« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

(Re)introducing Sarah Palin …

As Ann Coulter has noted, the Media has three standard ready-made templates for public consumption when it comes to Republicans, particularly Republicans it views as a threat to their Left-Wing compatriots’ in politics on the national stage; a Republican is either [1] dumb/stupid, [2] evil/corrupt or [3] “out of touch”. Reagan, Bush 43 and Dan Quayle were neatly pigeon-holed into category 1, while Bush 41, Bob Dole and to an extent, John McCain, found themselves in category 3. Dick Cheney was placed in Category 2, which is usually occupied by members of the administration other than the President and Vice-President, people like Lee Atwater and most recently, Karl Rove – in other words, people who have the audacity to get a Republican into office.

Sarah Palin, needless to say, has long since joined Reagan and Bush 43 in the club of Republicans the media has chosen to stuff into the dumb/stupid category and since then, through a combination of sheer repetition, McCain campaign incompetence and Palin’s own inexcusable flubbing of a high-stakes interview, they have successfully gotten what amounts to a majority of the American public to concur with that perception. As with Reagan and the belief that he was an “amiable dunce” during his Administration, it’s become a staple item of Beltway conventional wisdom that Palin has nothing upstairs. With regard to Reagan though, history, as it almost always does, has proven that the Beltway conventional wisdom was long on the conventional and short on the wisdom.

The question is if the conventional wisdom is right now when it comes to the former Governor of Alaska.

Personally, I believe she’s a lot smarter and more knowledgable than she has allowed herself to be portrayed – anyone who has seen her being interviewed on Alaska and energy issues before she was catapulted unto the national stage may have thought a lot of things, but “dumb” or “stupid” would not have been in the top ten. So the answer is; only if she allows the conventional wisdom to be right.

Which is why, if you were to ask me who next Sarah Palin should give an interview to after Oprah, Bill O’Reilly, etc. I’d say … Katie Couric. Then at some point, Charles Gibson, then Jon Stewart. I’d advise her to go on CBS, ABC, NBC and even MSNBC to tangle with ‘Tingles’ Matthews.

Confession time; I wish she had said no when John McCain called her up to ask her to be his Vice President last year. I believe her saying yes is something she now wholeheartedly regrets as one of the worst mistakes she has ever made – other than letting Levi Johnston date her daughter – no matter what she says in her book. The second worst mistake, as far as I’m concerned was resigning in the face of the continued unprecedented campaign of personal destruction being levelled against her and her family long after the elelction was over and done with. It is imminently understandable given the circumstances, but I believe she should have stood her ground and gone to war with everything she had to defend herself and her office.

Lessons learned – the next person to receive the call from a Presidential nominee asking to join him (or her) on the ticket should at least insist on allowing him (or her) to either pick or have veto power over key members of his (or her) staff. I had a premonition the instant I learned that Nicole Wallace had been assigned by Steve Schmidt to oversee Sarah Palin’s communications operation for the campaign that it couldn’t possibly end well. This is not because I had any idea that she would turn out to be the backstabber (hence, Operation Leper) she turned out to be, but because of her record of utter incompetence and failure as the Director of Communications for the Bush White House.

Considering her record, her actions may not be any less incandescently stupid, but not exactly surprising. In the Bush White House, her every instinct and judgement call was not only wrong, but catastrophically wrong. With Palin, not only did Nicolle Wallace (with Steve Schmidt backing her all the way) enforce a media blackout until it turned actively destructive to the campaign, she then exclusively scheduled two interviews with people that were openly hostile to her charge and then, incomprehensibly refused to schedule more interviews to allow Palin make up for her flubbing of the sit-down with Couric – though one wonders how much of that is due to cutting-room shenanigans.

But what is done is done. Which brings us to today, where Palin is now a private citizen, but still a public individual and one of the most iconic faces of the Republican Party. It has certainly not escaped the Beltway’s attention that no one in the public sphere today can make the Republican base open their wallets and donate their time and money like Sarah Palin. And to that extent, even the most self-abasing Republican “moderate” in the sisyphusian quest of seeking liberal approval would acknowledge that she’s an asset to the GOP. But to the extent that the perception of her that the Left, their cohorts in the media and their aforementioned self-loathing “moderate” Republican fellow-travellers have invested so much time and resources in implanting into the collective mind of the American voting public continues to resonate, she’s also a liability.

One of the things we political junkies tend to forget is that we’re not the norm. Most of us here can name every United States Senator and most House members serving on Capitol Hill and the state (if not the district) he or she represents. By contrast, a significant number of the people who would stand in line at the polls to vote next year would not know the name of the Vice-President of the United States and would have only the foggiest idea of what the candidates on their ballots stand for. We actively seek information on politics, we read blogs, newspaper and magazine sites, watch C-SPAN, listen to talk radio, etc. They don’t. So most of the information they have is what they’ve passively absorbed from watching television (i.e. “Hope” and “Change”), skimming the headlines at the super market checkout counter, or reading the local paper running stories culled from the wire services.

So when one takes into account that FOXNews and talk radio only reach a fraction of the population reached by the networks (who usually take their cues and talking points directly off the pages of the New York Times and Washington Post), CNN, MSNBC and the wire services, it’s really not surprising that the image of Sarah Palin is that of the ditzy Tina Fey portrayed facsimilie – “I can see Russia from my house!” who has never cracked open a book in her life and does not know that Africa is a continent. This makes Palin a net liability, in my opinion, especially with the non-junkies, the non-political and not particularly ideological, marginally informed, yet electorally crucial so-called “middle”.

At least for as long as she remains a figure on the national stage and continues making statements on policy.

That is, if she continues to allow herself to be made a liability. No longer having to obey the dictates of the McCain Campaign, and being unsaddled with the intense concentration of incompetence that is Nicolle Wallace is obviously an advantage. The release of her book and the subsequent book tour presents an opportunity, and her Oprah interview from a few weeks ago and her interview with Bill O’Reilly is a great start.

This is where I disagree somewhat with Art’s (Achance) oft-stated conviction that “Republicans should make news in the places where they can get votes and from which they serve.” I agree with it in large part. It’s a much smarter and much better use of time and resources, and it’s more likely to end up being fair to all concerned. For state and local level politicians, including members of the House and Senate, this makes sense. There is no reason why Saxby Chambliss (for example), should be giving more interviews to the New York Times than the Rome News Tribune.

The slippery slope I’ve seen with this (especially during the “I hope he fails …” brouhaha with Rush) is that it can devolve into the practice of preaching to the choir. And considering the massive advantage in reach that the Democrats’ and their allies in the media have, that’s not a good deal for us no matter how high FOXNews’ ratings are and how listeners Rush has. That the media will do its best to distort, discredit and even destroy, any Republican that threatens the Left-Wing agenda is simply a fact of life that should have been factored into our calculations a long time ago – it doesn’t mean we should abandon the battlefield.

Sarah Palin needs to shatter the image a hostile media has created of her and re-introduce herself to the American people. What better way, after her book, than Palin V Couric II?

And this time, wherever she goes, I repeat; she should take her own camera and cameraman – I simply see no reason why any politician should allow him or herself to be the victim of the cutting room floor when camcorders are so cheap and YouTube exists.

COMMENTS

  • mschmitt

    … and endorsing a Palin diary even though it’s not 2010 + 1 day yet.

    • aesthete

      That makes it OK :)

      • AceInTX
  • Achance

    from portraying Palin, or any other nominal conservative, as stupid. Frankly, she is stupid as they define smart. For the Axis Media, if you don’t see things the way they and their lefty, Ivy League friends see them, you, Sarah Palin, me, and everybody else from Flyover Country are stupid. No re-engagement with Couric or Gibson will change that; she doesn’t think like they and much of their audience do, she doesn’t talk like them, and, therefore, she is stupid. It really doesn’t matter if she has developed scintillating debate skills and slays them both with finely wrought logic, it will all be about image and affect and she is an “other,” like all the rest of us.

    That “middle” that people strive to get in their coalition doesn’t really know what to think about things they see themselves. They could watch Palin do a great interview with Couric and they wouldn’t know it was a great interview until some talking head told them that it was. No talking head from the Axis Media is going to tell them that becaust to them, Palin cannot do a great interview; she doesn’t think like they do, so, she’s stupid.

