law. He did so in part because plaintiff states such as Indiana are implementing it, which he said ?undercut? their own argument that he should block it.

            The latest Rasmussen poll shows that 81 percent of Republicans and 53 percent of independents want Obamacare repealed. Those voters will cringe when President Obama turns to Governor Daniels in a presidential debate and says: ?Mitch, all your talk about repeal is just cynical politics. Your health-care plan is not that different from mine. You expanded Medicaid to people with higher incomes than my plan requires. You are implementing my plan in your state right now. I?m even willing to make some of the changes you want so it will work better for Indiana. If you really think my health-care plan is unconstitutional, then aren?t you violating the oath you took to uphold the Constitution by implementing it??

          • aesthete

            It’s a tax hike on producers that has a progressive component and that was stumped for on populist terms. It’s full name is “Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share”, it has driven away investors, and the current governor is revisiting it to get investors to come back. If Obama were promoting it, liberals would swoon and conservatives would rage. If you want to defend it, well… knock yourself out.

            I have read the linked article, and it is odd. Here’s a reply by Grace Marie-Turner of National Review (part of which I cannibalized to write this paragraph) that is worth reading. Yes, both Obama and Daniels made changes to the status quo in their domains. That’s about where the similarities end: unlike the traditional Medicaid “all you can eat” model (ditto for Medicare), Daniels’ plan a) requires that participants chip in some of their own money (anywhere above poverty level, participants have to put a substantial amount into the account, and almost completely pay for their coverage at the 200% cut-off line), and b) uses HSAs to control for cost. It does not “expand Medicaid”; rather, it makes the HSA plan available to those at the 200% cut-off line.

            Costs have gone down as a result of the program’s implementation, and are continuing to go down compared to states that are using traditional welfare plans. “Other states” pay for it in the same way that they pay for any Medicaid plan — that sucks, but would have been the case with or without reform. My biggest problem with Daniels’ reform is that it expanded coverage to people who didn’t have it previously, but the dramatic reforms and cost savings that have resulted from a reform towards a more free-market direction outweigh adding a few more people to the plan, IMO. (You can feel free to disagree, of course.) The problems that you mention (besides the expanded coverage) are problems that have resulted from the demands placed on states by Medicaid, not by the marginal direction of Daniels’ reforms.

            As far as complying with ObamaCare goes, Daniels has done the bare minimum. Most of the major provisos for ObamaCare kick in in 2012 (wonder why, eh?), so the requirements are basically nil for IN. The state AG has filed jointly with the other states against ObamaCare, and Daniels has spoken and written in the harshest way about ObamaCare, so I don’t really have a problem with it. Since ObamaCare is taxing IN to pay for ObamaCare, what’s wrong with doing the bare minimum required to get some of that cash back? Nothing, IMO. I don’t have a problem with Govs who are resisting ObamaCare every step of the way, but I don’t see anything wrong with a Gov being more pragmatic and doing something that’s essentially costless to get his state and his citizens money that was already taken from them. It’s much like Palin’s acceptance of federal funds, in that way (which I don’t have a huge problem with, btw).

          • NHConservative0227

            It seems that the common view on Redstate is that ACES is a mini-form of socialism, that it unfairly punished oil companies. Nothing could be further from the truth.

            First, Sarah is a Constitutionalist.

            Under the AK Constitution, the AK Governor is a negotiator on behalf of Alaskans, who jointly own AK?s natural resources. Also, 85% of the operating budget is to be derived from development of said natural resources.

            As said negotiator, Sarah fulfilled her Constitutional duty to get Akns the best possible deal without discouraging developers. And to supply the 85% of the operating budget with ample funding from development.
            Under the U.S. Constitution, the President is NOT a negotiator with the business sector on behalf of all Americans (Obama, however, believes he is!). And all Americans do not jointly own all natural resources. And 85% of the U.S. operating budget does NOT come from development of natural resources.

            Therefore, as President, Palin would not pass a bill, such as ACES.
            She would fulfill the duties of the President under the U.S. Constitution

            In addition, before Sarah renegotiated with the oil companies, the oil companies were able to pay the State a bargain price for the oil they were extracting. Regardless of the actual market value of that oil, the State received a fixed amount per barrel. As oil prices rose to record levels, the per-barrel payment to the State?s Permanent Fund remained flat. That?s like someone selling their house for $500,000 knowing full well that the buyer will turn around and sell it to someone else for a cold million. Doesn?t make sense, does it?

            After Sarah wrangled with the oil companies for a better deal, the State and its residents are now able to get more reasonable compensation for the sale of their resources, compensation that reflects the current environment in the market for those resources.

            So, you see, the ?windfall profit tax? actually has nothing to do with windfall profits and is not actually a tax.

          • aesthete

            Per your explanation, if AK had revised its state constitution to call it a socialist state, Palin would be acting conservatively by boning up on her Marx and Engels, and implementing their prescriptions for state government to the letter. Indeed, a governor who attempted to govern moderately (i.e., doing the bare minimum required by that stipulation) would be less conservative.

            The fact of the matter is that that stipulation in the AK constitution is decidedly un-conservative and anti-free market. Even so, the previous tax structure was adequate for fulfilling this aspect of the constitution. Palin’s change to the tax structure a) did make the tax progressive through ACES (which includes a profits tax, though not a windfall profits tax), and b) campaigned for it on populist grounds (I can drag out quotes, if you wish).

            A windfall profits tax was sought after by leftists for years in AK, and the main difference between conservatives and liberals on oil taxation in AK up to that point had been the conservatives’ insistence on a flat tax, and liberals’ insistence on a progressive tax. Indeed, that is why there was heavy Democrat support for ACES, and not much enthusiasm for it among Republicans.

            You can argue that AK is different enough from the federal government/the continental US to be seen as not particularly relevant in examining her conservative bonafides, but in doing so, you’re essentially saying that Palin has little relevant experience to prepare her for a job managing the federal government.

          • NHConservative0227

            You ended your post saying that if I try to argue that AK is significantly different than the rest of the US then it means she doesn’t have enough experience.

            That is hogwash. It neglects the most relevant principle? Sarah is a constitutionalist. She followed the AK constitution to the letter to get the best possible deal for AK citizens. That is exactly the kind of experience we need for our leaders in Washington: those who know what the constitution states and actually follow it!

            ACES was unique in that it taxed the oil companies more during good enonomic times while taxing less and having a guaranteed minimum profit level during bad economic times.

            Another way to think of it as screenplay options.
            Someone writes a screenplay and options it to a producer for a period of a year or so. That producer has SOLE authority to produce that screenplay during that time, thus keeping it off the market.
            When the option is up, they either renew it or let it go, and the screenwriter can then seek other producers to produce his/her work.
            In Alaska, the government under the governor?s direction, ?options? oil/gas land parcels to energy developers for a period of a year or so. That developer has SOLE authority to develop on that land for that time.
            When the option is up, they either renew it or let it go, and Alaska can then seek other developers for the oil/gas.
            This is why Sarah?s govt sued Exxon; they had been renewing options/leases for 30 years or so to keep that land away from other developers ? but had done no developing themselves.
            Sarah called it warehousing.
            If a producer does produce the screenwriter?s work, the writer then gets royalties.
            Similarly, if a developer does develop the oil/gas, Alaskans then get the royalties.

          • aesthete

            Because as far as I can tell, they were.

            Your assumption that Palin is an uber-constitutionalist is just that — an assumption. She didn’t get into politics because of that motivation (IIRC, she got started in politics because of high taxes), and ran for governor under a reformist platform, not one that was constitutionalist. Her explanation for ACES was typical populist boilerplate, not constitutionalist. In fact, I’d be surprised if you could find many references at all to the AK constitution on Palin’s part in a context where she is not defending her ACES proposal as conservative.

            The AK constitutional provision is about as conservative as the provisos for free food, bread and healthcare in the Soviet constitution. You can pretty up that pig all you want, but I’d rather you didn’t.

          • acat

            That is, it’s socialist in nature, but because it’s limited to Alaska, it’s okay…

            Because that’s what Romney is saying about the Massachusetts medical thing – it’s okay at the State level but he wouldn’t do that at the Federal level….

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            And it’s not even close when trying to compare Aces to Romneycare!

            Romeycare was a mandate for everyone in the state to buy insurance. ACES developed the best deal between oil companies and the citizens of Alaska. It worked at drilling in AK increased, companies made more money, and the citizens of AK got more money in exchange for the use of the states resources. Romneycare was a dismal failure that has put the state on the path to bankruptcy. ACES helped create a $12B surplus. Romeycare forced people to buy something. ACES improved the previous tax structure to benefit both parties.

            First, aesthete, I said that what Sarah did with ACES was constitutional. The AK citizens own the natural resources and the oil companies were taking advantage of them. They were sitting on leases and making corrupt deals with the Murkowski administration for favorable tax rates.

            The fact that 85% of the state’s operating costs come from oil revenues cannot but stated enough. To generate revenue the state has to come up with a working agreement with the oil companies. How else are they supposed to generate revenue then there’s no state income or sales tax?

            Under her predecessor, Governor Murkowski, the Petroleum Profits Tax (PPT), a oil tax scheme, was implemented. PPT taxed oil companies 22.5% of their net profits, compared to the 10% tax on gross revenues that was previously in place. A tax on net profits was intended to encourage development and production. However, this legislation had two major problems: corruption and failure to both bring in sufficient revenue and increase development.

            Somehow, the legislature had never properly defined accounting procedures and permissible deductions — and the deductions came in much higher than expected. Meanwhile, as the shortfall appeared, a number of state legislators were on trial, under indictment, or under investigation for bribery by the FBI. These included some who should have done due diligence for the taxpayer on the proposal they enacted.

            ACES ensures the state does well in boom times — as it is doing now — when oil prices are high. But it also hedges against low prices in the future by ensuring that oil companies exposed to commodity price swings don’t face a crushing tax burden when commodity prices fall.

            Her plan includes an escalator clause that gives the state a larger share of revenues when oil prices rise. This is common to production-sharing agreements all over the world. A direct share in oil profits for every citizen is the ultimate incentive for more drilling. That’s why in Alaska drilling for oil seems almost universally popular, while other states are drill-phobic

            http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122057543526201877.html

          • aesthete

            It has always been popular, because most of the real jobs outside of government are predicated on a vibrant oil industry. That has nothing to do with the Palin or Murowski administrations, and I imagine that drilling would still be popular even without the government freebies that it allows AK to indulge in.

            You keep repeating that Palin’s actions vis a vis ACES were constitutional, but that’s not my contention. A constitutionally-permitted action is not necessarily a conservative course of action. To compare to the situation in Washington DC, the federal government has the power to tax income, to institute a tariff, and to implement other taxes. It would be entirely constitutional for the Congress to pass a bill raising all of those taxes to 100%. It would not, however, be conservative, as it would be an eminently dumb thing to do. While Palin’s ACES proposal doesn’t quite rise to that level of stupidity, it was quite bad: not only because it was a tax hike, but also because of its progressive component which, far from encouraging development, has stalled it. (Basic economics, really: taxing profits reduces the incentive to develop when profits are high, and enthusiasm for development are dampened when price/barrel is low.) The other nations that do this (Norway, the Sauds, Brazil) suffer from the exact same problem.

