« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Er, Sarah…

By: kowalski (Diary)  |  August 26th, 2010 at 05:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Ok this is going to be very short but Sarah Palin is forgetting something when she says things like this, referring to Scott Brown:

“But up here in Alaska, and so many places across the U.S., where we have a pioneering, independent spirit, and we have an expectation that our representatives in D.C. will respect the will of the people and the intelligence of the people — well, up here, we wouldn’t stand for that.”

Uh, Ok. Let’s not talk about the fact that Sarah Palin couldn’t ever be anyone’s Senator here in Massachusetts (nor would she want to be.)  Or that she decided to quit her job as Governor of Alaska to persue what she’s currently doing.  It’s beside the point, even according to her. 

Instead we should remember something else.  If we’re going to talk about judgment, let’s remember whose Vice Presidential candidate pick she was, and how enthusiastically she accepted that job.  Does anyone remember who that guy was?  Because she was willing to be his Vice President, and she wanted it really badly.  And a lot of us held our noses and went along with that, at the time. 

Remember, Sarah?

What I read from this and the past few days’ events is that we’re looking at McCain/Palin again in 2012, along with Romney/Brown.   Redstate’s editors should buy a pallet of Pepto Bismol right now.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Tbone

    Also, anyone who keeps bringing up the “Palin quit” meme, is just plain ignorant or totally unable to accept that what she has been able to accomplish running a freehand has been far better for conservatives and Republicans than had she remained a sitting duck governor.

    So K, are you ignorant or unable to accept reality?

    • SteveLA

      Scott Brown type Republicans are winning everywhere outside of the Deep South so far, so what does that tell you? Maybe your mythical “Real Conservatives” are a distant relative of Unicorn Lovers outside of the Deep South?

      I’m lost on the Palin quit meme, what do you call a politician who is elected to serve a term of office and then resigns early? Quitter, Strategic Retreated, Not Serious about Responsibility, Fickle Finger of Fate, Lightweight…so confusing about the adjectives to describe Governor Palin’s leaving office early to start making money.

      What would Jets Coach Rex Ryan say about that move…not in the presence of Tony Dungy that is.

      • Tbone

        “Scott Brown type Republicans are winning everywhere outside of the Deep South so far”

        “so confusing about the adjectives to describe Governor Palin?s leaving office early”

        How about “to be a fulltime liberal ass kicker”.

        Try to get your nose out of the way before her boot arrives.

      • 6eorge Jetson

        nt

      • The_Rebel

        as you would define the term.

        As for Sarah Palin, I think she’s been a real asset to the Party, but she does need to shut up once in a while. This sort of hit job she did on Scott Brown’s conservative credentials doesn’t square with her endorsement of John McCain in the primary, who isn’t exactly a 99.9% conservative type either. Heck, Scott Brown also endorsed McCain and was on the campaign trail with him.

        But if you put Palin and Brown in a room for 20 minutes, I’ll bet they would work out most of their differences and would get along just fine. And that cooperative spirit is the path we must take if we are to gain the majority in the House and Senate.

        • aesthete

          Palin is the conservative version of Obama. Sure, there’s that talking point about how much more experienced than Obama she was, but really, what does anyone know about her in a substantial way? Her three big accomplishments in AZ (“Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share”, “Alaska Gasline Inducement Act”, and the ethics act) are all either dead or dying, and none of them have accomplished what they set out to do. She and Obama have both gotten by on resum?s that a food service manager would look down on, rhetoric that appeals to a certain type, and a persona that attracts the cultural norms of the various groups on their sides. Both are thin-skinned and sensitive to insults, and both seem to think that their words can move the heavens and call down the angels, judging by how many parochial issues both Obama and Palin have commented on. IMO, just as Obama has overstayed America’s rhetoric, so, too, will Palin be over-saturated.

          • JSobieski

            Palin is thin skinned. I think that many of her supporters are a bit overly protective of her, and that she knows she can get a rise out of her supporters by being the person under attack.