    Sarah Palin and no other nominal conservative is going to carry BOS, NYC, DC, or LA in our lifetimes, at least not in mine, so why waste the effort? The Axis Media needs ratings and money even more than it needs to further its ideology. If someone who draws crowds and ratings like Palin does says she’s going to give a major policy address in Fargo, ND, the Axis media will hold their haughty noses and show up in Fargo – even in winter.

    • redneck_hippie
    • azaeroprof

      her book tour intentionally eschewed traditional liberal locales (except for the Oprah show!). And just two and a half weeks of a book tour for an autobiography, and look at the progress she has made on this “re-introduction”. Now she needs to follow this up in about 6 (or maybe 12?) months with a “Conscience of a Conservative”-type tome.

      And you’re right, she can have as much impact in Fargo (or on Facebook) as she would have on the CBS Evening News (which noone watches anyway!)

    • Tbone

      Palin needs to talk with the independents in Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, PA, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Virginia, Florida.

      If she never sets foot in Manhattan(NY not KS) again it won’t hurt her or the Republican Party and if she does, it will help neither.

    • Martin Knight

      I mean, I agree with you that there is simply no way that the MSM is going to give Palin a decent shake. And I’m not saying that she is going to win over the locales you mentioned by sitting down (again) with Couric et al. That’s not the aim of it.

      With regard to the “middle” – I really don’t think it’s that bad yet. We wouldn’t win any elections otherwise. So I’m not yet that cynical …

      • Achance

        seriously tested, spend some time with a group of randomly selected citizens. Sit around all day in the assembly room while they’re trying to empanel a jury maybe. Go to a union meeting, or any other sort of group that doesn’t self-select. Do enough of that and you’ll be as cynical as I am about that vast middle. They vote gut or last, best TV commercial.

        • Martin Knight

          The comments section of the politico and Washington Post is more than enough to make one cynical enough to give up – but I choose to believe it’s more a function of ignorance than intelligence.

          That said, your point that the “middle” votes “gut” is exactly why I’d want Palin to get back into the ring with Couric, Gibson, et al, have a sit down with Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, etc. … and take her own camera along to nip any editing shenanigans in the bud. Thanks to the Axis media {nice!}, the gut reaction of too many in the “middle” to Palin is negative.

          I want that to change. And, for so long as she’s the GOP face, it’s not just for her sake.

          • Achance

            Palin is not unintelligent; the synapses fire pretty quickly. She came up in a political world where an IQ over room temperature was good enough; I’m struggling here to thing of some genius’s elected from the Mat Valley. She has your standard BA level of knowledge and some political experience.

            None of the people you have to spar with in politics are very smart. Really smart people don’t do well in politics; they’re off-putting and intimidating, so nobody likes them. If you’re about half-assed smart, and Sarah is more than half-assed smart, you can just roll over most of the people in politics.

            That gut thing is just a toss of the dice. One mistatement, one gaffe, one mischaracterization that gets traction dooms you. Hell, I dunno, she may be the Obama Antidote, but that pretty much depends on her; she can’t be the pretty girl that everybody likes anymore. She needs to don her sheld and buckler and meet them on the field of honor if anyone is going to take her seriously.

          • mschmitt

            … If she ‘gears up’ and starts smacking people around as I believe that she is capable of, she’ll quickly fall into that “off-putting and intimidating” mold.

            She has to be able to do it all without dropping the cheery smile. I think she may be capable of — however I can only think of one politician in recent memory who’s been able to pull it off.

          • Martin Knight

            Which is one of the reasons why it should be a no-go unless she can bring her own camera and cameraman. There is simply no way in an interview that one would not have a slip-up or be stumped for a second or two that any half-way competent hostile editor cannot make hay out of if he knows he’s the only one with the tape.

            Addressing mschmitt’s point above on being “off-putting and intimidating” I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing. From being too dumb to tie her own shoes, she’s now so smart she’s intimidating?

            The reversal would be so large that it might even register with the most muddled “middler” who’d been spoonfed the dumb Palin storyline for over a year now.

            To be honest though, I’m not so sure alienating-level smart is that big a liability. My support for Romney last year (with Peter Pace as VP) was based on the idea that Romney’s ability to project competence and intelligence would match up well with Obama’s media-driven star power and likability.

            Basically give the voters a choice; a charismatic likable inexperienced guy with little to no executive credentials (therefore risky) versus an experienced competent guy with an intimidating resume (a surer hand).

  • Scott Mustian

    I have this vision of Sarah Palin scheduling a series of event/speeches in the heart of liberal territory such as inner cities or union strongholds. I can only imagine the terror she would create in leftist circles as she explains to the residents of cities such as Detroit or New Orleans how they have been enslaved by their Democrat masters for four generations. Just keep pounding the truth …. challenge city leaders to debate her and prove her wrong. It would be outstanding political theater and great practice for a national campaign.

  • Swamp_Yankee

    CNN Poll, Palin popularity on the rise:

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/07/cnn-poll-palins-popularity-on-the-rise/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_politicalticker+%28Blog%3A+Political+Ticker%29

    Palin should treat Couric the same way she treated Mitchell Too funny @: 1:44

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w-kmmlCHUs&feature=player_embedded#

    In the last couple of months:

    1) She becomes a force in the national health care debate
    2) She writes a national blockbuster bestseller
    3) She pleases her family
    4) She frees up Parnell to continue their agenda unabated by national forces
    5) Her ratings rise
    5) And she’s laughing all the way to the bank

    Resigning was the right move.She’s doing pretty good in my opinion. She doesnt need Couric. The book and tour is enough for now. Couric can whither. She’ll be a footnote by 2012. Ignore her.

    • redneck_hippie

      July when she took Mitchell and other correspondents on that fishing trip. There’s a statement contained in the press availability, if people pay attention. And Sarah also thought it was a good idea for the reporters to get fish guts on them. That’s how you treat Mitchell.

      • Swamp_Yankee

        Most people around here paid no mind. But Oprah reaches 10-20 million people and few of them are men, few are conservative and barely any are conservative men.

        She is doing it on her terms. She’s a private citizen. She doesnt need to answer to anybody. She just needs to keep rocking those malls and bookstores. Keep playing the local press and enjoy her family, have fun, stay a moving target, study policy and drop bombs on Obama from afar like the USS. Nimitz

  • dagnyt

    I agree with your post, but it’s easy for us to say so in hindsight.

    I think she doesn’t want to get into (or at least hasn’t) what was going on in the Alaska legislature from the day after the election to the day before she quit in terms of them actively ruining her record and destroying her politically. If she had waited it out, it’s not clear what her standing as gov would have been and instead of “quitter” they would have called her “incompetent/failure”. Not sure which is worse but at least “quitter” was her own choice.

    Anyone notice Gov. Parnell’s approval ratings? I recently spotted them as in the 80s and his seat is considered SAFE for the election next year. Interesting to note that he is simply continuing her policies. Where’s the outrage from the libs about him? It’s clear that it was personal to her.

    I would love to see her go on and speak to the hate mongers but it’s so fantastic watching her snub them. It highlights their partisanship and I think that’s perfectly fair.

    • Achance

      not necessarily safe for Parnell. Fmr. Rep. Ralph Samuels, a Palin opponent on ACES and other things, is set to announce for Governor and will have strong support. Rep. Jay Ramras has already announced for Lt. Governor opposing “incumbent” Craig Campbell. You’ll see a strong Primary challenge to both the Palin “team” and some of her “accomplishments.”

      • AceInTX

        Parnell and Campbell I presume?

        You would know better than I do…but the question has to be asked…is there a need for a primary challenge here…or is the challenge motivated by sour grapes from the old guard in AK?

        • Achance

          Stevens, Young, and Murkowski. So, since these are Sarah’s boys, they’re sacrosanct? Nobody named Parnell, Sean’s dad ran several times, has ever won a statewide office on their own. Guess we’ll find out how much electoral appeal he has on his own and how much was Sarah’s coattails. Campbell shouldn’t even be Lt. Gov.; there shouldn’t be a Lt. Gov. now that Parnell moved up. That was just a deal Palin and Parnell made to reward him for some great services and resume builders he did for Palin when he was the Adjutant General. Rather than fight her again, the Leg just went along with it and confirmed him.