          • NHConservative0227

            1. Drilling actually increased along with profts for oil companies in AK. In was a win-win for all involved.

            2. Before ACES, oil companies cut deals with the corrupt state gov’t which screwed over the people of AK and the revenues to the gov’t. Something needed to be done to break up the good ole boys network. Remember the Courrupt B@stards Club (CBC)? I think there may still be some on this site that have connections and will do anything to attack Palin because she went after their friends and put some of those crooks in jail.

          • acat

            Because my understanding is that it takes months if not years to start the permitting process to drill. If correct for Alaska as well, then … any drilling increases under Palin were set up by Murkowski … and we should really be looking at drilling numbers under Parnell to see the fruit of Palin’s policies.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            I seriously wonder how many on here who have clear cases of PDS and ties to the CBC will actually vote for Palin in the General against Obama.

            No matter what, she doesn’t get any credit for anything she’s done. It’s the same talking points over why she resigned and calling her a socialist over ACES.

            As for the frivolous ethics charges that forced her to resign:

            The Alaska law SPECIFICALLY DID NOT protect the Executive from frivolous lawsuits. Oddly enough, legislators WERE protected from this crap!

            In fact, the law concerning the Executive were so screwed up, Alaska passed NEW laws that DO protect the Executive. It DIRECTLY addresses what happened to Sarah Palin. The law went into effect on December 22, 2010.

            http://newsminer.com/view/full_story/10563878/article-New-ethics-rules-in-Alaska-to-take-effect-Dec?22?instance=home_news_window_left_bullets

            To keep mentioning this tired talking point as a negative against Palin is intellectually dishonest and makes you look bad.

            ACES was necessary due to the corruption with the previous tax structure under Murkowski. The oil companies were making deals with corrupt polticians (CBC’s) in the GOP while the people of Alaska were getting screwed. Many oil companies like Exxon were just sitting on leases for decades. Palin forced them to use it or Ilose it and struck a deal that worked out the best for the oil companies, the people of Alaska, and the state (which 85% of its operating budget comes from oil).

            It just doesn’t say much for Redstate when one of the most prominent conservative presidential candidates delivers a great speech in the middle of liberal hysteria in Madison, WI and may have given the biggest hint that she’s running with the “Game On” remark yet not even one post on the main page about it! It’s like the speech never happened! Instead the only mention is by a diary post from a member. If that wasn’t bad enough this site is completely overrun with vicious Palin haters who spread lies about her that would make the Lamestream media proud.

            Gems like “she’d be marginally better than Obama if at all” and “she’d be lucky to win her own state in the election” from PDSer like mbecker. Yet no one calls him out on it, instead aesthete and acat back the guy up.

            It’s absolutely disgusting. No wonder why the number of site hits for Redstate has gone down 13% over the last 3 months.

          • powertothepeople

            are you done yet? Do you need a few more tissues? Fine you like her, she walks on water in your eyes, and can do no wrong. We get it that you think that anyone who does not bow at the Palin alter must have PDS, hate women, are fighting their true sexuality, and so on. We get it that you sit in the dark confines of your room staring at the life size poster of Palin sitting right above the incense/candle alter dreaming of the day that Sarah kicks Todd out and gives you a call. We get it. We get it that she was all that is perfect in politics and has never done a thing wrong, never done a thing not conservative, has no faults, and should not be questioned. We know that the spirit of Reagan and Jesus abides within her and it is only her that can swoop from the skies and fix all that is wrong in this country. We get that without her as president, we are all doomed to a third world status and everlasting damnation. We get it………..

            And I wonder if the decrease in hits could be a trend repeated for years after an election? Could that be it? Oh well, if Redstate would have have just proclaimed their undying worship of Palin, all would be perfect.

          • acat

            And do you still not understand what you are going to have to do to help Palin win?

            Step 1 – grow thicker skin. This one applies to Palin too, by the way.
            Step 2 – find a narrative to challenge each and every Dem talking point.
            Step 3 – *calmly* restate the narrative each time someone in your real life repeats a Dem talking point. Calmly. Every time.

            You can’t even do that on a Conservative Republican web site.

            I have had to do that for every loser POTUS nom the GOP have pulled out of their rectums since Reagan. Support Palin in the general? No sweat. I can do that standing on my head, all day, every day. You can’t even do it now.

            Now, for the key point, and I do hope you get this. What do you do if Palin isn’t the nominee? Can you find the narratives and calmly restate them for someone other than Palin in the general?

            If not, then you’re of no use to me, or to your candidate, or to any other conservative republican.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Thanks to both of you for proving my point.

            Again, it’s kind of hard to convince those who have some of the the worst cases of PDS on the web. I’ve addressed all the “concerns” multiple times yet it’s like talking to a wall. There’s a major difference between raising legitimate questions and the same tired old leftist talking points. At least try to come up with some new material other than the “she quit” act.

            “powertothepeople” the site hits for Hotair has actally gone up 3% over the last three months. Maybe it has something to do with giving Palin a fair shake and not trying to ignore her. How about giving Palin a chance to make her case to the American people during the campaign instead of calling her “radioactive” this past January? As Rush said on his show today, Palin has not been made radioactive. Instead she has increased her influence and continued to take on the GOP establishment, the union leaders, and Obama.

            I know it’s probably a lost cause when presenting this to PDSer’s, but I need to set the record straight as to why Sarah resigned. Too many on here are just looking at one side without looking at the whole picture:

            Alaska offered no protection whatsoever for the Executive OR their staff. None whatsoever.

            If this isn’t bad enough, there was no law against frivolous harassment. Anyone could file a complaint for anything. One loon filed a complaint alleging ?bribery? because some school kids sent her some homemade cookies as a ?bribe? to get her to come speak to their school.

            She went and the Alaska Mafia went insane! She was given several gifts, like a signed hockey stick and so on. Trinkets, tokens of appreciation, nothing of real monetary value. There were 5 or 6 ?ethics complaints? filed after that one trip!

            One loser filed a complaint because after the 2008 Greta went to Alaska and did a series of interviews, including one in the Governor?s office. This same loon filed another complaint because after she resigned half of the nation?s media high tailed it up to her fishing spot to interview her!

            In their little world, doing press interviews was illegal!

            Sarah was Commander-in-Chief of the only National Guard units that are on permanent deployment.

            Not long after she became Governor, she wanted to make sure her troops were being taken care of, and visited them in Kuwait and Germany. That was OK though, because the Alaska Mafia hadn?t been created yet.

            However, once the 2008 election was over, and she TRIED to get back to business, all changed. In June of 2009 she went to Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo to visit her troops there. Stopped in Germany again as well.

            To show how insane these loons are, they filed an ?ethics? complaint saying she violated the Constitution by speaking to the troops! She was their Commander-in-Chief! It was insane!

            She also got a complaint because she wore a jacket in sub-zero weather. Granted it said ?Arctic Cat? and it was the Iron Dog, and yeah, Arctic Cat sponsors Todd, but still, no other elected official would have gotten any grief for that.

            The final straw though was when these evil SOB’s started filing ethics complaints against her staff, who also had no legal protection from the state!

            This was a well coordinated effort by Obama?s team. Pete Rouse, the same Pete rouse who stood in after Rahm left, ran the Alaska Mafia out of the West Wing of the White House.

            Rouse is a pretend Alaskan who only lived there a short time almost 30 years ago, but still votes absentee there.

            Anyhow, there were no protections for the executive whatsoever.

            Worse, nothing to stop frivolous crap. These people, ALL of whom were well know to state officials, even started filing them under fake names. One used the name of a soap opera star!

            There is a law that says one cannot discuss an ongoing ethics investigation. That included state officials as well as the complainant. This, of course is to keep things confidential until there is a verdict. It?s to protect everyone involved.

            Problem is, the law had no teeth. There was literally NO punishment whatsoever for breaking the law. None!

            So here?s what Satan?s little helpers would do. They?d all get together, designate someone to be file the complaint, then have their stories ready to go. More than once an article came out about a complaint before the damned thing was even filed!

            Of course, thanks to Obama, gutter snipes like Jeanne Devon, Shannyn Moore, and Linda Biegel (who was the DNC?s ?official? blogger for Alaska) were give access to cesspools like the Huffington Post, and of course, the blood libel media picked it all up from there!

            There?s never been such a coordinated attack on a sitting Governor, or any other official.

            Of course, these bottom feeders, Obama included, thought they?d run her out of office, and they?d never see her again.

            They didn?t understand Sarah, or leadership. By resigning she saved the state millions of dollars and made an end run around the whole mess!

            Even though Alaska wouldn?t defend Sarah, it still had to deal with the costs of researching these bs charges and the incredible barrage of FOIA requests. There were up 1000% or so after Obama?s thugs started in. This cost the state of Alaska $2 million. It was estimated at the time, that had she stayed in office, and the complaints kept coming at the same rate (and there is no reason to think they wouldn?t) the state of Alaska could have very well been out $6 to $10 million.

            There’s also a very good chance that had Sarah stayed in office, that it would have assured a democrat victory when her term was up. This way, she put her very capable number two in charge, and everything just kept on rolling. He sailed to victory.

            Bottom line is Sarah outsmarted them on every level. My guess is that all of these useless losers wish that they would have just left her and her state alone! Had she went back and just did her job as Governor, she would have never had the time to become the national leader that she has.

          • acat

            You have yet to answer what definition of conservatism you’re using that describes Palin as more conservative than any of the other candidates.

            You have yet to answer who your #2, #3, and #4 candidate choices are.

            You refuse to say whether you’d be willing to support anyone other than Palin in the general.

            You’re certainly not arguing in good faith, and I’m seriously concerned for your mental state if Sarah doesn’t run or doesn’t win.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Do you agree with someone who says Palin would be “marginally better than Obama if at all” or might not “win her own state”?

            If you’re arguing in good faith you might want to start by denouncing those ridiculous statements. No one else other than me has called him out for garbage other than me. This is why Redstate has become so anti-Palin and the web traffic has dropped so much. Too many “conservatives” accept these leftist talking points about Palin while letting all the other candidates off the hook.

            I’ve already stated in this very thread that Bachmann would be my second choice. I like her commitment to conservative principles– the fact that she keeps mentioning the $105B funding in the last CR over Obamacare and that she’s fighting for the incandescant light bulb. I think Michele would not stray from her core principles.

            My second pick would be Cain but I don’t think the first election he wins will be the presidency.

            As for what makes Palin more conservative than the other candidates. Again, I’ve already answered this countless times. It’s Sarah’s record and her policies that put her above the rest. She turned a hole in the wall in Wasilla to a thriving city. She created a $12B surplus as governor. Sarah has been right on all her policy issues over the last two and a half years.