            Obama truly is the most thin skinned President since the creation of mass communication technologies like radio. Obama grew up with everyone rooting for him He is uniquely unsuited to be President. He should have gotten a job in Hollywood after winning his Senate race.

          • The_Rebel

            and Obama has the bully pulpit. It is much easier for him to be over-saturated. I think Palin is doing what Richard Nixon did in the 60′s after his defeat for Governor of California. He continued to campaign for Republican congressional candidates, thereby securing much of their support when he ran for the Presidency in 1968.

            Granted, that Sarah doesn’t have the credentials that Nixon had when he left office in 1960 as VP, but she appears to me to be using that same roadmap to the nomination, whether it is in 2012 or 2016.

    • tacoslayer

      PS….it isn’t a “meme”. The lady quit in the middle of her term. The reasons don’t matter. She quit.

      • SteveLA

        Romney has to win the nomination first before nominating a VP canidate, unless you know something I don’t. It’s probably going to be Hucka Hucka and Mitt for sure, and a few others running. Let’s see who is running, what they are saying and what they are going to do to beat Obama before jumping off bridges.

        By the way, the “I won’t vote for X” mantra is something that I’ll leave to the Eeyore Republicans and the “True Conservatives” looking for their perfect Unicorn. We’ll see plenty of that nonsense in the many months ahead and lot more and even better nonsense.

        Besides, Romney is a Robot.

        • tacoslayer

          I’d be thrilled to see Romney get the nomination.
          We need a Qualified candidate if we want to beat Obama.

          I don’t see anyone else on the scene that is more Qualified to be CINC.

          • SteveLA

            Mitt and his sons served in what branch of the US Military? Sky-Net does not count…Oh never-mind.

            Far as seeing, well I’m sure many here on RS could give you the name and address of a good eye doc.

          • tacoslayer

            that is actually interested in the job??

            Military??
            LOL

            That’s a good one….

          • SteveLA

            Beats Bot, me Bot, but Bot, who knows Bot who is Bot going to run Bot. Way Bot too early Bot to talk aBot that now Bot.

          • tacoslayer

            Fair enough.

            Good night!
            :)

          • mbecker908

            Well, for starters, my dead white cat.

            The traits that make a successful businessman don’t necessarily translate well to elective office. For starters, as a businessman he was in charge and dealt with employees. As an elected official he has to deal with other elected officials who have no reason to do as he wants.

            And then there’s his record as a governor. He inherited a bloated, overspending monster with a big deficit in MA. When he left, he left behind the same bloated, overspending monster who was being well fed. He increased revenues and didn’t bother to even try to reduce the bloat.

            And then there’s RomneyCare. It’s bad enough that he actually put that piece of crap together as opposed to forcing the legislature to cob something together and fight them, but he consistently talks about what a great solution to the health care “crisis” it is. In point of fact, it is a total failure and a complete piece of crap.

            Romney is GWB on steroids. The ONLY possible candidate who could be worse is Huckafool.

            Once again, Romney is not just unqualified, but totally unqualified and has the public record to prove it.

          • The_Rebel

            If that’s how you feel about Romney, I can just imagine what you must have thought about Obama’s qualifications. :)

          • mbecker908

            He didn’t – and still doesn’t – have any. I don’t recall any discussion of that point before the election and his performance certainly should have validated the point.

          • The_Rebel

            n/t

          • aesthete

            is, at this juncture, too classy, overqualified, and competent to seek higher office.

            In candor, I prefer gridlock and divided government to one of the Republican big spenders getting office. If Romney or Huck got the nomination, it would show that the Republican party remains married to big government, perhaps inextricably, and would confront conservatives with the choice of either bending over, taking it, and being happy in the faint hope that they might, someday, get the government to do something conservative, or go down the emotionally appealing (but self-defeating) route of starting a third party. If Republicans don’t get serious about spending and the scope of government, and if the Republican higher-ups don’t stop snubbing the cultural and political mores of the hoi-polloi, they’re through. Whether it’s in two years or twenty, they’ll at best be the “anti-New Dealers” again, more known as the loyal opposition than as a governing power.