          As to the Ds, they don’t call Ethan Berkowitz “Jerkowitz” for nothing, but maybe he can hide it through an election. Bob Poe was once a Republican staffer but went with the Ds during Knowles and was Knowles’ Commissioner of Administration – and my boss for awhile. If he were running as an R, I’d support him in a heartbeat, but being a D brings too much Lefty baggage. If Poe can get money, he’s a credible statewide candidate. Ethan can get money, but it is CA and Trial Lawyer money and it is easy to hang that around his neck.

          • AceInTX

            and I’m not stating anything like:

            Stevens, Young, and Murkowski. So, since these are Sarah?s boys, they?re sacrosanct?

            I just want to know how much payback plays into the call for primarying them. if dagnyt is correct here:

            Anyone notice Gov. Parnell?s approval ratings? I recently spotted them as in the 80s

            80% is astronomically high…and I don’t get why anyone would be out to primary a Republican Governor with those kinds of numbers.

            I don’t see why what I asked isn’t a legitimate question. And I assure you…I asked it in good faith…you obviously took it as rhetorical but it wasn’t

            As for the rest of it…thanks for the info…that partly answers what I wanted to know…but it hardly answeres the question I asked…why is there a primary challenge to a popular governor with approval ratings above 60 % let alone reaching into the 80s if that report is right?

          • Achance

            and most think that Sarah just tugged him along when he became the Lt. Gov. nominee. And, I won’t speak for any potential candidates, but I know there are many in the Party who’d love somebody completely removed from the Rick Halford/Sarah Palin/Wasilla cabal that sprang to prominence when Sarah played kiss and tell.

          • AceInTX

            I know there are many in the Party who?d love somebody completely removed from the Rick Halford/Sarah Palin/Wasilla cabal that sprang to prominence when Sarah played kiss and tell.

            that answers the question quite nicely…

            thank you

          • Scope

            why does Sean Parnell have such high approval ratings? You say that many in the party would love somebody removed from the Rick Halford/Sarah Palin/Wasilla cabal, but, then why are Parnell’s approval ratings so high. I don’t know who has been polled for the approval ratings, or, if the polls were wrong, but, how can you have such high approval ratings if so many (as you say) were against Parnell. Parnell, from what I understand, is carrying on with Palins initiatives. Please, I ask, will you stop the incendiary comments, such as the Palin “kiss and tell” comments. That is what incites, and, starts the flames on the Palin diaries. This is a civil and rational discussion, please don’t add the “unprovable” comments. We can talk about Palin without turning every Palin diary into a “flame throwing” incident.

          • Achance

            and it isn’t time for any real opposition to him. Nobody has publicly said a discouraging word about Sean Parnell since he took office, not even Don Young who has plenty of reason to.

            And I don’t really care what you and others think. It is real simple: you accept a plum patronage appointment from an administration, you don’t get your way about something, rather than work it out, you quit and run to be the Anchorage Daily Worker’s favorite Republican by trashing the people who put you there. That is called kissing and telling. Let’s be clear, Sarah Palin didn’t know a thing about the oil industry that wasn’t common knowledge except maybe a little that she picked up from Todd; she sure wasn’t any oil and gas or even oil and gas economics expert. Because, he liked her as a political up and comer, Murkowski put her on AOGCC, at the time one of the, if not the, highest paid patronage positions in the State. And just to be clear, the ONLY qualification was “Friend of Frank.” And she trashed Randy, she trashed Frank, she trashed the Party, and a whole bunch of ignorant NPs elected her Governor for it. And now to add insult to injury that work of fiction she calls an autobiography trashes them all over again. So, yeah, I don’t mind being a little “incendiary.”

          • Achance

            You and several others here are absolutely incapable of having a “civil and rational discussion” regarding Sarah Palin. Your ignorance of her actual conduct and record is exceeded only by your devotion to this mythical “everyworman” you and her sycophants have created.

            For months I’ve put up with a bunch of yahoos from God knows where who don’t know a damned thing about me, about Alaska, or about Alaska politics hold forth on St. Sarah. I’ve also been repeatedly accused of being a misogynist by you and jaded for committing the unpardonable sin of being honest and actually knowing something about her. I’ve put up with you and other Palin sycophants characterizing me as some disgruntled, failed job-seeker when I’ve made it perfectly clear that I can’t stand the woman and would never have worked for her. I’ve put up with several of you alleging that my issues with her are because she fired me when I had been retired over six months before she even took office and IF I had still been there, it is extraordinarily unlikely that the bunch of neophytes she brought with her would have had either the skill or the guts to even think hard about firing me.

            Now, I don’t give a damn about your pleas for anything really. You guys make her a saint, I don’t think she is and the difference between my opinion and yours is I actually know something about her that I didn’t get from her press releases.

          • azaeroprof

            Very few people in this world are all good or all bad. We get (and get and get) that you “can’t stand the woman”. Virtually none of us here have the close-up knowledge of her that you have. But there are plenty of people who have been around her in Alaska, some much closer and longer than you, who have an impression of her 180 degrees removed from yours. And there are some who reach a similar conclusion to yours. That’s just the nature of humanity and of politics.

            I, for one, have read everything I could and heard every opinion I could (including yours many times over) and reached the conclusion that I really like her and would support her running for POTUS. It doesn’t mean I think she’s a saint or that I’m some stupid, mind-numbed Palinbot. It just means that I, being a reasonably thoughtful person, have evaluated what evidence I have available to me and concluded something different than you.

            RedState is a wonderful discussion platform embracing 1st Amendment principles, and I would never decry your right to state your opinion on Palin. However, your reliably negative, and sometimes nasty, comments on Palin and those who are fans of her, frankly just make you look like you are on a vendetta. I don’t think you are a misogynist nor do I think you are one of the “cronies” she went after. I just think you made up your mind about her a long time ago (maybe rightly so).

            Yes, there are a few people that show up here who are what you would consider “Palinbots”. Mostly, their diaries (often in a weird font, don’t know why that is?) get ignored and fade off the diary list. But frankly, the tone and frequency of your anti-Palin venom detracts from your legitimate points regarding her governing record and style. Originally, your concerns made me re-think my feelings about her (though on balance, I still came up with a net positive). However, the more I see how much you “can’t stand the woman”, the less credence I naturally give what might be legitimate concerns of yours.

          • Achance

            There was a perfectly civil discussion going on about whether Palin should try to do “overs” with Couric, Gibson, et al., I disagreed and said there was nothing in it for her or any other Republican. Somebody chimed in with something about how Parnell’s approvals are in the 80s and his re-election is safe. I replied that it was safe for a Republican but not necessarily for Parnell because he has some powerful opposition. Ace, ever minful of an opportunity to slam Republican Party actions calls into question why a popular incumbent would be primaried. I replied that it was because he had never won a statewide election on his own and there were many here who would like the whole Palin/Wasilla cabal and those linked with it out of power. Go read it; just the facts, not real criticism of anybody except I sorta jeered at Ace’s new-found opposition to primarying incumbents since he, and many others here, are usually advocating shooting Republican incumbents. At that point is when the Palin TalkingPoints kicked in about the revenge of the old boys and Scope has to chime in about how I’m flaming. I think the definition of flaming when it comes to Palin is saying anything that a Palin supporter doesn’t agree with. Scope, who I’m sure is an accredited expert on Alaska politics and polling chimes in to question whether there is even any opposition to those popular Palin policies of Parnell – how ’bout that for alliteration? Frankly, nobody much cares about politics in Alaska right now and nobody is really campaigning for anything. Governors that you aren’t reading about every day are almost always popular as long as the economy is pretty good and the PFD was over a thousand bucks. All of which are the case right now, so Gov. Parnell is pretty popular though I have trouble with the 80% figure. Just for the record, I like Gov. Parnell and used to work with him and for one session for him at the Legislature. I’d support him over ANY Democrat, though as I said above if Bob Poe weren’t running as a D, I’d probably support him.