            As for the other candidates, they have serious flaws where they’ve strayed from conservative principles in the past or still do to this day. Feel free to re-read my “Compare and Contrast” post in this very thread to educate yourself.

          • NHConservative0227

            Obama is making her job easier.

            It is starting to become clear.

            You want Obamacare repealed vote for Palin

            You want lower gas prices vote for Palin

            You want a strong dollar vote for Palin

            You want relief form the nanny state vote for Palin.

            Obama?s policies are so bad that having a clear 180 degree opposite candidate is the only way to win. And as of now Palin is the only one offering that choice.

            The rest including Trump is just offerring to change the rider of the horse. Palin is offerring America a chance to change horses.

            Don’t worry about what I’ll do. Your concern is “noted”. If Palin loses the nomination, I’ll plug my nose and voted against Obama just like I did in 2008. The question is what the conservatives on Redstate will do. Will you take advantage of the primary to vote for the most conservative candidate in Sarah Palin or will you allow rampant PDS to let another squishy moderate to win the nomination.

          • acat

            You’ve answered the “who are my other choices” question, I see. Bachmann and Cain are quite good but both have less executive government experience than Palin. This greatly reduces their ability to win the nomination. One could be suspicious that you’re stacking the deck.

            You wiffed on the “what is conservatism?” question. I’m looking for specific, concrete statements such as “Conservatives are opposed to cronyism and back-room dealings” or “Conservatives believe in reducing the scope and coercive power of government” or “Conservatives believe human life starts at conception, and that lives are precious resources that should not be wasted”.

            You completely ignored the question of whether you would support the GOP candidate, regardless, in the general.

            As for Becker, I see nothing that needs repudiating.

            Palin will likely not win Alaska – the re-election of Lisa Murkowski is a pretty reasonable proxy for Palin’s popularity. Her opting to resign, and her drawing outside attention have both turned the average Alaskan against her.

            I’m opposed on principle to judging politicians on what they say – I watch what they actually do. While in office, Palin was not the conservative firebrand she is now. Taking ACES as an example, it sacrificed the reduction in the scope of government coersive power (the checks got bigger – that’s coersive, AK law or not) in order to reduce corruption. Win-lose at best.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            First Acat, I’ll bet you anything that Palin will win Alaska. I think it’s ridiculous and pure PDS to think otherwise. Miller won the primary, it wasn’t until Murkowski ran as an independent to split the vote three way. It helped her too that the RNC and he GOP elites really did little to help Miller. Secondly, Acat, you seriously think that Palin would only be marginally better, if at all better than Obama??

            Palin is more conservative than the other candidates based on her record and her positions. She has a great executive record as a two term mayor and as governor. She cut taxes and implemented policies such as ACES to result in a $12B surplus.

            The thing you keep overlooking with ACES is that at least 85% of the states operation budget comes from oil. Over 95% of the land is under federal control. There is no state income tax or sales tax. So the states’ hands are pretty much tied, they need to rely on profits from drilling. Under Murkowski there was all kinds of corruption with the CBC club. The Petroleum Profits Tax didn’t work since too many within the GOP were in bed with the oil companies. You also had companies like Exxon tying up valuable resources by refusing to drill. Palin cleaned out all the corruption and created ACES. The tax was higher during boom times and lower during slower economic times, another point that’s often forgotten. Drilling increased, oil companies made more profits, the Alaskan people benefitted with more money and jobs, and the $12B surplus was created.

            No matter how you slice it the people of Alaska own the natural resources. It’s the job of the governor to negotiate the best deal between them and the oil companies. Alaskans were getting screwed before and Palin found something that worked for everyone. She was aware of the state constitution and did her elected duty by following it. That’s something alot of politicians on both sides in DC need to do. Palin would never do something like this on the national level since it’s not constitutional. Plus 85% of the federal operating budget does not come from drilling. There is plenty of revenue, we just need to cut spending, which Sarah understands.

            In addition, I think you have to put stock into what candidates are saying now and what their stated positions are. It says alot as to who’s willing to call out Obama and not be afraid to back down. No one has done that better on a variety of issues over the last two and a half years. I think the main way to beat Obama is to not be afraid to call him out instead of being to nice like McCain was. Where have the other candidates been over the last few years? Has anyone consistently had the balls to go after Obama like Sarah has? I think not.

            I’m going to repost where the other major candidates have strayed from conservative principles so that thinking conservatives can see way Sarah is much better:

            1. Romney: Romneycare pretty much says it all. It?s the father to Obamacare, pretty much the same thing but on the state level. Even though 59% of American favor repeal of Obamacare, if Romney is the nominee the issue is taken off the table. I mean I can?t help but fear that Romney would seek to ?fix and improve? Obamacare instead of repealing it. Plus where has this guy been the last few years? Has he been outspoken on anything? Finally, Mitt flip flops so much he makes John Kerry look firm in his positions. Mitt has changed his mind on abortion, Don?t Ask Don?t Tell, and even Reagan (he said he didn?t want to go back to Reagan-Bush while debating Teddy Kennedy).

            2. Trump: This guy is nothing but a fraud seeking attention. He talks a big game now but what was he doing last year? Has anyone seen him at any previous Tea Parties? In February 2010 he donated to Anthony Weiner? Congressman from NY who?s one of the writers of Obamacare! Trump has also donated to Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emmanuel. While Bush was in office Trump said Bush was the worst president of all time. That Obama had a chance to be a really good president. Now Trump is saying Obama is the worst!!! In the 90?s Trump was a proponent of single payer health care.

            3. Huckabee: He still supports cap and tax. As Ark governor he weighed kids in public schools. He supports Moochelle Obama?s food police program. Huckabee has given numerous clemencies to violent criminals who should?ve remained in prison (including the killer of the 4 dead cops on Seattle). He also raised alot of taxes as governor.

            4. Gingrich: He supports ethanol subsidies. He supported Dede Scozzafavva in the NY23rd (one of the worst RINO?s ever who supported Acorn!). Newt even sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi in a stop global warming ad ! Usually I don?t talk about candidates personal lives, but I found it pathetic that Newt said one of the reasons for his affairs was that he loved his country so much!

            5. Pawlenty: Former support of statewide cap and tax in Minnesota. Also, while everyone was blaming Sarah Palin for Tucson, Pawlenty piled on by saying he wouldn?t have used cross-hairs himself!

            6. Daniels is one of the establishment picks. He was Bush?s Budget director for about 4 years under which we saw a dramatic increase in spending. Daniels supports a VAT tax, wants a truce on social issues, and doesn?t view illegal immigration as a top priority in Indiana. Daniels also tried to tax those making over $250K extra in his first term, but was rejected by the GOP legislature. Class warfare anyone?

            I also recently just learned this from listening to Mark Levin, easily the worst thing about Daniels:

            http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261285/mitch-daniels-s-obamacare-problem-michael-f-cannon

            7. Barbour: He supports Moochelle Obama?s food police program just like Huckabee. He also doesn?t think of illegal immigration as too much of a problem, he won?t go after employers of illegals:

            http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/14/barbour-lobbied-for-mini-amnesty/

            As you can see all 7 listed above have major questions in regards to sticking to conservative principles.

            Don’t worry though, if one of the squishy moderates listed above someone gets the nomination, I’ll hold my nose and vote for them over Obama just like I did with McCain in 2008.

            The real question is if the “conservatives” on Redstate will vote for Palin over Obama or if some will actually stay home out of pure PDS hatred.

          • acat

            And I’m glad to hear that you’ll be supporting the GOP nom, whoever they come up with. It’s a Scott Brown or Mark Kirk (or, if you prefer, Lisa Murkowski) scenario – better off with someone who agrees 50% of the time…

            Let me show you one thing you’ll need to change, though. If I paraphrase what you wrote above in your 4th paragraph a little, I get this:

            Palin would not propose something like ACES on a national level because it would be unconstitutional.

            The problem is, that’s almost exactly the same as saying:

            Romney would not propose something like Romneycare on a national level because it would be unconstitutional.

            So, either you need to find a different logic for Palin, or you have to give Romney a pass.

            For the record, I loathe Romney and am hoping his campaign crashes and burns in Iowa and New Hampshire. He strikes me as a non-genuine person, I doubt he’d push back as hard as I’d like on abortion, and while his finance background would be helpful, his tendency to jump the wrong way and to not be able to smell fraud is very disturbing to me.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Look ACES bothered me too when I first heard about it, but then I learned more about it.

            In Alaska the citizens of the state OWN the natural resources. By the state constitution they are required to be paid just compensation for the use of said resources. It would be like finding oil in your back yard. You would expect to get paid for it right? Do you think that the oil companies should be able to just take the oil for nothing or be able to rip off Alaskans? It’s not very conservative to allow one side to breach part of a contract.

            So the oil companies were not being unfairly taxed. They were getting away with murder under Murkowski and all his ties to the CBC while Alaskans were getting screwed.

            Also, 85% of the state operating budget comes from drilling. To run the government their needs to be enough money coming in from the oil companies to both the gov’t and the citizens of Alaska.

            It’s apples to oranges to even mention Romneycare. No one in MA is entitled to “free” health care. It also forces American citizens to buy something. ACES doesn’t force Alaskans to do anything. It simply gives them a fair reward for the resources that they OWN. ACES doesn’t punish oil companies, it ensures they give fair value to Alaskans, not screwing them over like they did under previous administrations.

            Finally, Romneycare was a dismal failure. Health care costs in MA went through the roof and the state is on the path to bankruptcy. ACES was a smashing success for all involved. The oil companies drilled more, got more profits, Alaskans got fair value for their resources, and a $12B surplus was created for Alaska.

            During the POTUS campaign Obamacare will be one of the main issues. Romneycare takes it off the table if he gets the nomination. ACES is a non-issue since the majority of resources in the US are not owned by the citizens and the federal budget is not 85% funded from drilling. However, energy independence is a major issue. No one has a better record on this than Palin. She created the smashing success of ACES, got the Alaska Pipeline deal agreed to, and even fought with McCain over drilling in ANWR. Palin has been pushing for domestic drilling since day one. Americans will identify with her on this issue as gas approaches $5 a gallon. No other candidate has even close to as good of a record or even rhetoric on this issue as Sarah.

            Mark it down, energy independence will be one of the main things that helps Sarah get elected as our 45th President.

          • acat

            their statehouse reps in part on a promise of universal health care.

            There is no difference between that choice and the choice of the citizens of Alaska, when it achieved statehood, from codifying the ownership of the mineral resources. There is no legal distinction – both laws are constitutional within their respective States.

            You are correct that energy issues, something Palin knows quite a lot about, is likely to be a big deal in the 2012 election… even if Obama pumps the strategic oil reserve dry it’s not big enough to save him.

            You will, though, need to refine your defense of ACES, though.

            You also haven’t answered any more about what conservative principles you’re judging Palin on.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            If you think it’s ridiculous for a certain PDSer on here to say that Sarah would only be marginally if at all better than Obama. That’s an incredibly ignorant statement. Do you agree with it? I’ve only asked two or three times already.