          • eburke

            “If Romney or Huck got the nomination, it would show that the Republican party remains married to big government, perhaps inextricably,”

            If either of those two get nominated, we as a Party are screwed for precisely the reason you just stated.

          • cactusjack

            If the economy continues to worsen and if, when the smoke clears Nov 2012, Romney is POTUS-elect, then under those circumstances when he takes office he will turn further *right*. Both socially and economically. And defense/national security will take care of themselves. Obama will have so screwed everything up, going back right will be the only option there, too, just how fast the only question.If he gets in, watch.

          • mbecker908

            And he won’t for the same reason GWB could never be a conservative. They are wired to think the best of everyone and work with them in good faith. Romney would get rolled by the Dems before he’d finished his inaugural address.

            Put Romney in office and you’ll see all domestic branches expanding and Romney finding ways to fund them with the same smoke and mirrors he used in Massachusetts.

          • The_Rebel

            would be (hopefully) a Republican controlled House and Senate, something he never had as Governor, with the Dems having veto-proof majorities in the legislature. And if we get the proper people in the leadership, they can hold his feet to the fire.

            I guess I’m more hopeful than you are about Romney, but a lot will depend on what happens this November.

          • aesthete

            That Republican-controlled government did wonders for conservatives in Bush’s first term.

            Romney knows how to take a failure and turn it into something profitable through rebranding, differentiating the product line, and using various other techniques that work marvelously for business, but not so well for government. See, for instance, his self-rebranding when he went to places like Detroit and promised a subsidy, or when he went to agriculture states and praised ag subsidies to the high heavens. I won’t even touch his about-face on abortion, partly because he might have been sincere in his turning, but mostly because people who vacillate on abortion, instead of shutting up or keeping firm on the issue, irritate me.

          • mbecker908

            figured that out by now.

            1. The Republican Leadership in both the House and Senate are a BIG part of the problem. They won’t drive Romney “to the right” anymore than they did GWB.

            2. The Leadership isn’t going to be changing any time soon.

            3. Romney will be the leader of the party. The gnomes won’t fight him and they won’t demand that he start acting like Governor Christie.

            4. Mitt Romney is a totally gutless wonderkind. He wouldn’t fight if your grandkids lives depended on it. And they do.

          • The_Rebel

            any time soon, then what are we fighting for? If this is the big wave and we can’t get the leaders we want now, then when?

          • mbecker908

            The Entrenched Political Class is what runs DC and frankly, they are the party of big government because it serves them. Just look at guys who were at one time on the conservative’s wall of fame who are now part of the problem. The only person I can think of who is relatively unaffected is Jim DeMint.

          • The_Rebel

            And what is your solution to the entrenchment?

          • mbecker908

            We have to keep electing – or at least running – credible conservative candidates (JD Hayworth is not the model for us) and we need to have a mechanism to hold them accountable.

            Actually, my first target would be Michael Steele. There needs to be a mechanism to identify and promote conservatives, build a bull pen. We need a solid administrator and strategist, like Haley Barbour, as head of the RNC. Not Steele and definitely not Sarah Paliin.

          • aesthete

            that Romney will be a bad president (though I think that he would be). You don’t have to hate Romney to see that electing the guy in the Republican party who inspired ObamaCare, supported TARP, left MA the same structural deficits as yesteryear, and fits the profile of the Republican Northeastern elite would not play well with the Tea Party, which was largely inspired by TARP and motivated to oppose ObamaCare. Huck would be horrible for somewhat similar reasons, but to an even worse extent, by taking the worse qualities of Bush and tripling the ante, and by being insincere and political in his faith (for all his failings, I never felt that Bush’s Christianity was used for political gain or a farce).