            I just get tired of the tired old St. Sarah cleaned up the old boys in Alaska and is now going to slay the dragons in the rest of the Country meme. Everything she has ever done in politics follows the same pattern; she villifies someone or some group, sets herself up as the saviour of that group, and advances politically by doing so. Then before she can be seen to be nothing more than a chimera, she moves on. Read her book and you’ll see her describing that pattern over and over. Everyone around Sarah is always self-interested and corrupt, Sarah is always the pure of heart savior, everything that doesn’t work out is always because of someone else’s failure. I see that point of view over and over in her book as she describes things I know about and know her version not to be true. I’m as down on Beltway Bandits and political consultants as the next one, can’t stand them generally, but since I know much of what she says about her political career in Alaska isn’t true, I have to wonder how much of her description of the people and events on the campaign with McCain is similarly distorted?

            You’d have to be from Alaska and involved in government and politics to understand what being tired of Sarah Palin is really like. I’d like to just make the day she left office a State holiday and go on with life. That said, when one of the Palin supporters starts spouting her TalkingPoints, they’re going to hear another view that didn’t come from her press releases and when one of them resorts to ad hominem, as they always do, since that’s all they have, they aren’t going to do it with the impunity that Palin supporters usually expect. We’re already suffering under one Party’s having elected an obscure, insecure and narcissistic neophyte to the Presidency because nobody was allowed to criticize or question him, our answer to that shouldn’t be to try to elect our own obscure, insecure and narcissistic neophyte because she can’t be questioned or criticized by anyone in our Party either.

          • azaeroprof

            Your characterization of the above thread is pretty accurate. I was speaking on more general terms, sorry I didn’t convey that better.

            Look, you have every right to criticize Palin in this forum as you please. The rest of us should pay attention to what you say, and combine it with other knowledge. You have a valuable viewpoint, but it is just one viewpoint. There are (at least) two sides to every argument, and many who have been involved in government and politics in Alaska in the “Palin Era” feel the same way as you, but many are extremely favorable towards Sarah. And some who saw the same events as you from the inside, interpret those events in a way similar to what Sarah describes. You’re entitled to your opinion just as they are.

            You have a lot of conservative credibility here. Heck, you’ve been here several years more than me! I just think you run the risk of becoming the “anti-Josh” if you keep up with the “St. Sarah”-type snark. I think there may even be some newer folks who will intentionally bait you to get a response. The true Palinbots, if ignored here, will find that they are much happier at Palin advocacy sites and go away on their own.

            I know you don’t like it, but Sarah is probably the leading national conservative voice at this moment in time. I’m sure you would prefer it otherwise, but I just don’t see the practicality of slamming her on a conservative site. Seems she gets enough of that from the other side.

          • Achance

            Unlike many here, I’ve long been a Republican first – as an operative and as an appointee. I couldn’t afford the luxury of ideological purity, so admittedly I’m a cynic and a pragmatist and generally subscribe to the notion that if you think something is simple, it’s because you don’t know enough. I’ve always approved of what Churchill said of some General’s attack in North Africa that went awry and was drawing much criticism, Auchinleck I think it was. Churchill replied that he wasn’t going to criticize one of his generals for “… erring in the direction of the enemy.” I’ve always operated on the premise that if something would get an issue off my #1 Priority List and moved things in an acceptable direction, I would do it. Another deriviative of that is not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

            I have no use for the McCains and Grahams who compromise principles for the acclaim of people who would never really support them. But on the other hand, you have to compromise constantly in government to get anything done. You just have to remember your direction and your objective and not compromise in such a way that makes your objective further away. But then you have the “never surrender,” to use a little more Churchill, “conservatives” who want to shoot everyone who makes any compromise, who isn’t ideologically pure. Those aren’t conservatives, they’re simply “aginners.” Some are aginners because they don’t really have an overarching worldview but rather only a view of what they don’t like. Some are aginners because they are opportunistic; they don’t have any plan but advancing themselves by opposing someone else’s plan because it redounds to their political benefit. I put Sarah Palin in the latter version of aginner and most of her supporters in the former. When she and her supporters can articulate a program and plan to implement it that goes beyond saying the other guy is bad, I might change my mind. That said, I don’t write Sarah Bad diaries or done my version of the “fact check” on her book, because I’m willing to let her be herself; that’ll eventually prove her up one way or another, but I’m not going to let the hagiographies go unrebutted.

          • azaeroprof

            I think we’re pretty much on the same page. Governing does often require compromise to advance one’s agenda. This is why Governors are often seen as less ideologically pure (including Palin before the 2008 race). Legislators can bluster and posture and set themselves up as more ideologically pure because they don’t have to solve problems except in a collective sense.

            If you want to hunt hagiographers, that’s your business. Personally, I think it brings you down a level and does nothing but cement their opinions and maybe chase them away (maybe that’s your goal, I don’t know). I would love to see you spend that time formulating some diaries on what you think Palin could do to improve herself and her position going forward. You have a unique perspective on this among those of us at RedState. If I recall correctly, she told Erick she reads RS, and certainly some that have access to her do as well. So I think that would be more productive use of Achance for the movement than “swatting flies”.

          • Achance

            Martin suggest she do an “overs” with Couric and I replied with why I didn’t think it was useful to her. You saw what happened with the rest. I just don’t appreciate the personal attacks on me and on people I know coming from people who only know the Palin side of the story and that only from press releases.

          • azaeroprof

            I think your advice was excellent. Palin’s best tactic is to just ignore idiots like Couric & Gibson.

            I think you kind of invite the personal attacks by responding in kind. If you were to write a diary, starting with something like

            The folks around here know I don’t like Sarah Palin and why. But given her current status as a leading national spokesman for the Conservative movement, I will set those feelings aside for the moment and offer some advice on what she could do to improve herself and her position going forward. If her goal is to be elected POTUS in 2012 or beyond, she would be well-served by taking the following advice:

            Follow that up with a snark-free, serious-minded constructive strategy. If she were to read that (pretty good odds I think), she might take some of that advice and make herself more positive in your eyes (and thus in the eyes of others who feel the way you do). And I’d be willing to bet that you would get much different treatment from those in the pro-Palin camp going forward.

            (Pretty sad, I’m such a junkie I’m sitting here trying to be a campaign advisor for Art’s RedState diary writing!)

  • Scope

    as stated by Palin at the journalists dinner on Saturday night. As to Schmidt, she said that if she needs a bald campaign manager, the only choice she will have is James Carville. What an insult to Carville-LOL. Good invite for Palin, she was the Republican keynote speaker. I wonder how the Democrat keynote did, Bahney Fwank?

    Sorry Martin, I disagree that Palin stepping down as Gov. of Alaska was a mistake. Time is bearing that out.

  • AceInTX

    First, if she ever again agrees to an interview with the so called “objective press”….she should do so on condition that said interviews be conducted live so as to pre-empt their ability to selectively edit her in order to create a false impression and she should also make it plain that the entire time will be taped by Palin’s people…

    She should never again put herself at the mercy of the cutting room floor…and she must never again allow herself to be “handled” by bad actors like Schmidt or Wallace regardless whether their bad acting was as a result of animus, (which I suspect), or utter incompetence, (which wouldn’t surprise me give McCain’s incompetence and the fact that he hired them!).

    I’m particularly with you in this:

    It?s a much smarter and much better use of time and resources, and it?s more likely to end up being fair to all concerned. For state and local level politicians, including members of the House and Senate, this makes sense. There is no reason why Saxby Chambliss (for example), should be giving more interviews to the New York Times than the Rome News Tribune.

    The slippery slope I?ve seen with this (especially during the ?I hope he fails ?? brouhaha with Rush) is that it can devolve into the practice of preaching to the choir. And considering the massive advantage in reach that the Democrats? and their allies in the media have, that?s not a good deal for us no matter how high FOXNews? ratings are and how listeners Rush has. That the media will do its best to distort, discredit and even destroy, any Republican that threatens the Left-Wing agenda is simply a fact of life that should have been factored into our calculations a long time ago – it doesn?t mean we should abandon the battlefield.