            ACES is a severance tax on the natural resources. There is no state income or sales tax. Once all the oil is gone from Alaska then they’ll have to start taxing the citizens for the loss of revenue. They need to get as much as they can from the use of these natural resources now.

            I already stated why Sarah is more conservative numerous times. I’ve defended her record as nauseum. If you don’t know her policy positions then you’re being willfully ignorant at this point.

            I’m sick of playing games.

          • acat

            Seriously, I’ve already answered regarding Becker back here:
            http://www.redstate.com/joshleguern/2011/04/17/palin-in-wisconsin-finally-a-potential-2012-candidate-with-something-good-to-say/#comment-901

            You, for some reason, never replied to it. I assumed you understood what I wrote.

            As for ACES, nothing you’ve written changes what I’ve written. So the citizens own the natural resources – a sentiment very similar to the workers owning the means of production – means that, somehow, Palin doing something perfectly legal but not purely conservative in Alaska doesn’t excuse Romney doing something perfectly legal but not purely conservative in Massachusetts.

            As for Palin, I am not – as I said before – willing to judge her policy positions based on what she says. She’s a politician. I look at the record she has produced as Alaska’s chief executive… and I come up wanting someone who is more of a fiscal conservative.

            This is not a game to me. This is deadly serious. If, as Bill S.’s diary today suggests, Palin really is the best candidate then her supporters are going to have to get better – as I’ve said to you repeatedly in this thread – at responding to the MSM lies over and over and over without going all thin-skinned.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            It’s my belief that you, mbecker, and others have always had a general dislike of Palin and are unwilling to give her a fair shake.

            You just agreed with mbecker that Palin would be only marginally if at all better than Obama. We’re talking about a Marxist intent on regulating every aspect of our lives. What on earth makes you think Palin would be anywhere near that bad?

            If you don’t get this, then there’s really no hope for you.

            It was Palin’s job to be a negotiator between Alaskans and the oil companies. It’s conservative to follow the Alaskan constitution and to live up to what that contract says. In doing so it led to a $12 B surplus.

            Romney had no duty to push gov’t healthcare and mandate. It wasn’t required by the constitution. On top of that it was a dismal failure that has put MA on the path to bankruptcy.

            I will keep defending Sarah’s record. Most reasonable people will be open to these explanations. Again, if you’re so disingenuous that you agree that she’d barely be better than Obama, then that’s on you, not me.

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

            Img src=”http://www.kodakgallery.com/imaging-site/services/doc/5494:241787392311/jpeg/BG” width=”25%” height=”25%>

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

          • NHConservative0227

            and your other friends from the CBC in Alaska for me.

          • acat

            His input on how to kick bureaucrat butt is going to be very needed when the GOP picks up some additional executive positions (governorships, etc.) in 2012.

            Unfortunately, too many Red Staters could only see his anti-Palin viewpoint and discarded the rest. Baby with the bathwater, I suppose.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            Diminish his credibility on everything else he said.

            The same is true of those like mbecker. The guy has plenty to contribute in other areas but when you constantly degrade and smear Palin with the same leftist, worn out talking points it makes the site look bad as a whole.

          • acat

            And being even more blunt, that’s not my problem.

            It makes the GOP look foolish when we get someone elected, only for them to get rolled by long-term bureaucrats who know how the system works. Art Chance knew how to deal with that.

            Regarding Becker, as far as I can tell he’s not said anything that he needs to walk back regarding Palin, although I did see him apologize to Kestrel about something else.

            Maybe it’s a “life lesson” thing with you. Everyone, and I do mean everyone, has certain topics that are hot buttons for them. Things that they just can’t rationally discuss. With you, it’s anyone criticizing Palin. With me, it’s anyone praising Ron Paul. With Art, it’s anyone praising Palin.

            That doesn’t “diminish” what Art says, what you say, or what I say .. it just means that, on those topics, conversation is limited.

            Becker is more complex about this – he doesn’t seem to have a problem discussing Palin, provided it’s based in hard, documented fact… and we have had a number of Palin supporters who sound suspiciously like escapees from the cult of Ron Paul. They, not Becker, and not Art IMO, are what bring the place down – they degrade the signal-to-noise ratio and – as you’ve found – they make the job of anyone actually defending Candidate Palin much harder.

            Mew

          • NHConservative0227

            When becker says that Palin would be marginally if not at all better than Obama.

            It’s hard to put into words how ignorant comments like that are.

            Like her or not, Palin gave a great speech this past Saturday in a very hostile environment. She took at the GOP establishment, the unions, the media, and Obama. I haven’t seen anyone else in the GOP field who’s had the balls to do the same.

            You would think that such a speech would at least warrant a main blog entry on the main page. Instead the only reference at all is from a diary entry from a regular member.

            Then again, Erickson had seemed Palin “radioactive” last January. His boy Pence is not running. Still waiting to see who Erickson supports.

          • acat

            If you really think giving a great speech makes for a great President, NHCon, then .. Obama’s proof that you’re dead wrong.

            As I’ve said before, I’m looking for credible evidence of conservatism in Palin’s record as Governor of Alaska. So far, you want to talk about her speechifying.

            This is like a car dealer trying to sell me a 2005 Camry based on the spec for the 2009 model. I want to know about the actual, verifiable history of the candidate I’m buying, not the posing and posturing that’s happened since.

            Giving a great speech does not cut it for me.

            Mew

          • gekster

            there are some who just ain’t gonna see that.

            Not taking sides hear, but it is what it is.

          • BigRedConservative

            And by any definition, Palin isn’t. To address your concerns more specifically:

            1. Romney. Perhaps the only candidate who really is unelectable. But even then, conservatives should stop knifing him on Romneycare. It is-as he admits-a work in progress.

            2. Trump. You really think he’s even considering a run? Calling him a fraud is like calling Antarctica cold.

            3. Huckabee. What’s wrong with being healthy, again? The man nearly had a heart attack, I think it’s laudable of him to promote public health. Attacking him on that is desperate.

            4. Gingrich. If Gingrich has any problems, they’re in his personal life. As for Scozzafava, his endorsement was based on electability-which is rather important in liberal NY

            5. Pawlenty. Saying he wouldn’t have used cross-hairs was an intelligent, calculated response which made him look good whilst Palin floundered. His only bit of pandering to the MSM. He made a mistake in cap-and-trade, and he now knows better. A candidate who learns is better than one who gets stuck in a rut.

            6. Daniels. This rabid fear of the establishment may be our death come 2012. Daniels is an electable, highly capable governor with decent executive experience. The fact he happens to have a Princeton degree shouldn’t confuse you.

            7. Barbour. Firstly, don’t call Michelle Obama “Moochelle”. You come across as attacking a candidate’s family, which I though only liberals did. Secondly, he’s a lobbyist-what do you expect him to do?

            Any of the above is better than Palin. Take your pick.

          • NHConservative0227

            Defending all these moderates, but saying they are all still better than Palin?? Thank you for the laugh. In case you really don’t have a clue and were actually serious, here’s my retort:

            1. Romney. Perhaps the only candidate who really is unelectable. But even then, conservatives should stop knifing him on Romneycare. It is-as he admits-a work in progress.
            Why should we stop knifing him on Romneycare? It?s a disaster as health care costs have gone through the roof in MA. Mitt signed it and said he loved mandates. Even though 59% of Americans want to repeal Obamacare, nominating Mitt takes this issue off the table. Good to see though that you want to give Mitt a pass by making excuses. Anyone But Palin right?? (ABP)

            2. Trump. You really think he?s even considering a run? Calling him a fraud is like calling Antarctica cold.
            Sadly I think there?s a good chance he runs. Glad you agree he?s a fraud though, because I?m sick of so many so called conservatives talking about him.

            3. Huckabee. What?s wrong with being healthy, again? The man nearly had a heart attack, I think it?s laudable of him to promote public health. Attacking him on that is desperate.
            This is a joke right??? So he had health problems, so it?s ok to team up with Moochelle Obama on telling people what to eat? It?s ok to use taxpayer dollars to weight kids in Ark schools? Also he STILL supports cap and tax.
            Finally, 4 dead cops in Seattle don?t like Huckabee either.

            4. Gingrich. If Gingrich has any problems, they?re in his personal life. As for Scozzafava, his endorsement was based on electability-which is rather important in liberal NY

            Another ridiculous statement on your part. So it?s ok to sell out all conservative principles just to win right? BTW if she was so electable, how?d she do again? Also Palin supported the conservative Doug Hoffman! I bet you supported Mike Castle too right? With ?republicans? like Scozzafavva who needs enemies? She?s a huge supporter of ACORN!! Don?t forget Newt?s support for ethanol subsidies and sitting on that couch with Pelosi. Do you have any excuses for that too? Please humor me!

            5. Pawlenty. Saying he wouldn?t have used cross-hairs was an intelligent, calculated response which made him look good whilst Palin floundered. His only bit of pandering to the MSM. He made a mistake in cap-and-trade, and he now knows better. A candidate who learns is better than one who gets stuck in a rut.

            Intelligent? Try gutless and pandering which is exactly what Pawlenty is. Palin gave a response full of grace and dignity. She defended the Tea Party after being accused of murder. This gutless wonder joins the chorus by piling on! Glad it was he ONLY bit of pandering to the MSM. Name one instance where Palin has done the same? Finally, glad you trust guys who supported cap and tax in the past. I don?t, I?m not that na?ve.

            6. Daniels. This rabid fear of the establishment may be our death come 2012. Daniels is an electable, highly capable governor with decent executive experience. The fact he happens to have a Princeton degree shouldn?t confuse you.

            Read the NRO article I linked to about Indianacare.

            7. Barbour. Firstly, don?t call Michelle Obama ?Moochelle?. You come across as attacking a candidate?s family, which I though only liberals did. Secondly, he?s a lobbyist-what do you expect him to do

            And finally it comes to this. Defending the Obama?s. That?s what you?re really all about isn?t? You realize that Palin is their biggest threat, so everyone weak GOP moderate you defend while trying to take down the best conservative running for President in years!

          • Doc Holliday

            I could care less if he almost had a heart attack. He should get a deal from Subway like Jared. We don’t want statists here. I don’t care if their cause is to ban guns, ban smoking, or ban Krispy Kreme. Any man who would willingly be treated as a child is no man at all.

          • Doc Holliday

            uh, too many Mai Tai’s (ok not really those). I had the day off. Of course I was talking about the Huckster.

          • 20jan2013

            They seem to giving you good sense.

            Romney’s the one who was pro-abortion before he wasn’t. Romney’s the one who forced the citizenry to buy insurance.

            Now you’ve got people thinking that Huckabee (that’s his name, if you can deign to give the man at least that minimal level of respect) wants to ban guns and Krispy Kremes. I’m confident in the intelligence of the readership of this website that they know you are grasping at straws, and as anyone who ever played in a hay mound as a kid like I did knows, when you grasp at straws you only end up with pricks.

          • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

            “I don?t care if their cause is to ban guns, ban smoking, or ban Krispy Kreme. Any man who would willingly be treated as a child is no man at all.”

            And I agree — Huck’s tendency toward statism is troubling and, frankly, automatically disqualifies him from my vote in the Primaries.

          • Doc Holliday
          • 20jan2013

            Let’s play a game. For every example of statism by Mike Huckabee that you can identify, I will identify two examples of statism by one of the other Top Five contenders.

            Unless you can come up with concrete reasons for conservatives not support him, Huckabee is looking like the nominee coming out of Iowa with a 1st place finish.

            Don’t worry about Trump, he is using this as a way to negotiate a killer salary for the next season of The Apprentice.

          • Doc Holliday

            http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/7567-mike-huckabee-nanny-statist

          • Doc Holliday

            what are you, his cardiologist? there is no such thing as nearly having a heart attack. Too bad you focus on individual stories like the Oprah crowd, and not on the Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it say the feds can tell us what to eat? You know, Mizz Obama is playing that game too. And the FDA is infringing on our rights by mandating calorie information at all restaurants. Good idea? health smart idea? who gives a *&RW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Doc Holliday

            sorry NHconservative, I screwed that one up. I should have replied to Big Red non Conservative.

  • AnnaD

    She will lose. Five minutes of Tina Fey as Sarah Palin on TV and the independents will walk away en masse. She was plucked by McCain way too early in her political career (he could have picked Condi Rice), before Palin had the chops to run a country (although she was vastly more qualified than Obama) and by walking away from her Governorship, she ended any real chance, as fas Ias I think, for running for President. Palin should do what she does best: fire up the crowds for other candidates.

    • rightwingmom52

      he would not have gotten most of the social conservative vote, and Obama would have won by a much bigger margin.

    • Josh LeGuern

      An election is won by supporters getting out there and telling their friends and family why they should support the candidate. If you don’t like Palin as a potential candidate because you feel she has the wrong principles, fine.

      But if you don’t like her because you’re scared of Tina Fey… well, we’ve already lost this election.

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

        Elections are about candidates and only candidates. Check the results in DE and NV for starters. On the other side of the coin, check out FL where excellent candidates were able to overcome big initial deficits in name recognition and outright hostility from the State party to win both the Senator’s seat and Governor’s office.

        Good candidates will connect with a very broad cross section of the electorate, bad candidates connect with the base enough to win a primary and then fade away into confused obscurity.

        As of right now Palin falls into the latter category. She has better name recognition that anybody, and every time she get’s out front on “stuff” people like you get all wound up and proclaim the second coming and her F/U polling with the great unwashed middle who’s votes will elect the next President go further south. In the last two years she hasn’t seen a single uptick in her “F”s with Indies.

        As of now, it would appear that her perception is pretty well cast. We’ll see what this speech – a good red meat offering – does to her polling. And then will come May and the release of the AK emails and we’ll see just how much stuff hits the fan.

      • AnnaD

        I enthusiastically voted for McCain in 2008 because of Palin; I thought McCain was a weak candidate but Palin sparked him up. Then Couric and Fey did their hatchet jobs. The people who tilt the election one way or the other simply won’t vote for her. But she’d be a great Secretary of Energy!

      • phlogiston

        It’s bad enough when Republicans cower in fear of the coverage they will get from WaPo, but honestly, if we can’t overcome the “hurdle” of a Saturday Night Live skit or two, the battle is already over and we should just throw in the towel now, move to a relatively deserted portion of Montana and wait out the collapse of our nation. The best line in Palin’s Madison speech was when she basically told the establishment GOP to grow a pair. It’s a long overdue message. And it’s probably why so many eunuchs in the party consider her unelectable.

    • Doc Holliday

      you are going to choose your candidate based on some ditzy broad?

  • Darin_H

    Is she sufficiently conservative? Oh, Lord Yes

    Is there anything in her record that screams “Oh, Lord Yes” that she’s sufficiently conservative? I don’t mean any speeches she’s given, I mean her record. How she actually governed. Seems to me, she’s a bit right of center, but not so much. ‘Becker’s right above, she’s perfect outside bomb thrower – lobbing rhetorical grenades at the liberals/democrats.

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

      And the ObamaNuts actually tend to get all worked up about her one liners and it tends to throw them off their stride, such as that stride is.

      She’s a valuable addition to the Party Quiver. I just don’t happen to think she’s POTUS material for a whole variety of political and executive competency reason (all the same reasons, BTW, that make BO such a bad President).

    • David123

      1. Sarah Palin is passionately opposed to Obamacare. She publicized the death panels. I think if she were president repealing it would be her top priority. Getting rid of Obamacare helps out on the fiscal conservative front and helps to reduce the intrusiveness of big government.

      2. Pro-life: Being pro-life is who Sarah Palin is. Sarah Palin leads by example on this issue. And, if you’re truly “pro-choice”, it’s hard to attack Sarah Palin on this issue. Sarah Palin is the woman who got pregnant and she is the woman who made the CHOICE to carry her babies to term – it’s all about a woman’s right to choose, isn’t it? So what is wrong with Sarah Palin’s choice???? The only way to attack Sarah Palin on this issue is to be outright pro-abortion, and take the position that a woman should get an abortion whether she wants to or not.

      Furthermore, as president, Sarah Palin gets rid of the PERCEIVED NEED for most abortions. The reason for most abortions is the woman who is pregnant can’t acheive her goals if she has a baby [or if she has this particular baby at this particular time]. So if Sarah Palin, the mother of five chidren including one special needs child, becomes president what does that do to the myth that a woman cannot accomplish her goals if she has a baby? I’d say it demolishes that myth.

      3. Our 2nd Amendment rights: Sarah “I eat therefore I hunt” Palin will defend our second amendment rights because she knows gun ownership is important from personal experience.

      4. Foreign policy: Sarah Palin loves America and she admires Margaret Thatcher who ran a conservative, effective foreign policy. Sarah Palin would leave Barrack “never says the word victory” Obama in the dust on foreign policy. Pawlenty and some other potential Republican candidates are probably about equal to Palin on foreign policy, but I see no one who is clearly superior to her.

      5. Fiscal conservative world view besides repealing Obamacare. Sarah Palin eloped – to save money. That is the mark of a frugal person, and the mindset of a fiscal conservative.

      6. Reaching across the aisle to get dubious bipartisan compromises. Given how Sarah Palin has been savaged by leftists, she is unlikely to make dubious compromises with them to get their approval or get invited to the “right” cocktail parties.

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

        stuff she’s said. And it doesn’t line up at all with her actual “record” as a governing executive. Her so-called accomplishments in Alaska – all of which have been or are being rolled into non-existence – we accomplished with Democrat votes in the Legislature.

        Your comments on abortion are simply so unfounded and stupid as not merit a reply. And on foreign policy, I’m sorry but “love of country” doesn’t measure up to a well thought out policy. Reagan had years of study and work on FP thesis, she’s’ got a couple of facebook articles.

        Come hell or high water you can’t show a single “fiscally conservative” act as an executive. She’s all talk. And she’s really good at appealing to people who are looking for a good feeling about their candidate – like the folks who elected Obama.

        All this is moot, however, since the only real point about Palin is that if she can’t turn her polling with independents around – and I’m talking about F/U polling not head-to-head – she’ll had Obama and his billion$ campaign fund a landslide and give him back big numbers in both houses of Congress.

      • Darin_H

        David, I know all that stuff. It also isn’t what I was asking for. I’m not looking for her position on issues. I’m looking for what her record is – a defense of her record.

        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
        • David123

          Sarah Palin, as a person, is rock solid conservative in

          1. favoring repeal of Obamacare

          2. being pro-life

          3. being pro-2nd amendment rights.

          She is right on these issues because of who she is. On these three issues, I don’t think we could find anyone more conservative to nominate than Sarah Palin. With Sarah Palin, you don’t have to wonder if she’s truly against Obamacare, abortion, and gun-control. Some candiates, you kind of wonder if they’re taking positions they don’t truly believe in just to get nominated. Not so with Palin, at least on those three isssues.

          So it’s more about what she has done in her whole life than what she has done just as governor.

          I feel the same way about Barack Obama. I disagree with many of his policies, but my strongest disagreement is with him attending a church where they curse America for 20 years. I think he was born in Hawaii, but he couldn’t have stopped his mother from flying to Kenya to give birth to him anyhow. He could have stopped attending that church the first time they cursed America. He didn’t have to keep going there for 20 years.

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

            And it’s fun to see someone so afraid of what *might* be out there in her record that they don’t even want to look – it ain’t just a river in Egypt!

          • Darin_H

            Insert Shawshank Redemption quote about “obtuse”

            I think you’re just a ‘fraidy cat – too scared of what he might find :)

            Again, I ask not about her positions.

          • David123

            Barrack Obama – never been governor, and he has done a much worse job as president than Palin [and most other Republicans] have done as governor

            Donald Trump – never been governor

            Sarah Palin has not imposed an Obamacare-like health care scheme on the people of Alaska. This makes her preferable to Mitt Romney.

            Sarah Palin has not let a lot of criminals out of jail. This makes her preferable to Mike Huckabee.

            For me, it is important to evaluate Sarah Palin the whole person, not just Sarah Palin the governor. However, if you’re focusing on primarily on governor I can see why you might prefer Pawlenty or Barbour to Palin. In that case the position should be “Palin is good, and Barbour(or Pawlenty) is even better.” No point in Palin-bashing. Sarah Palin the vice-presidential candidate was almost successful in preventing Obama from becoming president – that should count for something.

            Sarah Palin enjoyed high popularity as Alaska’s governor.
            http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp?pg=1
            Her approval rating as governor was always above 50 percent, ranging from 54 to 93 percent.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

            Sarah Palin campaigned and won as a reformer and reformed Alaska

            As governor, Palin had budget surpluses.
            http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/05/nation/na-surplus5/2

            I was not afraid to look – I did look, and I didn’t find anything negative to be valid.

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

            The first five paragraphs relate to exactly nothing but your ability to type with one hand.

            The polling data you quote is three years old. Check out her current polling. Assuming you can operate your mouse with one hand.

            She campaigned as a reformer and the reason she left office is because she got caught in her own reform agenda. And the fact that she climbed in the the Governor’s office over the politically dead bodies of Republicans might have something to do with the fact that when she got her cute tuckus in a sling there wasn’t anybody around to help.

            Nice work on the budgets. The only thing you missed is that every one of her budgets significantly increased it’s predecessor.

            You didn’t find anything David because you don’t know how to look or what to look for. It’s a frequent problem experienced by worshipers and/or the not to bright. Pick one.

            This is a new standard for pathetic though.

          • Darin_H

            I don’t see any accomplishments up there.

            Geez, I can at least come up with the gas pipeline off the top of my head.

            And did you really, really, just post a like to Wikipedia? Really?

            double heh.