          • eburke

            Hmmm…if I recall, the last time he showed up he couldn’t develop a coherent thought process or answer a direct question but excelled at strawmen and moving the goal posts whenever he got pinned down.

            You seem to have this well in hand…so I’ll just move on to other topics and let you enjoy yourself (I’m thinking this one doesn’t merit waking up Franz. He needs his beauty sleep)

            And just remember…state’s rights is a bedrock conservative principle

            /rolls eyes

          • cactusjack

            and notice my comment conditioned on a big IF I hope doesn’t actually happen = worsening economy, as in double dip recession lasting another 12 months (gulp). It will change the entire national focus and debate. It will change everything including who wants to and who should run for POTUS. It will drasctically change the game plan of the Repubs in the House, provided they have one in the first place.

            Goodnight, all this reference to tacoslaying is making me hungry,

          • gekster

            Lets concentrate on what we have at hand.
            Take of TODAY.
            012 will get here.
            Lets worry about that on 11/03/010, OK.

          • IJB
      • acat
        • SteveLA

          This far out, not knowing who else is in the race you’ve made up your mind so strongly. Well that’s something else again, a Unicorn of a different color.

          • acat

            of making the worst choice in any situation.

            There *has* to be someone better running.

            Mew

          • SteveLA

            acat

            Many others are far worse.

            Hucka Hucka is at the top of the list of who would be worse, at least for me.

            Anyone who was elected to an office and cut and run before doing the whole term or accomplishing much while in office is pretty high on my list of people who I would have difficulty voting for.

          • acat

            Unfortunately, he’s likely to do rather well with the same folk he did rather well with last time, since (unlike Sanford and Silky Pony) Huck hasn’t had a major personal-life issue turn into a campaign issue.

            So, if Huck is able to organize on the ground in Iowa, where his populism will play well, and is able to place in the top 3 in New Hampshire, where he won’t play well, he’s well positioned to stay competitive all summer of 2011.

            I suppose we really should pay attention to 2010 first. There’s always the chance Vassar is right and we’ll have larger fish to worry about by then.

            Mew

          • Scope

            The policemen that were killed by the murderer that Huckabee released, because he believe that the guy “saw the light” and found God, will not be easily forgotten. Even the Evangelicals aren’t that forgiving or dumb. I think it is also widely believed that the Huckster overstayed his welcome in 08, and resulted in McCain.

            I really don’t think that the Huckster will run again. He wasn’t able to raise the necessary funds last time, except for the short lived burst in Iowa. He won’t do any better in future runs. I think he will assess the landscape of who shows up for 2012, and, if he thinks there are some credible candidates, he won’t waste the time or money. He’s very happy with his gig on Fox.

          • acat

            false conversions aren’t exactly a new phenomena, especially for evangelicals .. I don’t think they’re likely to take getting scammed on lightly, but maybe not as heavily as one may expect.

            I hope you’re right about Huck staying at his Fox News gig. It’d be better for all concerned if he stays that course.

            Mew

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            like the next twenty years or so.

          • JSobieski

            I really really really don’t want Mitt to be the guy.

            Of course, I said that about McCain the last time around.

    • kowalski

      You’d have a hard time living in Massachusetts and there have been no shortage of people who have suggested I move out of the Commonwealth.

      And it’s something I consider, or would like to consider. Unfortunately it’s not an option for me right now. I have to play the hand I was dealt, and Scott Brown was a hell of a lot better in Ted Kennedy’s seat than Martha Coakley would have been. Palin should have drawn the contrast with what might have happened had Scott Brown *not* won, instead of attacking him.

      I know Scott Brown isn’t a movement Conservative, but according to 85% or so of the population in this state, there are *never* going to be any Movement Conservatives elected here. Sarah Palin taking the bait to kick him for that seemed like an awfully cheap shot to me. The guy pulled off the biggest upset in recent political history.

      • Scope

        If I don’t like the direction the state is going in, or who they elect as their politicians, locally, or nationally, I can move to a state that I am much more comfortable with.