    I’ve had a diary in mind for about 6 months that I haven’t been motivated enough to write that deals with the inevitability of losing races, districts, states and entire regions of the country when you decide it’s not competitive and you surrender it to the enemy. How do you win a race you don’t even compete in? The republican Party abandoned the east and west coasts decades ago and we can’t compete there because the message in those states/regions is all liberal all the time. there is no alternative messaging in these areas. Without campaign machinery and advertising in these areas to counter the socialist/Democrat message…there is nothing left for people to believe but the propaganda they are being fed them by the local and national media.

    there is no longer any arguement in New England there is no alternative message of vision for the people…It’s the Kennedys or nothing…so why exactly is it that we don’t have a single Republican elected to the House of Representatives from New England?

    We’ve ceded so much territory to the Democrats that we start every single national election with 50% of the country in the Democrat’s column simply because we’ve abandoned them! and are left to fight over the other 50%.

    What kind of sense does that make…we need to start competing…as the Democrats did beginning in 2006 in blue states and make the Democrats defend them. maybe by simply moving into an area with a common sense conservative message…we can make people start to think about issues…and maybe change some minds…the only 100% certain thing is this..If we cede the argument before it’s already started…we lose…and we have done so now for 30 years!

    • Achance

      any part of the Country. I just think our elected officials should keep themselves, their news, their parties, their fundraising etc. as much in the district as possible. I really don’t want the Republican house member from Alaska whoring to get on the Sunday shows.

      You just have to understand, Ace, that going for some of those places you so adamantly don’t want to abandon means you’re going to have candidates and maybe officeholders with whom you disagree. Sorry, you’re not electing a Republican SoCon to a statewide office in the Northeast or on the Left Coast; it is hard to elect one even here in Alaska if they wear it too loudly.

      I know everybody views Palin as the quintessential SoCon, but I assure you she didn’t run as one or really even much mention social issues in her campaign; neither did her opponents for that matter. When she got beat by Loren Leman for Lt. Gov., Leman was the SoCon candidate, not her.

      • AceInTX

        That’s the essence of my arguement…it’s the message that is missing in New England….and California, and the inner city…

        The essence of my argument is that a decision was made 30 years or more ago that conservativism wouldn’t sell in these areas as if people in new england couldn’t understand what’s wrong with spending more than you make…or startving grandma for convenience sake is wrong…There is an absence of conservatives in New England and California because there is an absence of conservative thought being communicated there by the press, and more importantly anyone running for office in those regions…

        In my opinion…you draw exactly the wrong correlation to what I said…I’m saying we have to start taking a conservative message to these areas…and start pounding it…win or lose…(obviously we’ll lose initially)…but win or lose…we need to start banging the drums and start rallying like minded people to our cause.

        You start with…if we do what you say…we’ll have to run liberals…I reject that…and I believe that would continue to lose for us as it has for the last 30 years….I’m as convinced that is the very thing that has lost those regions for us in the first place…

        The one thing I see as a problem in what I’m saying is the logistics…because we will be spending money in these areas as we try to rally people to our cause that we could use elsewhere…but I’m convinced an effort must be made…because conservatism is common sense…and it has to be presented to people in a common sense way….that’s not happening now and it shows in the absolute absence of a single elected Republican from New England in the House!

        • Achance

          and welfare. The Ds can play vote fraud, patronage, and bread and circuses with the welfare population and their putative leaders and the unionized public employees vote for more and more government. There is no conservative message that could change the voting tendencies of either. Which isn’t to say there’s nothing you can do, but you have to do it precinct by precinct and district by district.

          • AceInTX

            in those areas? and are you saying you can’t convince people that you can’t spend more than you take in forever? Or that you can’t convince anyone that without business to hire them, you can’t have jobs for people…or revenues to collect in order to maintain your government? There is no message that would carry the day no matter what we do?

            There is no conservative message that could change the voting tendencies of either. Which isn?t to say there?s nothing you can do, but you have to do it precinct by precinct and district by district.

            then why don’t we just surrender ourselves to Obama and his minions now…because there is no hope for this nation!

          • Achance

            discussing things with you. I assure you that there are shades of gray in the World. The fact that I can’t run a Baptist minister who heads a pro-life group and is a life member of the NRA in a some Statewide race doesn’t mean there isn’t a municipal assembly seat I can get him elected to or a State house district, or maybe even a Congressional district in a Blue state.

            So, rather than arguing that we give up, I’m simply arguing that we not stupidly commit suicide.

          • AceInTX

            The fact that I can?t run a Baptist minister who heads a pro-life group and is a life member of the NRA in a some Statewide race doesn?t mean there isn?t a municipal assembly seat I can get him elected to or a State house district, or maybe even a Congressional district in a Blue state.

            When did I say anything about running a Baptist minister? seriously…I like talking to you because I learn from you…but you’re so punchy sometimes it’s frustrating…

            What I said is…we need to start running on conservative issues up there if we’re ever going to change people’s minds….the press isn’t going to do it for us….and the Democrats aren’t going to do it…WE have to communicate the message…and keep communicating it till the message takes hold….We quit trying 30 years ago and there is now no one trying to persuade anyone about what we’re supposed to represent as a party…why that would set you off is beyond me!

          • Achance

            “then why don?t we just surrender ourselves to Obama and his minions now?because there is no hope for this nation!”

          • AceInTX

            There is no conservative message that could change the voting tendencies of either. Which isn?t to say there?s nothing you can do, but you have to do it precinct by precinct and district by district.

            because it sounds to me like you’ve already given up the fight

          • Achance

            to unionized public employees outside of a few law enforcement units that will get their unions to support ANY Republican. There is no message a Republican can give in the Inner City or to the run of welfare recipients elsewhere, border cities, Indian resrervations, etc. that will get them to support any Republican in any numbers.

            Now in places where there are such people but where they don’t dominate, you can work to overcome their superior organization and their well-developed voter fraud strategies with some expectation of success. Again, it isn’t binary.

          • AceInTX

            I’ve voted Republican since 1992 and I was in AFGE from 1992 to 1999 and I know at least 60% of my co-workers voted Republican because I was in the DOJ, BOP.

            I stand by my point…you are absolutely right…as long as we’re not trying to sway any of the people from the places you mention…then we won’t change any minds…but you can’t tell me you can’t get people from those areas by running against out of control spending, or against out of control government, or any number of issues. Maybe you can’t start tomorrow and see an effect in 2010. It would have to be a sustained effort…but to just abandon those areas as we did in starting in the 90s hasn’t quite worked for us has it?

            and I find it Ironic that you pounded me for a my way or quit attitude and then turn right around and defend quitting in the areas we discuss here.

          • Achance

            in the interest of public employees, especially unionized public employees, or of people dependent on government to reduce the size and cost of government. Reducing or at least limiting the size and cost of government is a fundamental tenet of conservative Republicanism. Therefore, it is not in the interest of public employees and others dependent on government to vote for conservative Republicans. There is nothing you can do about that logic. Any place that is dominated politically by government dependents and public employees is going to be Democrat because Republicans cannot be true to their own principles and act in the interest of these dependent groups. Which isn’t to say that you shouldn’t recognize their interests and sometime act on them, but doing things for them just makes them better off and healthier when they attack you.

            Our constituency is people who are not dependent on government. That’s the primary reason the Democrats are trying so desperately right now to make a permanent majority dependent on government. We’re at risk in our traditional Red states and under full scale attack in the Purple ones. Unless we can use an attack on a Blue district to take some pressure off us in a Blue or Purple district, we don’t have the resources to go on the offensive in Blue districts. See, e.g., the Davis-Lee-Longstreet discussion in the winter-spring of ’63 in which they considered detaching Longstreet’s Corp to shore up the West but ultimately concluded that doing so wouldn’t save the West and likely would cost them the Virginia front. Consequently, Lee struck out to Pennsylvania to force the Yankees to follow him to protect their capital, thus releasing Northern Virginia from occupation for the harvest season allowing the Confederacy to stave off starvation for one more campaign season. There’s a lesson to be learned there.

          • AceInTX

            We?re at risk in our traditional Red states and under full scale attack in the Purple ones. Unless we can use an attack on a Blue district to take some pressure off us in a Blue or Purple district.