          • aesthete
          • Tbone

            naysayers bother you. They are kinds like spinsters who attack the the good looking gal who got the good looking guy. They are as predictable in their Plain insults as sunrise. Amusing, really.

          • Darin_H

            That someone brings up Palins rather moderate Republican governing history, or the poor little boys who can’t handle that fact?

            I’ll give her this, Palin’s more of a man than you ‘bone. I find it insulting that you’re so dense that both ‘becker and I agree that she’s perfect in what she’s doing now, and you think we’re knocking her for it. Hah.

          • Tbone

            and attack any Palin supporter with your worn out non-issues. It’s somewhat amusing but in a pathetic cringing sort of way.

          • aesthete

            for showing up with “facts” and “questions” about her “record”! You should follow Tbone’s lead and talk about bad smells — the true mark of a scholar.

          • acat

            He that smelt it .. and so on?

            Eh. To be fair to Tbone… not sure if it’s Palin’s Alaskan executive record or the clear disconnect between it and her supporters but .. even on all that Alaskan ice, something still stinks.

            Mew

          • Tbone

            But I do have enough sense to laugh at you pseudo-political wonks.

          • Darin_H

            You take a gander at a good looking woman who makes a great speech and all your brains go to your crotch.
            /tbone

            Nice try. Still no list of her conservative accomplishments in office.

          • Tbone

            there are a lot more “real guys” out there than wonkers.

            Really Dude, Goo Goo Dolls and you’re talking about my crotch? LOL.

          • Darin_H

            Yes, there are a lot more real guys out there, and they would probably want to know what she has accomplished – at least a basic outline.

            No wonder that you can’t come up with anything other than insults (I’m only giving what I get here) because all the blood rushes out of your brain when you she her name?

          • Darin_H

            this is hilarious – that we’d spend an entire thread on this, instead of, say, spending it talking about Palin’s executive accomplishments.

            Says a lot about you, and I guess, her.

          • aesthete

            REAL MEN don’t have time for facts!

          • Tbone

            written in reverse on your foreheads so that when you look in the mirror it will remind you what you’re supposed to do.

            As for facts, you guys don’t know the difference between fact and opinion.

            By example, Palin resigned. That is a fact. All the other stuff about that you guys blow up each other’s shorts is opinion. Fact.

          • acat

            Fact: Palin resigned.
            Fact: There has yet to be a convincing narrative to explain it.
            Fact: The mushy middle, who will select our next POTUS, need that narrative.

            Fact: Tbone doesn’t have a better narrative, so is reduced to .. well .. talking about bad smells.

            Mew

          • Darin_H

            Because I don’t actually hate Palin, I rather like her. A heckuva lot. And have said so. In this thread. So your dishonesty is as grand as your ego. Again, you’re still avoiding Palin’s record, and agreeing with me – she’s a great orator, who makes Democrats’ heads explode.

            You do realize that every time you reply to me, without giving any evidence of governing accomplishments, it bolsters my case (just to be sure, my case is that Palin should stick to speeches and jabbing Democrats with pointy sticks, a hot female Rush Limbaugh if you please).

          • Tbone

            I’m not avoiding Palin’s record, I don’t much care about Palin’s record. Not my job. If you would quit squealing and blow in a bag for a moment, you could go back up and read my first post here. All it was was a word of advice to David123 not to let you swarming Palinphobes get to him.

            Geez, anytime someone posts a positive word about her you guys show up like gnats to a bug light. I mean really, how many anti-Palin posts do you have to accumulate to get into the 7th Heaven when Art Chance returns from his exile in Murkowski’s Hell? :-)

          • Darin_H

            You’re too cute. You don’t like talking about Palin’s record because it’s both thin, and moderate – you’d rather try to distract everyone with her looks and her speeches. And all this one-handed typing you’re doing isn’t helping your case at all.

          • aesthete

            I think he’s using his nose or a speech-to-text program at this point.

          • Darin_H

            Just got the image of Tbone as Farva from Super Troopers….

          • Tbone

            Grow up.

          • Darin_H

            Pretty rich coming from you.

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

            non-fact based splat against the RS wall from Tbone.

            The only thing more predictable than some of us point out pearls-of-fact to the Palinswine is you showing up and saying nothing.

          • Tbone

            Becker, she is an accomplished, good looking woman. The fact that you can’t deal with that tells us so much about your personal emptiness.

            I just wish you weren’t soooo easy.

          • acat

            to sit in the big chair, to grab the brass ring, to be the most powerful woman in the free world?

            Failing to sell a jet on ebay?
            Speechifying and bomb-throwing?
            Putting caribou back on the menu?

            Seriously, Tbone .. I know you like her… but you have yet to address the questions about her actual record. So far, the only one I’ve seen do that is Aaron.

            Mew

          • Tbone

            prejudice and bigotry. I am not here to either defend or promote Palin. I just point that you Palinphobes come scurrying from the woodwork and attack any Palin supporter like a pack of little anklebiters. While some of the Palinistas sound like they have Palin shrines you Palinphobes sound like you belong to the Art Chance Cargo Cult. LOL.

          • acat

            See, the thing is that none of the pro-Palin posters seem to address the problems.

            There’s the fact that her negatives haven’t moved in the middle. There’s the fact that her supporters haven’t been given or don’t know how to repeat a narrative that explains some of her apparent faults.

            These aren’t knocks on her – these are questions about the sanity of her campaign. If they’re not clever enough to come up with a simple narrative that explains away the questions – as Aaron did and I paraphrase thusly: “Look, on page 8 of this state report, she was vindicated. Troopergate is a dead issue except as media innuendo” – then I’m not seeing how they can really get anywhere.

            I can, however, see how we’ll have a lot of Palin fans sitting home on election day because “their darling” didn’t win the primary.

            Mew

          • taylerdog23

            C’mon, just please try to come up with something that is a demonstration of her record.

            “She is right on these issues because of who she is.”

            How the he** do you know who she is? Because of her speeches?

            And yes, I believe I would have to worry about Obamacare, abortion, and gun-control because she would be too busy sending out tweets against the evil MSM to actually, you know, GOVERN.

  • urherex

    The question is not where Obama was born, it’s” was his Father a
    United States Citizen” when he was born. Both parents Must be Citizens
    of the U.S. That’s the question that needs to be answered. There all
    over this at The American Thinker.
    As for Trump running for, and getting the nomination. It Aint gonna happen.
    Just as Mitt has Romney Care that can be used against him. The Donald
    not only can’t deny that he voted for The One, he Endorsed him. He told
    Neil Cavuto he thought he was (to paraphrase) a fine young man, and asked
    why not give him a chance, what harm can it do? It’s on tape, I’m sure
    someone could use it in a 30 second Ad. I wish Neil would play it for him
    when he”s on his show, ranting about what a mess Berry has made of
    everything.
    As for Sarah, I think she’s way to valuable doing what she’s doing now.
    Who else can make the Lefts Heads Explode just by tweeting, or saying
    one sentence. Not to mention all the revinue she creates wherever she
    goes.
    One more thing GO LAKERS!

    • Josh LeGuern

      I’m a natural-born United States citizen and neither of my parents were citizens at the time of my birth.

      And yeah, I think Trump’s finished. But I think Palin SHOULD run.

      And I agree with you on something else GO LAKERS! ;)

      • urherex

        Its not a problem if your not running for President. It’s the law, and if his
        father was’nt a U.S. Citizen that could be the only reason he’s gone
        to such lenghts to hide his birth certificate.
        I love Palin, don’t get me wrong. It’s just that she is so effective doing what
        she’s doing now. Besides a position with the next President would be
        just fine with me, Say Press Secretary maybe.
        Well at least we agree on one thing, GO LAKERS!

        • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

          …to know that Barack Obama, Sr., was never an American citizen. Obama’s a citizen, because born in Hawaii, but not a natural-born citizen, since his father was a Kenyan. It’s that simple.

          Everyone just decided to overlook that conspicuous fact. Clarence Thomas as much as admitted that.

          In a theoretical sense, this is hugely important, because essentially all three branches of the U.S. government — executive, legislative, judicial — as well as all levels of government — local, state, federal — simply ignored and our Constitution, which in my mind has done profound damage to our constitutional republic.

          On a practical political level, however, the U.S. is never, never, never, never, never, never, NEVER going to throw out its “first black president” — so forget about it. We’re stuck, and that’s it.

          • powertothepeople

            Not sure what Thomas was talking about, but it does not require the President to be a natural born Citizen in order to be eligible.

            Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as President of the United States:

            ? No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

            Second, regardless of his fathers citizenship, being born in the USA under the 14th makes him a citizen. So his fathers standing is a mute issue.

            Third,Again matters little what his father had listed as his citizenship, as long as one of his parents was an American citizen, was in good standing, and had been the US or one of its territories for a set amount of time prior to the birth, he is a citizen eligible to be president. While I do not know the law concerning British citizenship, I would assume due to his fathers citizenship, he could have dual citizenship but since that was never done, again it is a mute issue.

            So not sure why you think his fathers citizenship would change the fact that he is a natural born citizen. You either have to take one of three positions, he was born here and regardless of his parents citizenship, under the 14th amendment, he is a natural born citizen, two he was born outside the US but because of his mothers citizenship and her compliance with the requirements set forth in US law he is a citizen eligible to be president although not natural born, or you buy into conspiracies and believe that the above law is irrelevant, his mother did not meet the requirements to have her son be a citizen due to his birthplace, and he is in fact a British Citizen due to his birth in Kenya and it being a commonwealth of Britain at the time.

            But you state you believe he was born in HA, so by law, he is a natural born citizen regardless of his father or even his mothers citizenship. So going on your own admittance that he was born here and your misunderstanding of US law concerning Natural born, there is no damage to our constitution or our republic by anyone, not even the branches of government. The only damage to our republic was the fact that so many morons voted him in.

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

      that remain to be answered. John Roberts took care of all of those when he swore him into office.

  • lukematthews

    Trump is a classic Democrat, a true mainstream, machine-supporting, Big Business Democrat who has no conservative credentials at all. But, on a side note, his unabashed slamming of Obama has done some good. He’s masquerading as a Republican but really causing mainstream Democrats to question the Anointed Won. Right now Obama is being squeezed by his left wing kook base, and now he’s going to see flight from the center of the party, especially given he’s becoming ballot box poison.
    Palin gives as good as she gets. The lame-brained media and Hollyweirdos are out to get her, but I wouldn’t count her out yet. She brings fire and light to the situation. I’m not sure she’d be the best candidate, but she has passion and verve and I respect her.

    • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander
  • jenniferjmilleresq

    To believe you guys, you have to believe everything that comes out of her mouth is a lie and that her life is a complete fraud, or perhaps there is something else about her that is at the core of your persistent and vigorous opposition. Whatever your problem is, I say, what’s the big deal if she runs in the primary? What problem do you have with that? If she’s such a fraud and loser, she won’t win the primary, right?!! Her all-important secret negatives in AK will be unearthed in the primary process, right (oops, I forgot, there is a conspiracy there and her record is being buried wholesale as we type). I have a very strong sense she is going to run and do a whole lot better in the voting booth than you are projecting despite every “negative” that exists being trotted out.