        Brown may have pulled off the greatest upset in recent political history, but, it doesn’t mean that he will keep that seat. If the Democrats had run a better candidate, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. There isn’t alot of credit to be given to someone who won because the other candidate was so very bad, even those in her own party wouldn’t have her. Then there is also the fact that Brown won in a special election, at a time when Obama and the Progressives have destroyed everything in this country. He had national attention because it was the only election going on at the time, and everyone was focused there. I’d be willing to bet that many many that supported him, would not do so again. Some of his votes have peed off alot of people.

        • kowalski

          The story of Brown’s victory is really pretty remarkable. Yes it was a special election and it did seem that Brown came out of nowhere after driving all around the state in his pickup truck. The Democrats in Boston and elsewhere did a lot to try to cast him in the mold of all the stereotypes they could think of for doing that, but he reasonated with a lot of people here — people you wouldn’t expect, who had been accustomed to living under the Kennedy yoke for all the years they did.

          And Coakley was so pluperfectly confident that she had the backing of Everyone Important in this state that she didn’t bother to campaign very hard against him. She had all the right endorsements. She had the right people working to support her. She was a shoo-in.

          Except that she didn’t count on one thing: the fact that an awful lot of people here had not really liked Ted Kennedy for a long, long time and really wanted to send a message to what I call the locked-in ruling caste in Massachusetts. It was an extraordinary thing to watch, because as little as a month before the election I would have bet that Brown couldn’t win. Then he surged, partially because the NRSC sent him a bunch of money for some very effective television ads, and he had laid the groundwork driving around the state in his pickup truck.

          Coakley, meanwhile, figured she had the endorsements and had greased all the necessary palms and nothing would stop her.

          The next Democrat here won’t be so complacent or lazy, and if the Republican side of the aisle wants Brown to keep the seat, they’re going to have to support him, instead of kicking him for unnecessary reasons like Palin did. That’s what I’m saying.

          Scott Brown isn’t Redstate’s idea of a model conservative but when the next election rolls around, I still think Redstaters should support him over his doppler-shift left Liberal opponent. Palin’s gratuitous kick left a bad shoe in my mouth, and I’m pretty sure that everyone in the Massachusetts Republican Party who worked so hard to help him get elected felt the same way. She should be a little more careful where she’s throwing those shoes of hers, that’s all I’m saying.

        • The_Rebel

          if the Dems wins this seat in 2012. Brown is showing his independent spirit, and while certain votes won’t make us all happy, those votes will serve him well with the 85% of this state’s population who will never vote for a Movement Conservative, as Kowalski said above. I’ve lived in the Boston area for over 60 years, and believe me, Scott Brown is about the best this state will elect in the conservative mold, whether you consider him one or not.

          He knows what he needs to do between now and 2012 to win again, and his votes are reflecting that.

  • emaberk

    and she has her sights set on 2012. She’ll beat Romney or Brown in the primaries without breaking a sweat both of them are Massachusetts Republicans and don’t share the values or direction of where the Republican needs to go.

    • SteveLA

      Romney is probably running, Brown as far as I know has no interest in running for President.

      Now Hucka Hucka, that’s another kettle of Republican “True Conservative” Unicorns running for office. Hucka Hucka never stopped running for President.

      • emaberk

        and see who will be running. But Sarah can beat them all.

        • acat

          She’d be a great asset to a reborn RNC, but .. she’s just not that good a POTUS candidate.

          Bomb-throwing she’s good at. Rallying the troops, she’s good at.

          POTUS? Whole ‘nother skill set.

          Mew

    • mbecker908

      unqualified than Obama. A cut-and-run political coward with a failed agenda as governor who will be printing money just like the O.

      She’s an excellent bomb thrower. She’s absolutely nothing else.