            I don’t see us as being in the position that Lee and Longstreet were in the east however…We’re still a center right country…if anything..we’re the north in the early years…we’ve got all the resources and manpower we need…but we can’t get our generals to fight…I know that’s an over simplification because we the north also had a populace that didn’t want to fight…we do…or base is fired up and mad as hell and we’re not idolizing our generals like the union troops did McClellan…we’re ready to string our generals up for bleeding us dry on battles that don’t mean anything while losing the war…

          • AceInTX

            We?re at risk in our traditional Red states and under full scale attack in the Purple ones. Unless we can use an attack on a Blue district to take some pressure off us in a Blue or Purple district.

  • AceInTX

    I have my qualms with it…the quitter label being chief among them…but I find her argument that she was becoming a distraction and it was best for the state for her to step down to be persuasive.

    She needs to improve that message however…she needs to play up the viscous and vindictive nature of the charges made against her by obsessively partisan Democrats and play up the destructiveness of the politics of personal destruction to her being able to conduct the people’s business as governor and the people’s representative as the reason she was forced to step down.

    As to whether she should have stepped down or not…I’m of two minds because I don’t like a quitter…and this makes her a quitter no matter how it’s spun…but then the other part of me is of a mind that…why should she have stayed there as a great big target for the bags of burning dog poop being thrown at her…and why should she have stayed and subjected her family to the axes and barbs that were being thrown at them when she was a lame duck anyway?

    • aesthete

      Her having abruptly quit in the middle of her term shouldn’t be a concern. Otherwise, she’s a no-go for executive office for me, unless you think that it’s going to get any easier for her and her family.

    • Achance

      by that Ethics Act standing between her and pay day; you know, that Ethics Act that she likes to brag about. She acts like Alaska didn’t have an Ethics Law until she came along. The pre-Palin law was one of the strongest in the Country as it related to Executive Branch employees and better than most even for Legislators and staff. The law that actually passed hardly resembled the thing her “bipartisan” committe of Wayne Anthony Ross and Ethan Jerkowitz came up with.

      Whatever else was at work; you can believe as much of her story as you want, I don’t believe much of it at all, she had a story and a book deal with a very limited shelf life. The only way she could cash in was get out of the Governor’s job. I can’t blame her for going for the bucks, being less than honest about why, well, that’s just Sarah being Sarah.

      • mschmitt

        … do you then think that she didn’t care what quitting would do to her Presidential/Political chances, or didn’t know?

        I personally don’t think it was about the money at all; I think she realized her heart was no longer in Alaska politics and wanted to keep her presence on the bigger stage — and, yes — to escape from nickel and dime ethics charges (not because of legal expenses, but because that’s the only press she was poised to get for the foreseeable future).

        • Achance

          She had a chance for more of both than she could get by remaining Governor. She’s always been good at seeing the scoring opportunity.

        • aesthete

          I don’t want a leader who gives up when “her heart” isn’t in it. Politics isn’t a Disney movie, where you can follow your heart and believe in yourself, and anyone who tells you that the art of pursuing power in an institution with a monopoly on coercive force (that’s what politics is) is the proper avenue for emotionalism and self-expression was a fool. What happens when her heart isn’t in Presidential politics? Are we to accept that as an acceptable answer? Believe me, if Gov Granholm quit her job as governor in Michigan (if only that would happen :) ) and gave reasons similar to those given by Palin, conservatives and Republicans would collectively roll their eyes and crack a sardonic smile. Why should it be any different for Palin?

          • mschmitt

            I don’t think there’s much disagreement that quitting the governorship hurt her political future. Yet, she’s on record from before McCain picked her saying that she wanted to run for national office (meaning VPOTUS and/or POTUS). What I want to know is if you guys believe she just badly miscalculated when she quit (thinking she could cash out and keep in the front-running for POTUS in 2012, or an Alaskan or carpet-bagged senate seat).

            I’m not saying the money isn’t necessarily an incentive (if it weren’t she’d donate the proceeds). I’m not saying she isn’t necessarily interested in power (though, Lord, I’d pay good money to see some of those rare fools who don’t care a cotton picking thing for power over their fellow man running for office)… I think she wants to be President, and I think that staying in Alaska would guarantee that never happened, that’s all.

            Fighting ethics charges guaranteed bad press. The book tour guaranteed press (much of it good), generated money for her PAC (giving her even more national clout), and made her some coin as a bonus. Makes perfect sense to me (regardless of whatever she is saying in interviews — I wouldn’t know).

          • aesthete

            Far be it from me to say that she was stupid in making that move. If she remains a symbol and a political celebrity, I have no problem with her being a quitter; it would be irrelevant to those functions. The problem comes when some of her supporters (not lumping you in here if you don’t think this describes you) say that this is a smart move from an executive standpoint, that it shows leadership, that it was made in the best interests of AK or that it was somehow a move that is anything but a major negative when looking at her as a potential POTUS candidate.

            As to her national aspirations, I don’t begrudge her those. I do think that it shows little regard for her former constituents for her to abandon the governorship and to break her commitment to the people of AK for them, though, and I don’t mind saying so. One can (and many good, intelligent people will) support her despite, or in some cases because of, this. If her record matched up with the image of conservative crusader that gets played up, I, too, might be tempted to overlook this flaw, but as it stands, what she did in AK seems to paint a very different picture from this.

          • mschmitt

            … it’d help her executive experience/leadership/etc — and I think they’d probably be wrong. It did help her bottom line chances of becoming POTUS some day.

            We can discuss her conservative cred some other time (though this is the conversation I’m really interested in). The complaint of the day seems to be that because she didn’t martyr her POTUS chances in order to stay in Alaska, she’s not qualified to be POTUS — I was just trying to figure out if you guys realize that or if you didn’t agree with my premise (staying in Alaska: bad press + lame duck, leaving Alaska: good press + money + influence).

      • AceInTX

        My memory isn’t what it once was, but weren’t there dozens of ethics complaints being filed against her all of which required dozens of lawyers and state resources all of which were dismissed?

        • aesthete

          For crying out loud, this is one area where even the most libertarian among us would say that government funds aren’t misallocated. Obviously, it reflects badly on those who bring up frivolous charges, but who ever expects libs to play nice?

          • AceInTX

            where he attempted to downplay the coordinated attacks on her is if there was only one ethics complaint against her…

            There were dozens as I said…and no…I don’t expect the Democrats to play fair…and I’m pissed at Republicans who play fair with them…

          • AceInTX

            I did say I find her argument compelling but tied that in an even stiffer knot by saying she quit no matter how you spin it….

          • Achance

            I think there was only one pending complaint at the time she quit, but it would have rained complaints had she taken the deal and written that book while remaining Governor, and some of them would have stuck. There’s some things in the book that somebody might raise a valid complaint or lawsuit about but most everybody is happy just having her out selling books, e.g. Bitney, the Deputy Commissioner she trashed, some others close to her administration.

          • AceInTX

            But there werre plenty of ethics complaints leading up to her resignation…As I’ve swaid…she quit and there is no way to spin it otherwise…I only point out a strategy on how she could lessen the damage…but that doesn’t mean the damage wasn’t done

        • Achance

          I’ve been on the receiving end of all sorts of official complaints including under the Ethics Act and filed by Her administration. I’ve never spent a dime. I simply asked the AG to determine whether I was within the scope of my duties and if so, to defend me. The Ethics Act allegation, I just defended myself. It is an AG complaint against you that means something, the rest is just politics. She and the campaign are the ones that went for private counsel on everything and I can tell you that most legal bills for politicians that have the power to do something to or for an attorney could be nominated for the Prize for fiction; only God knows what her legal arrangement really was.

          The two that would have been worrisome are the Wooten-Monegan (Troopergate) and the emails. She brought that all on herself by flipantly and defiantly saying she was going to be open about everything – she’s another politician that likes the word transparency, it’s just that real transparency stuff she doesn’t like. Then it became apparent that people close to her, as in her bed close in the case of Todd, had been all over the Tpr. Wooten thing. If you believe that Frank Bailey all on his own decided to take out Tpr. Wooten just for the good name of Sarah’s sister, boy do we need to talk about my bridge! He stepped in front of the bullet for her. Sooner or later she or somebody takes a big hit over the emails. Not only did she defy well understood State policy in the way she conducted State business on the private accounts to hide the emails from the network and the PRA, she led several members of her administration astray trying to cover for her. If that one stays alive, the courts will slap them around pretty well.