    • Goldwater_Conservative

      since you seem very new to this world of politics. A GOP primary is a contest among the MSM to see who can make republicans look the worst. Thats the goal, and none other. So now close your eyes, and picture debate after debate with Trump and Palin talking birth cirtificate and Paul talking conspiracies….you see it now. Endless sound bites on CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYT, SNL it would be there dream come true a real 3 ring circus. Its time for us all to get serious, and in so doing its time to tell the clowns to exit stage right.

      • jenniferjmilleresq

        Thanks for the lesson on politics. I have a masters in journalism and know a little about the “MSM” and if she looks bad to more of us than not, she won’t win. What’s the problem?!

        • Goldwater_Conservative

          will make the GOP look bad as a whole because that will be what the MSM will spend every waking hour trying to do. Its hard for them to make Pawlenty or Romney look like a fool, but with Saracuda, all she has to do is open her mouth and the world laughs.

          • jenniferjmilleresq

            does an absolutely thorough job of making itself “look bad as a whole.” And the worst part is, it’s the substance of their actions that is ridiculous, not lapses in vocabulary. They negotiated down from 100 billion to 38 billion after accounting gimmicks less than 1 billion and they have a substantial majority.

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            here is another lesson for free, they have only 1/3rd of the government. If they controlled more then you could expect a better deal.

          • jenniferjmilleresq

            but gimmicks. Why did they punt?

          • Goldwater_Conservative

            play gimmicks, I think they actually got snookered on that. I think most of them thought they were doing the whole 38 billion cut.

          • NHConservative0227

            On one hand you make fun of Palin while defending the weak GOP House leadership.

            You say they got snookered on that deal when they actually thought they were cutting $38B? Even if that’s what they thought, it’s absolutely pathetic to cut a measely $38B without even putting up a fight. There were no cuts to the EPA or to Planned Parenthood. These guys were scared to death of gov’t shutdown. These guys have no backbone.

            Palin took then to task for being so pathetic and not living up to their promises We need more leaders like Sarah who are willing to “fight like a girl.”

            Yet you defend the weak House leaders and attack Sarah??

      • 20jan2013

        I thought she was a “freak.”

        Get a life.

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

      Find one statement here that says she shouldn’t run in the primary.

      In point of fact I’ve said over and over that she might well win the primary and that it’s the general where she’ll get massacred. Literally.

      The discussion upthread simply revolves around the worshipers who simply don’t live anywhere near the real world. The one thing all of those folks have in common is “a strong sense” she can win. Facts on the ground be dammed. I had this same discussion multiple times on the subject JD Hayworth beating John McCain. There were a dozen or so people who kept telling me that all of the polling – and I look at F/U not head to head – was simply an abberation and that their sense was that the TeaParties would flood to the polls and give JD a win. I predicted a 20 point loss five months prior to the election and the final result was something line -23.

      Ignore facts on the ground at your own embarrassment.

      • jenniferjmilleresq

        I don’t think my impression of your goal is off at all, with or without a specific quote. All the dislikers all have is a “strong sense she [can't] win the general.” I know everyone’s terrified to analogize to 1980, but old GOP establishment geezers everywhere said Reagan had no chance in the general.

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

          I could care less if she runs. Frankly, I doubt she will, but that’s just a guess. If she does, I think there is a pretty high probablility she loses the primary. She’s got enough fools following her to make an impression, but I doubt there are enough of you for her to win.

          I don’t have a “strong sense she can’t win in the general”. I’ve got conditions on the ground and they’re very stark.

          1. Her F/U among independents goes down with every poll. She has to turn that around.
          2. She’s shown absolutely no inclination to reach out to anybody but “her base”.
          3. Her record as Governor of Alaska is, at very best arguable. Realistically, it’s not a picture – even a blurry one – of conservatism.
          4. She ran out on the job with the worst excuse anybody has ever put up.
          5. Alaska is supposed to release the emails in question in May. I doubt that will be pretty, mostly because she’s consistently refused to discuss the problems with those for two years. And they will be a problem for her.
          6. All of her signature programs as governor are now or soon will be vapor.
          7. Outside of her home town, she’s about as popular as ebola in Alaska. You can bet that will get wide press.
          8. You may not care about the MSM, but that’s where the great unwashed get their news. It won’t be pretty.
          9. She’s studiously avoided the MSM for two years. She refuses to talk to anybody who might ask a difficult follow up question. That can’t go on if she’s going to run.
          10. When faced with a hostile press, she won’t come off well to anybody but you.

          Frankly, in these forums the biggest problem Palin has is her supporters who come charging in, ignoring the issues she has to address to win, primarily because they couldn’t make a cogent argument if their life depended on it. There are people who support Palin who are able to make a reasonable argument and they stay far away from most of these diaries because I would guess they’re embarassed to be seen with the likes of her defenders posting here.

          • jenniferjmilleresq

            I think you’re overestimating the “MSM” and the power of a “hostile press.” Times are changing. The effect of her stepping down as governor and the emails and other negatives remains to be seen. Current polling is 18 months out. Bottom line is your “reasonable argument” is an educated guess (if all your facts are accurate) with a lot of personal opinion. Most candidates haven’t even announced. I think this trashing of another conservative is premature and disgraceful.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    ….who said that Palin’s speech in Madison yesterday was her second-best (second only to the 2008 GOP convention speech). I would rate it her third-best, the second-best being the one she gave to the Susan B. Anthony List’s Celebrate Life Breakfast last May:
    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/293509-1

    HOWEVER, having said all that, I agree with the various commenters here who say that the people who elect presidents are the “independents” in the “middle” — which means the millions of uninvolved, non-political, apathetic, touchy-feeley, Oprah and National Enquirer people who vote for whomever they hear being talked about favorably by their co-workers, and the co-workers being mostly people who’ve been indoctrinated by the MSM.

    As many have pointed out, Sarah’s favorable/unfavorable ratings with these uninformed morons have gone NOWHERE in the last two years. Their minds got made up about Sarah Palin back during 2008 — and nothing’s gonna change ‘em.

    Unlike some of the people here, I think Sarah Palin’s smart as a whip, a gifted politician, a capable executive, good judge of character, positive can-do attitude (which we desperately need big doses of about now), etc., etc. In an ideal world, she’d have a chance. But in an ideal world, the MSM would be fair and balanced and present both sides of things, too.

    Sarah should help good conservative candidates get elected. Her “win” record in the 2010 elections was pretty good. She’s doing great in the role she has right now, and should keep at it. I’d be willing to bet that whoever she ends up BACKING for President will win not only the primary but the general.

    • usadying

      And RINO’s to boot?

      • acat

        most likely failed to converge behind a single candidate before Iowa, making it a non-decisive free-for-all … leaving most of the conservatives damaged and vulnerable to whichever RINO who does well in New Hampshire.

        I expect that’s exactly what’s going to happen since the only time in my memory that the GOP hasn’t stuck its’ collective gonads in a meat grinder during a wide open primary was 1980.

        Every other time, it’s been “This man’s turn” or “This man is electable” or some equivalent blather signifying that, once again, the conservatives who provide the muscle of the party get overruled by the gutless D.C. apparachiks who pass for the brains.

        Mew

        p.s. I’ll be shopping for real estate someplace nice and deserted and with clear fields of fire… I hear http://www.missilebases.com/ has some nice choices…

  • jenniferjmilleresq

    They don’t have a stranglehold on us anymore….!! There are so many news sources and greater access to communicate (fb, etc.). Take a deeeep breath.

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

      According to the most recent Pew Media Survey, about 60% of people get their news from TV; about 30% from newspapers and about 35% online. The numbers don’t add to 100% because many people get their news from multiple sources.

      So while the case can be made that the MSM doesn’t have a “stranglehold” on us, you can’t by any stretch of imagination sell the idea that they don’t drive the news cycle. Plus, the one question that wasn’t asked above with respect to online news sources is “Do you read a newspaper online?”, and the answer to that would, I’m guessing, be an overwhelming “Yes” for a large number of people. They get their news from the same lefty source (NYT – dead tree v NYT online), it’s just delivered in a diffrent format.

      Don’t kid yourself, or at least don’t pass your delusion on to the rest of us, the MSM will drive the primary, and certainly the general, news cycles. Every candidate will have to deal effectively with them or end up politically dead.

  • nickel

    Here is a simple test. Honestly, if you were in combat and needed someone to be willing to take a bullet in order to cover your back, who of the Republican Presidential candidates could you trust not to;

    A.) LEAVE
    B.) Join the enemy
    C.) Surrender and declare a “compromise”
    D.) Say they changed their mind about the sanctity of your life
    E.) Sell the story of your “death” to promote a celebrity TV showl.

    Okay, now we have a much smaller group of potential nominees, and while I hate to admit it as a man, the only ones still on the list are both women. You go girls.

    • 20jan2013

      Could you please match the contenders to each letter? I don’t know where Huckabee fits on that list. I know Romney is D.

      • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

        nt

  • 20jan2013

    would be the establishment’s, MSM’s, and the Democrats’ worst nightmare. I can just imagine the headasplosions.

    But Pawlenty’s cool, too! Trump may yet atone for his past sins and win me over.

    • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

      nt.

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

      And I can see Obama getting EVERY Independent vote and winning by 15 with a 150 vote margin in the House and close to 60 in the Senate.

      And you obviously no NOTHING about Trump.

      • 20jan2013

        just that it would be their worst nightmare even contemplating the possibility that they would win.

        I don’t claim to know a whole lot about Trump, but to say I know “nothing” about him is a bit of an overstatement. What do I need to know about him? I trust your judgment becker.

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

          And take a hard look at his business experience.

          From what little I’ve seen – and I haven’t looked hard – his positions on issues are infantile. I’m seriously not impressed. Check out today’s National Review Online and their Corner blog. There’s a bunch of stuff that should scare the pants off you.

          With respect to his business experience, he’s got four huge business BKs, the most recent netted him a huge $$ in TARP funds. That’s at NRO too.

          And then he’s a birther. Frankly, that’s an automatic disqualification for me. People can blather on about the birth cert until hell freezes over, but say BO can’t produce one. So what? What ‘cha gonna do? HINT: nothing. It’s a non-issue people are wasting their time on while the building we all live in is burning down.

        • Kyle-MI

          mbecker is correct about the NRO articles. The one I found most devastating was the article on Trump’s abuse of imminent domain. I am surprised that someone hasn’t brought this up sooner. Trump made his money on real estate including numerous deals with local governments for them to take private properties via imminent domain and then resell them to Trump at bargain basement prices. There is no way I can see this playing well with most of the GOP voters, let alone most of the general public.

  • ArchTriumph

    Great post (apart from the adequate comment – but I understand your angle)!!

    Sarah Palin has the guts we need. Too many of the guys in the crowd are gutless. They justify, equivocate and rationalize with the best of them, but they rarely if ever take a hard stand on what matters the most.