      • BA Cyclone

        Of the known 2008 retreads “likely” to campaign for 2012, Palin, Romney, Huckabee; not one of them IMO has any bona fides in the realm of true fiscal conservatism. Frankly it seems they are all more firmly planted in a return to GWB-era “compassionate conservatism” – i.e. big spending on things GOP-ers find O.K.

        The 2012 politics are still very vague from the RNC camp – in as far as even 2010 “official positions” even seem vague – and therefore it’s hard for me to see how firmly they will pin themselves to firebrand fiscal conservatism.

        My dream would be to see a firebrand, unabashed conservative out there clearly articulating such a vision. Give us some “hard truth” about the tough choices that MUST be made in public financing. A blend of Chris Christie and Marco Rubio.

        From where we stand right now – the populace seems desperate for a person to get the national financial house in order – I see NO reason to compromise on that…even if a particular candidate is REALLY like-able.

      • BA Cyclone

        Of the known 2008 retreads “likely” to campaign for 2012, Palin, Romney, Huckabee; not one of them IMO has any bona fides in the realm of true fiscal conservatism. Frankly it seems they are all more firmly planted in a return to GWB-era “compassionate conservatism” – i.e. big spending on things GOP-ers find O.K.

        The 2012 politics are still very vague from the RNC camp – in as far as even 2010 “official positions” even seem vague – and therefore it’s hard for me to see how firmly they will pin themselves to firebrand fiscal conservatism.

        My dream would be to see a firebrand, unabashed conservative out there clearly articulating such a vision. Give us some “hard truth” about the tough choices that MUST be made in public financing. A blend of Chris Christie and Marco Rubio.

        From where we stand right now – the populace seems desperate for a person to get the national financial house in order – I see NO reason to compromise on that…even if a particular candidate is REALLY like-able.

      • Section9

        You just demonstrated why Palin will have a hole big enough to drive a truck through. Romney and Huckabee are big government Republicans. Daniels and Thune have great records, but no name i.d. and are being pushed on the rank and file by the American Crossroads crowd.

        Watching Becker and the rest of the RedState crowd trash Palin does remind one of how Romney’s father and Rockefeller fought each other between ’66 and 68 while Tricky Dick went forward to unify the Party. Only Nixon’s securing of Strom Thurmond’s support in SC allowed him to fend off the talented young Governor of California, however.

        It’s not who is acceptable to you folks. It’s who is acceptable to rank and file movement people and how effective various campaigns are run. And I will tell you now, if Mitt Romney couldn’t beat a Zombie candidate in 2008, he can’t beat Palin in 2012.

        You underestimate her at your peril. But please continue.

        • cactusjack

          if the economy gets worse (it did today by the way) we’ll need a (robotic) economic technocrat to waltz us into the WH over the crushed, smoking crater of a Dem party who ran (who knows, Barney Frank?) after party elders approached the 0 in 2011 and told him his time was up & to “go quietly”.Hillary has no eco cred, she.s wrong in this scenario. But now, a positive thought – there is much fighting and glory to be had in the coming months especially in the House. Conservative heroes some known, some unknown to us as of yet, may arise from the fray, clear courageous heroes in the Cause (Reagan’s term not mine). One of them, may be our standard bearer in 2012. Why not a presidential candidate from the House, it’s not like the Senate did so hot in 2008. So 2010 and 2012 are kind of related for the Repubs.

  • SirGladiator

    Sarah definitely can, and will, beat whoever runs in 2012, should she choose to run. To think otherwise you’d have to buy into the far-left spin about her that she isn’t intelligent, or qualified, etc. and that’s fair enough, if you believe that of course you expect her to go out there, perform poorly, and lose to the establishment’s man, whoever that turns out to be (probably Romney). Those of us who know better, know that she is extremely smart, talented, she’s got a great record of achievent to run on, unlike for example Romney who has a record to run ‘away’ from, like his support of abortion and socialized medicine, among other liberal causes.