          • AceInTX
          • AceInTX
  • http://handbagsdirectonline.com trishaking78

    She is just a normal person who is not enamored by her position as a public figure and who wants to make the voice of the average American heard and respected. I feel bad that she left her position as Governor of Alaska, but she really did the right thing. She should be the next president of the USA! Go kick some butt for me, Sarah!

    If there are any technical wizards out there who know their way around web designing, then I could use your help. I have a domain name sarahpalin4presidentnow.com that I want to use to help promote unity for her campaign, but I don’t know how to do the web stuff. I would appreciate any help or support.

  • dagnyt

    Hi everyone –

    In reading all your comments regarding Sarah’s alleged and real transgressions, it strikes me as funny when you consider what the President and his cronies are up to – before and after holding office.

    So, she’s garbage because she quit being Gov.? But it’s ok when pols take YEARS off to run for office (yeah, I’m talking abt the President and our lame ’08 nominee).

    Seems to me the Gov. G from Michigan should resign out of shame for failing at her job so badly. Michigan is a disaster. But she’s a good gal for sticking with it?

    I wish lots of Govs from states that are failing would step down. That’s what would happen if they were private companies.

    The rest of the clowns in DC have so much theft ($ and election) and legal deceit among and between them and they know that everyone knows and ho hum, it doesn’t matter.

    But Sarah quit being Gov so she is damned??? Really?

    • aesthete

      I’m just pointing out that if she did resign using the same lame reasons as Palin, she would be rightly excoriated by Reps and conservatives. My friends in Detroit would love to see it happen!

      Again, I have no problems (that relate to politics) with Palin stepping down if she’s going to remain a symbol for conservative women and a political celebrity. But in the case that she might be running in ’12, is it so unfair for us to see her resignation from AK as a negative? To extend your CEO metaphor, it would be as if a CEO whose only record thus far has been of failing in a mid-sized building stepped down, and then tendered her resignation to Sony for their CEO position.

      • aesthete
    • gekster
  • jeffreywturner

    You have to admit, it is fun to watch the liberals obsess and steam & fume over her every move.

    I keep waiting to see one of their heads literally explode in front of the camera.

  • Ann_W

    In ’96 we were told that Bob Dole was the most electable Repub. Then I remember in 2000 just hearing all the coverage about how much money GWB had, and that he would be the hardest to beat without any coverage of the other people in the race. Then we got treated to all the polls showing that John McCain was the only Repub that could beat Obama or Clinton. I’m so sick of being steamrolled by the MSM.

    Now we have Sarah Palin and no one can deny the raw deal she has gotten from the media, so we’re rallying behind her. We see her sticking it to the media as what we’d like to do. Now this has morphed into the media saying that because conservatives stick up for her– she is THE conservative candidate. That if you are a conservative, that’s who you’ll support in 2012. They are going to pick our candidate for us AGAIN. Palin did not govern as a conservative for the short time she governed. And I don’t care what anyone says— She was HORRIBLE in the debate with Biden. She didn’t know what she was talking about. I’m so sick of getting steamrolled by the media.

    We can appreciate her feistiness and enjoy her sticking it to the media without buying their story that she is THE conservative candidate for 2012. Please be open to all the different candidates when they start to emerge. I’m starting to feel herded again.

  • markeckenrode

    If she ever wants to have a shot at national office, Palin needs to wait til 2016 or later. She doesn’t have a grip on the comlex and important issues facing the country. She would get chewed up in the primaries as more Americans have a chance to see her stumble around searching for an intelligent answer to questions…we all remember the Katie Couric interview. I fear there would be more just like that. I have nothing against Palin, and agree with her on most issues. But I would prefer to have her wait and let someone who can at least compete with Obama run in 2012. We cannot allow him to see a second term.

    • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

      you are about to be swamped by an S storm.

      • gekster
        • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

          about Saint Mother Superior Sarah.

          • gekster

            If you dislike her, thats OK by me.
            If you like her, thats OK by me also.
            The thing is I see way to many who will say one thing or the other, and then “but.”
            IMO its like they try to be on both sides of the fence.
            I could be wrong. Thats just the way I see it.

    • Finrod

      C’mon, out with it, if you’re so set against Palin you must have someone in mind.

      • Ann_W
        • azaeroprof

          He’s a competent Gov and I’m a native-born Hoosier (though Boilermaker by the grace of God!).

          But seriously, though, if you gave free tickets to a speech by Daniels, you could maybe fill my grandmother’s living room. And that’s if you gave free pizza, too.

          There was an era in U.S. history when competent government officials could be elected President without having a vibrant public persona, but sadly that day left with the arrival of the television. Think about it: Ike, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and now Obama. I don’t buy the argument that the public will be tired of strong personalities after Obama (personally, I find him quite boring!). I think to beat him in 2012, we’ll need a strong personality. Looking around right now, I see Sarah Palin and…….well……mystery person to be named later.

          • Ann_W

            … after what “Yes, we can,” and “We are the change we were waiting for” will have done to the country by then.

            I think some people are going to project their conservative fantasies on Palin, and will be disappointed. Going by the small amount of record that she has, there’s very little there there. Because of lack of solid management experience or leadership experience, and economic knowledge we could end up with another GW Bush. (Doing things that seem like the right thing to do for each individual instance, instead of based on sound ideas.)

          • David123

            he didn’t have charisma

          • Ann_W

            Also, Bob Dole didn’t really have defining principles, he was a deal maker who went this way and that way depending on the issue. Mitch Daniels has results to show off that mirror what needs to happen in the country. Maybe for once the case could be made that maybe the flashy, look at me, I make good speeches personality is not always the best person for governing.

    • azaeroprof

      Does Sarah Palin need to do some policy homework? Absolutely. But if you watch her interviews recently, she has obviously been doing some since she left office. And her political path is littered with the carcasses of those who underestimated her.

      This ‘unelectable’ meme is a creation of the mainstream media. They want you to believe that. Obama will be hard to beat in 2012 no matter who we run, especially if the economy improves by then. But Obama’s approval is at 47% and Palin’s favorability is up to 46% (which is, incidentally, almost identical to Ronald Reagan’s just before his 1980 landslide).

      I’ll buy the argument that she might have trouble matching up intellectually in a debate with Obama, at least currently. But the progress she has made in her image rebuilding tour so far has exceeded even my expectations. Given another year or two, she could be a pretty formidable opponent for Obama. She might well fizzle, but I think it’s going to take a pretty strong GOP candidate to beat her.

      • Swamp_Yankee

        Funny how the Pro-Palin bots get called out more than the anti-Palin trolls. This tool has a thinly veiled and failed agenda.

        • Richard Mullins

          Other than that, we should call it when we see it.

      • Achance

        The Country is about 30% love him no matter what and 30% despise him no matter what. That leaves 40% in the squishy middle, and that has been the equation for the last several elections. That 40% ain’t much on that political thinking stuff and they usually vote for the last, best TV commercial. Comrade Obama reprises Blazing Saddles and holds a gun to his head and says, “Don’t shoot or the cool Black guy dies,” and they all vote for the cool Black guy. Borrowing from Einstein: Two things are infinite; the univers and human stupidity – and I’m not sure about the univers.

    • Martin Knight

      She doesn?t have a grip on the comlex and important issues facing the country. She would get chewed up in the primaries as more Americans have a chance to see her stumble around searching for an intelligent answer to questions?

      I really love how people are so certain of this. It’s like reading Kathleen Parker declare for a fact, sourced from nothing more than her imagination, that Sarah Palin had never read “To Kill A Mockingbird.”

      This, of course, ignores the fact that she battled Joe Biden to a draw in their debate – and this is despite the fact that she’d been handicapped to stick with McCain’s non-answer talking points.

      ?we all remember the Katie Couric interview. I fear there would be more just like that.

      Did you even read the diary? Has it not yet occurred to you that one interview (and thanks to Nicolle Wallace’s stupidity in not scheduling more) cannot be the sum of a person’s worth or knowledge? Do you know what ended up on the cutting floor? I got an F on a paper once … do you think that sums up my GPA?

      I’m no fan of Palin in 2012 – in fact, this diary is about her rehabilitating herself for 2016 or 2020. But with friends like you, I don’t think she (or the GOP as a whole) needs enemies.