    Palin is the best candidate in the category unto her own and that matters the most: candidates who demonstrate boldness in clear communication and consistent commitment to constitutional principles.

    She is adequately qualified. I especially like an under touted aspect of her resume the negotiations within the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, This simply tells me she can play hard ball, big time. Say what you will but she represented business and constituent interests well.

    Palin has a Plan. America First.

  • runner12

    filled with name-calling and amped up rhetoric? It is one thing to ask someone to back up what they are saying, but personally attacking someone for disagreeing with you is going too far.

    All of those who have a problem with Palin, write a diary! You would be able to educate more people on her record than you ever will by name-calling.

    Right now you are just further alienating people and entrenching
    those who are over-the-top Palinistas in their unquestioning support of her.

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

      There is a group of people who are nothing more than Palin worshipers of the same ilk as RonPaul acolytes and the jerks who elected Obama. They don’t deal in facts, they don’t deal in the actual conditions on the ground, they only deal in their messianic love for Palin and any taste of reality is greeted as heresy. They don’t think, they have no clue how to research a question or present an argument and, when the subject is Palin, there can be no argument.

      Let ‘em be entrenched, let ‘em be what ever they want to be. They’re simple fools. Don’t misunderstand, there are people who can make a reasonable case for Palin, none of them show up here, I think they’re embarassed by these fools.

    • powertothepeople

      there is not an overwhelming amount of unfriendliness here and just as much comes from the Palin bobble heads. But lets not play coy shall we, no amount of reasonable dialogue is going to stop those who worship Palin Jesus from acting out like the girls at a Justin Beiber concert. You know it, they know, we know it.

      And as to your “go write a diary” nonsense, this site is not about only speaking on diaries you agree about. It is a site dedicated to political debate. In fact, it is what makes the site great. There have been plenty of diaries written from every side and every side responds on them all. So thicken the skin a bit and don’t worry so much about what is said and what is not said. There is already a team of moderators that are more than capable of intervening if things get out of control.

      • runner12

        This was just a bit of friendly advice, nothing more. It cannot be denied that every Palin diary ends with each side calling each other names, very little true debate goes on.

        Both of you feel very strongly about your views on Palin, that is not a bad thing. But placing your views in a diary might be helpful to others and may decrease the number of people who blindly follow Palin. There are many conflicting reports out there about her.

        I will also stand by the truth that name-calling rarely wins anyone to your point of view. That has nothing to do with thick skin, but it has everything to do with how effectively one communicates their point of view.

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

          And the reason for that is quite simple. As with RonPaul’s supporters, the ability to do research, read and understand, and assemble an argument is pretty much non-existent with Palin worshippers. They pretty much refuse to discuss history or anything with a factual basis because they get seriously chopped to pieces every time they do. Thus they are left with projection and prognostication that they claim as fact. It’s pretty pathetic.

          There ARE Palin supporters here who are very capable of cogent arguments and who can make a case for her. They just don’t show up once the twits have have taken hold.

          • runner12

            There is no doubt that there are many who jump to defend Palin when someone dares question whether she is the best choice for President, even when the questions are quite legitimate. Also to be fair, the diaries refuting some of the issues that people have with Palin have been a little slim.

            I just wish that the debate would stick to facts on both sides and quit hurling personal insults. It does nothing to clarify some of the issues surrounding.

          • rightwingmom52

            When those on both sides resort to hurling insults, it makes me question how much I’m willing to consider their opinions at all, about Palin or anything else. Not everyone who questions Palin is a “hater,” but not everyone who supports her is an “idiot.” You can substitute whatever adjective you want between the quotes.

  • sparkyva

    The right person will have made mistakes and learned from them. The right person will have a vision for America and work tirelessly towards it. The right person will be able to communicate that vision to the people, be able to use the “bully pulpit” as Teddy Roosevelt said. The right person will know how to play hardball politically and push the agenda through. The right person will in those 8 years lay the groundwork for another generation of American greatness.

    Those are the standards we should be judging by. The nitpicking and favoritism shown in the comments here are just partisan bickering. Anyone running on the above platform has to prove to me that they will support our candidate even if it is not them. Lose the ego trip and really put the good of the Country first.

    How many will when they lose the nomination, go back home tail between legs and disappear. We need all the candidates to pledge to hit the campaign trail after the nomination to support the taking back of our country.

  • rightwingnut2

    Out of the current crop of potential candidates, who do you support?

    1. Tell me why your candidate of choice is the best to go up against Obama.

    2. Do you believe your candidate of choice has the political courage to do what needs to be done if elected?

    As far as I can tell, the current crop includes…
    Palin
    Romney
    Huckabee
    Bachmann
    Palwenty
    Daniels
    Cain
    Santorum
    Barbour
    Huntsman
    Johnson
    Paul
    Trump

    It’s likely that not all of them will run, but barring any surprises, that’s likely it right there.

    A few of them are good conservatives, but rather than bash Palin, I think you need to seriously consider the prospects of your own dream candidate (s).

    • powertothepeople

      you get a life, grow up, get a new love interest, and have enough maturity to understand that all people are not going to have a picture of Palin hanging from the rear view mirror. People can like her personally but dislike or not favor her politically. Does not make them haters, which by the way, was that not the kiddie word developed and made famous by the twit Paris Hilton?

      Grow up.

      • gekster

        to run as Palins VP.

      • rightwingnut2

        I ask you a simple question in a respectful manner. If you can’t reply without insulting my maturity, then I have no use for you. Go to hell.

        • powertothepeople

          did your feelings get hurt. And sending someone to hell, not very nice of you.

          And if you think calling anyone who does not lust after Palin haters respectful, then you should have had no issue with my response.

          And the same comments above stand. Although now I think I understand considering children use the whole go to hell thing. Let me guess, 12?

    • ruexperienced

      That is a BIG IF you are skipping over.

      People make their decisions for president based on a combination of three criteria-

      1- Ideology

      2- Experience and job qualifications

      3- Electability

      Palin probably has the correct ideology. (assuming her Constitutional common sense conservative bumper sticker slogans are more than bumper sticker slogans) Of course her ideology is probably no different than the 20 million other people who post here or who listen to Rush Limbaugh.

      But her experience and job qualifications are sorely lacking. Nearly every other person on the list tops her in that area.

      And where she totally fails is in electability. She ranks at the bottom with Gary Johnson and Ron Paul. She has had two years to raise her shaky image into that of a serious presidential candidate. But after quitting her job (bad move), she walked the red carpet on Dancing With the Stars, had a reality show and got into food fights with Cathy Griffin, Bill Maher, Michelle Obama, Cathy Griffin, Barbara Bush, Rick Santorum, Charles Krauthammer and Cathy Griffin. Palin has ZERO CHANCE to win a general election because nobody outside of a few loyalists take her seriously.

      So even if she gets a 10 for ideology, with the other factors being very low numbers, she is toast.

      • rightwingnut2

        Huck? Romney? They poll the best right now, but I don’t know many conservatives who would go the extra mile to help their candidacies.

        Karl Rove pointed out that Giuliani was polling at 50% against all Dem challengers at this point in 2007. Hillary was in the 30s, and Obama in the 20s.

        How did that work out?

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

          But God won’t give him back.

          So, I’ll have to wait and see what issues come to a head, how the candidates/potential candidates deal with them and make a decision. And that won’t be for quite a while. There’s no rush.

          • acat

            http://sweasel.com/wp-content/themes/weasel/graphics/zombiereagancarter.jpg

            Sounding better all the time…

            Mew

        • ruexperienced

          and we need to see how each one handles himself. So ask me in a year.

          Candidates are responsible for their own image. It is UP TO THEMSELVES to get above the fray and to get their message out. If they can’t run a good marketing campaign they cannot get elected. Period.

          If they are easily distracted by petty attacks and spend their time complaining and moaning about small picture distractions (“Michelle Obama doesn’t want us to eat desert!”), then they are more suited for a radio talk show, not the White House.

          This is why Palin is viewed unfavorably by 61 percent of the people IN ALASKA!

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

      Or comprehend rational thought.

      Please note that the folks here who are critical of Palin’s experience and her ability to be an effective President, to a person all think she has a place in the party structure. She’s good at throwing red meat to the base. She’s a good fund raiser. She’s good at attracting attention on issues. I personally would have loved to see her as RNC Chair.

      We also have solid, documented factual reasons why she would be a disaster as President, and why given the current situation on the ground with Independents, she’ll lose the general badly.

      In terms of “picking a dream candidate”, those don’t exist. All candidates are trade-offs and frankly the biggest problem with the Palin Worshipers is that they refuse to believe she has even a small problem. Their vision is one of throwing palm branches down on the streets of DC as she enters on her inaugural donkey.

      In addition, why would anybody pick a candidate now? One, you don’t even know who’s running. Got some probables, but no candidates. Two, you don’t know what the real driving issues are going to be as the election nears. You can write down a laundry list, but don’t expect any of them to be near the top in six to nine months when things will begin to count.

      And finally, as far as “bashing Palin” is concerned, the problem isn’t so much Palin. It’s the completely irrational, ignorant fools who have their little Palin shrines down in the basement where their mommys won’t catch them late at night when they’re supposed to be in bed. With their hands on top of the covers.

    • Change Jar Conservative

      1) Palin is the only candidate who I’ve had VERY CONSERVATIVE only-vote-for-Republican people tell me they wouldn’t vote for.

      This includes my father-in-law who is a follow the speed limit, wear-a-tie, never-swear Christian / pro-lifer / fiscal conservative.

      But he’s not the only one.

      2) Who would I rather have?

      Mitch Daniels is my #1.

      He’s a three-leg conservative despite other people’s plan to paint him as something else.

      He does have FINANCIAL PRIORITIES right now and in his current job has priorities around EDUCATION rather than UN-UNIONING.

      He is the most ready and most able and most serious candidate out there.

      Beyond him and assuming that he won’t get past the sound bites over his “social truce,” Tim Pawlenty is probably the next best person out there.

      3) If I could make Palin be the President (i.e. if I got to choose POTUS) then she is someone I would be fine with. However, this election is far too important in stopping Barak to put up our most dangerous candidate.

      Palin is nitro and glicerin. She would either win or just get killed …

      She has a visceral connection with about 22% of the population (including yourself apparently), but a strong negative perception with about 40% including a good number of moderate and conservative voters.

      It’s not about hating here, it’s about winning and a lot of us aren’t willing to take a chance on her losing a very winneable election.

      • aesthete

        but to add to your statement, ‘becker’s absolutely right about all candidates being a series of tradeoffs. Daniels has problems with taxes, Pawlenty supported climate change and can be a bit too conciliatory. Both could potentially have problems with foreign policy down the line. Nobody’s perfect — which is one reason why we shouldn’t lay down rose petals at the feet of any pol.

  • aesthete

    with whatever small scraps of dignity they have left — nope, they just have to extract every bit of worth that the thread originally had.

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