    Obviously its too early to know who is going to run and who isn’t, but it’s pretty clear that Sarah Palin is the opposite of Obama in every way, she’s got the record of achievement and success vs his total inexperience and never having run anything (before he ran America into the ground that is), she’s much smarter than him, she takes all the far-left criticism in stride and isn’t the least bit thin skinned like Obama is, she works unbelievably hard and does far more than anyone could ever imagine one person being able to do, unlike Obama who constantly needs vacations from what little he actually does, etc. She’s going to provide an easy, pleasant, and powerful alternative to ‘the one’ in 2012, and ultimately I don’t think the race will even be close, Im thinking Sarah will win by double digits by the time its all said and done.

  • emaberk

    Obama won’t stand a chance it’ll be complete blow out and she’ll be the one that can lead the Country back on track.

    • mbecker908

      She couldn’t bring the party together in AK let alone the national party. Not to mention that she’s simply not qualified to be POTUS. Her tenure as governor was nothing to write home about, she cut and ran when the going got tough when all she had to do to avoid the supposed financial penalty was to have her AG certify that her actions were consistent with her office. Her signature programs are vapor.

      She’s an excellent bomb-thrower and a good fund raiser. Beyond that, she’s in over her head at least as far as TheOne™.

  • Scope

    Palin was not McCain’s pick, she was what was brought in to try to re-establish a badly failing campaign, and to try to put something conservative on the ticket to counter his moderateness, that no one was buying. Yup, you are correct, she accepted the challenge. She also found out that McCain’s campaign team wanted her under their tight control, and, she was not allowed to speak her peace, be who she was, or to act as a counter to some of McCain’s waywardness.

    Nice hit piece on Palin though. Even Rush talked about her today. He said he has gotten into loudness matches with some of those he talks to. Some R’s bought into her “dumbness” just as was orchestrated by the D’s. The D’s don’t go after those they think have no chance in hell of anything. As Rush asked- Who is she dumber than? Biden or Obama? Who? Can you answer that Kowalski?

    Again, nice nice hit piece. This belongs on the Daily Kos site. And imagine, I’m still not sold on Palin yet, but, I’m willing to keep an open mind.

  • Scope

    n/t

  • kowalski

    But she said it. What I don’t understand about that statement is that for all the good things Sarah Palin has done in the past year, she allowed herself to get roped into kicking Scott Brown when it was totally unnecessary for her to do so. Brown’s people played it cool when they were informed, but I don’t understand why she felt she had to do it.

    Scott Brown achieved something in Massachusetts that was pretty important and sent shockwaves nationwide through the Democrat party – without Sarah Palin lifting a finger to help him, so far as I can tell.

    Why take the bait from a talking head and start kicking him now on national television? It doesn’t make much sense, particularly since it’s a certainty that nobody much more conservative than Scott Brown stands a chance of being elected Senator in Massachusetts.

    Maybe she’s just angry at Massachusetts, a state of mind that I can understand.

  • chihank

    Scott Brown to be the generic Republican for the country. They think that if Scott Brown can win in MA, then he can win everywhere.

    GOP insiders see Michelle Bachmann and Jim DeMint as wingnuts who will shrink the party.

    Both Palin and Brown are correct. Scott Brown is the best we can do in MA. However, Scott Brown’s voting record is unacceptable in Red and Purple States. I want more Rubios, Sharron Angles. and Ken Bucks please.

  • kowalski

    I would vote for Palin, without any hesitation. My point here is that if Sarah Palin wants to start firing off stray rounds at people, the last person she should be shooting at is the guy who brought Ted Kennedy’s senate seat into the (R) column and defeated Martha Coakley, the Attorney General of Massachusetts.

    After a newscritter prompted her. And she took the bait. Just so she could continue talking about what she might have said anyway.

    That kind of stuff doesn’t make sense. Scott Brown isn’t running for Senator in Alaska and Sarah Palin couldn’t run for Senator here in Massachusetts. She should be glad he won. I am.

  • bk

    Crist, Specter, Dede, etc.