      • mschmitt

        It’s a troll — it doesn’t think.

    • JadedByPolitics

      oh you MUST mean the complex SOCIALISTIC CRAP that is going to be in place in every nook and cranny of this great country and the complex and important TASK of DISMANTLING THAT!!!!!

      Oh btw ANYONE can compete with the idiot in chief in 2012 ANYONE…..WE can ran a ham sandwich and Americans will be ready to give the title President to it to get RID OF THAT LEFTIST!

  • Swamp_Yankee

    The queen on HotAir concludes:

    “Sarah?s energy is boundless and her ability to connect is unparalleled with any public figure I?ve met in covering politics over the last 17 years”

    But nothing to see here. Lets stop talking about Palin. She’s a dumb quitter and a nobody now.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2009/12/09/sarah-in-the-springs/

    • Swamp_Yankee

      WOW -. super Chicago liberal Page even compares Palin to Reagan.

      “And her timing was impeccable. She has a former sports announcer’s — and former Miss Alaska finalist’s — way of projecting her sincerity, a quality that the late George Burns famously called the secret to success: “Fake that, and you’ve got it made.”

      Yet, as much as her politics are not mine, after chatting with her and her husband, good-natured former “First Dude” Todd Palin, I came away with a new fondness and respect for both of them. If they were faking their enjoyment at being there, they certainly sounded mighty sincere about it.

      They were warm and friendly in the infectious way that helped Ronald Reagan rise from B-movie actor to California governor and U.S. president. The fact that Palin’s next book-signing date was in Iowa only enhanced talk of her possibly taking the presidential plunge. More bizarre things have happened, like Reagan’s rise.”

      She’s re-introducing herself alright.

      http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped1209pagedec09,0,1268390.column

    • Hermes

      I appreciate the fervor of the Palin supporters around here. Certainly, I cannot deny that she has a certain charm and what I would call good political instincts. However, this is not the stuff that statesmen are made of.

      Benjamin Franklin was a real character – a blast at parties, a ladies’ man, and really one of those people that you “just want to be around.” He was a crowd pleaser and diplomat, but not a man to whom one would trust the keys to the White House.

      James Madison, on the other hand, was a brilliant political philosopher, a talented writer, and, at least in his pre-Presidential period, a magnificent champion of liberty. Not much of a personality and some have mentioned that he was a poor speaker – although he is said to have had John Adams’ particular brand of dry wit. Not a crowd pleaser, but an authentic statesman.

      Sarah Palin, alas, is more in the Franklin mold. She is a high-energy, tough competitor and a solid public speaker, but she lacks any consistent systematic political philosophy. At least none that I have seen her explain in any detail. At best she is a populist, at worst a demagogue. The Republican Party needs Palin, yes, but possibly as a replacement for Michael Steele – honestly could we find someone WORSE than Michael Steele? She will bring in the crowds and the money without having to try to excel in areas that she is clearly lacking in (e.g. knowledge of political philosophy, literature, and economics). Palin leads by example, which is commendable, but she is cunning and instinctual, not thoughtful in her leadership. Her gut reaction is to be a conservative; she likely could not explain the subtleties of Burke and Smith or Kirk and Strauss. In other words, she is not a statesman in the American tradition.

      Hanging our hopes on a re-branded Palin in 2012 will likely result in disappointment. Obama is hardly an intellectual (despite his supposed credentials), but in a popularity contest, he is going to win given the media’s bias. The GOP image is, thanks to President Bush and Governor Palin among others, tarnished. It is thought of by both the Left and the Middle as the party of the rube or dunce, That is not going to change unless intelligent, educated candidates who are able to clearly, eloquently experess their ideas in words are nominated. Talking points and sloganeering will not work – that’s for the Dems. Populism will not work either and that is the only trick that the Sarah Palin’s and Sean Hannity’s of the world know. It is painful to face the truth here folks, I know, but accepting that the party needs to get collectively more educated about our own beliefs is absolutely the only way to win back our country. The Heritage Foundation that Rush and Hannnity constantly drone on about is a start, but only a start. A democracy functions only when its citizens are educated. It’s long past time that we start fighting this battle in earnest; our failure to do so has resulted in the Obama presidency.

      I like Sarah Palin, I wish the very best for her and her family, but sadly, she is not the next Reagan.

      • Achance
        • Hermes

          Believe me, I already had the sofa turned over and the windows nailed shut before I commented on Sarah Palin. I didn’t really consider my comment anti-Palin in any way, but that seems how it’s going to be taken by the Palin-ites.

          Glad to hear from you, by the way, Achance!

      • Swamp_Yankee

        Seems like you have another pony in that race. She is a tremendous asset that has people from non-traditional conservative demographics giving the GOP a look.

        Besides, the whole she doesnt read thing is a red herring… “she likely could not explain the subtleties of Burke and Smith or Kirk and Strauss”. She could just as much as any other Republican out there including Rudy, Huckabee, Romney or Pawlenty.

        I take it you havent read her book. If you did, you wouldn’t have made such a statement.

        Personally, as the son of a hardcore fisherman and the brother of two hardcore commercial fisherman, I love the “rube” image. Its not a liability. Its an asset. As a Boston based attorney, you can have all the polished “intellectuals” There are more of us Middle American “rubes” than there are pompous, urbane intellectual elites. I’d rather be governed by the wise commerical fishermen of my hometown then my “sophisticate” and “articulate” law school professors.

      • Swamp_Yankee

        Seems like you have another pony in that race. She is a tremendous asset that has people from non-traditional conservative demographics giving the GOP a look.

        Besides, the whole she doesnt read thing is a red herring… “she likely could not explain the subtleties of Burke and Smith or Kirk and Strauss”. She could just as much as any other Republican out there including Rudy, Huckabee, Romney or Pawlenty.

        I take it you havent read her book. If you did, you wouldn’t have made such a statement.

        Personally, as the son of a hardcore fisherman and the brother of two hardcore commercial fisherman, I love the “rube” image. Its not a liability. Its an asset. As a Boston based attorney, you can have all the polished “intellectuals” There are more of us Middle American “rubes” than there are pompous, urbane intellectual elites. I’d rather be governed by the wise commerical fishermen of my hometown then my “sophisticate” and “articulate” law school professors.

        • Hermes

          I notice that an entire string of comments above this one concern the 2012 election, so I don’t know that I am “the only one talking 2012.” As for my political preferences for that election – I don’t have any. Not yet anyway. Am I against Palin in 2012 … yes, but that hardly counts as an endorsement of any other candidate.

          I have read most of Palin’s new book, which I borrowed from our local library and was generally unimpressed. I don’t blame Mrs. Palin, however, as it reads like every other ghost-written politicians’ memoir out there. Scott McClellan’s book and Ted Kennedy’s book read about the same as Palin’s. Change a few names here and there and you get the same product. Hardly the work of a “Rogue.”

          Being a rube isn’t really an asset in politics. While no doubt Barney Fife is a charming fellow whom we would all like to share a coffee with (or a beer if you are President Obama), few of us would want to see him elected to the Presidency. I don’t contest the charge of absence of political knowledge that you make against Giulianai, Huckabee, etc. Which just goes to show how bad they are as candidates as well; it does not bolster Palin in any way, it simply shows that the other options are as bad as she is.

          You mention her appeal to the non-GOP demographic: to whom do you refer? Blacks, Latinos, Jews? I cannot really see a white evangelical from Alaska making a big splash amongst those groups. Possibly you mean libertarians? In that case, her husband should have run for office, not her. Besides that libertarians already have a candidate: Congressman Paul whose libertarian credentials far outweigh those of Mrs. Palin.

      • Third Street
  • littlel

    to capture those who have already made up their minds that she is not for them. I know she has those who are with her and will never leave her, but the ones she needs are the ones who are more in tune with the likes of Susan collins or Oly. Snow, not the Cornyn or Sessions types.
    I would love to have the opportunity to vote for her in a National election but am not sure she can win the swing states when the time comes. At least there will be well defined Liberal (Obama) to run against, which should provide the chance to bring in a new congress and White house

  • eburke

    in the same sentence, breath or context with John Cornyn.

    I’m just sayin’