Oh, Noes! Not ANOTHER Post About Sarah Freakin’ Palin!
We have 1 year, 11 months, and 15 days until the 2012 election and already this crap is getting to me, especially where La Palin is concerned. You can’t get away from her, no matter how hard you try. There’s Palin’s teevee show (which I haven’t watched, thank you). Her daughter Bristol dancing with stars or something like it. Barbara Bush making headlines with an innocuous one-liner about Palin “staying there.” Conservative columnist Jedediah Bila doin’ that “Jane, You Ignorant Slut!” thing to the equally conservative Mona Charen‘s piece about why Palin shouldn’t run. And the moonbats! … the latest of which is the supremely insufferable Frank Rich’s column in yesterday’s NYT. I hate to deal in clichés but it’s true: All Palin, All the Time. I don’t see how I’m gonna be able to take another 1,029,600 minutes of this.
Liberals, on the other hand, are jumping up and down at the prospect of a Palin candidacy. She could win! they urgently insist to skeptical Republicans; you should get behind her. Don’t throw us Democrats in that Palin briar patch! The latest example is the star columnist of the New York Times, Frank Rich. His Sunday column is titled “Could She Reach the Top in 2012? You Betcha.” Palin’s got a huge television presence, Rich says — 5 million viewers for her new TLC series. Which is slightly less than the 65 million it would take to win a presidential election.
Boaz has a good point but I’m thinkin’ he’s missing the forest for the trees. Yeah, the Lefties would love to see Palin run. Like Mr. Boaz, I think the Lefties are praying for a Palin In 2012! candidacy. But it ain’t just Lefties. Palin has a large number of followers and that camp is gettin’ larger by the day. Palin is anything BUT dumb and she’s milking the populist anger at “professional pols” for all it’s worth. As Ms. Charen said: “She’d so much rather be out dog sledding than in some ‘dull political office,’ she tells the audience. File that.” Yup… there’s a quote that will come back to haunt should Palin In 2012! become reality.
It seems like the only folks that don’t like La Palin are the establishment Republicans, for better or worse. But there’s one thing about the establishment… they know how to win elections. One could counter that Palin knows a lil sumthin’ about the subject, too… just look how well the candidates she endorsed in the mid-terms did. Well, sorta. Except for that Delaware witch, the nutcase in Nevada, and the Alaskan Tea Partier. They didn’t do so well. Andthere are more. The endorsement thing was a mixed bag, at best. But Palin does energize the base… that’s what she’s best at doing.
So. This is gettin’ long and I should stop. Don’t get the wrong idea: I’m not a Palin-hater. I’ve written my share of paeans to the woman, the first of which is here. If you peruse my September 2008 archives you’ll see a LOT of that sort of stuff. Do I like her? Yes. Do I want her to run for president? Not only no but Hell, No! Just continue doing what you’re doing, Mrs. Palin… give your speeches, do the Fox News thing, write your books, smile for the camera, and stump for conservatives… coz you’re good at that.
One more thing from Mr. Boaz and then we’ll really go. It has to do with the Reagan/Palin comparisons some folks are making, including La Palin herownself.
Peggy Noonan spoke for a lot of Reaganites when she responded to Palin’s suggestion that being a Fox-TLC celebrity was a reasonable platform for seeking the presidency, since after all “Ronald Reagan was an actor”:
Excuse me, but this was ignorant even for Mrs. Palin. Reagan people quietly flipped their lids, but I’ll voice their consternation to make a larger point. Ronald Reagan was an artist who willed himself into leadership as president of a major American labor union (Screen Actors Guild, seven terms, 1947-59.) He led that union successfully through major upheavals (the Hollywood communist wars, labor-management struggles); discovered and honed his ability to speak persuasively by talking to workers on the line at General Electric for eight years; was elected to and completed two full terms as governor of California; challenged and almost unseated an incumbent president of his own party; and went on to popularize modern conservative political philosophy without the help of a conservative infrastructure. Then he was elected president.
The point is not “He was a great man and you are a nincompoop,” though that is true. The point is that Reagan’s career is a guide, not only for the tea party but for all in politics. He brought his fully mature, fully seasoned self into politics with him.I made a similar point back in February when David Broder was pushing Palin’s prospects. And two months before that I noted that the Washington Post had run two op-eds “by” Sarah Palin in the space of five months, so that one ”might almost think the Post wanted Palin to be seen as a leader of Republicans.” In the coming months, watch for it: Democrats, liberal journalists, and red-state bloggers will talk up Palin’s chances. Republicans and conservatives who want to defeat President Obama in 2012 will try to change the subject.
Yeah, what they said. Read Mr. Boaz’s piece.
Thanks, Daph.
My pleasure, Buck.
daphne, friends:
if i am forced to read one more time that the limits of sarah palin’s influence with the electorate lies in the delaware race for united states senate, i think that i shall be forced to barf up my lunch.
why do i say that, given that the palin endorsed christine o’donnell got spanked in the election, losing 123,000 votes to christopher coons 174,000 votes? doesn’t that demonstrate that palin’s endorsement was not worth much?
well, as a matter of fact, that particular election does not demonstrate anything, except that in delaware there are a lot more democrats than republicans.
witness.–
delaware has one congressman who stands for election “at large.”
that means in delaware the person running for congress appears on the same ballot as the person who happens to be running for senate, if there is one.
this year the democrat candidate for congress garnered 173,500 as opposed to 125,000 votes for his republican opponent, glen urquhart.
the more perspicacious among you will note some similarities in that.
democratic candidates for congress (house & senate) — 175,000 votes
republican candidates for congress (house & senate) — 125,000 votes
now, i have heard “old guard” republicans says that if they could have but fielded an “old guard” candidate, they would have taken the delaware u.s. senate seat by 15%. given the above circumstance i would have to say that such an assertion is pure bullshit. nothing more, nothing less, though it seems a bullshit proposition which has gained almost universal acceptance among those who don’t like sarah palin.
it is delusion on their part.
rather than whining about sarah palin, the “old guard” should issue her public thanks for doing what she did in conjunction with her tea party allies, and that was to mobilize a great upwelling of partisan fervor upon whose coat tails the republicans swept to victory.
what palin’s influence did do, and this is why “old guard” republicans have their shorts in a knot, what to get a tea party candidate elected as the republican standard bearer in the general election. this is a matter of significance that is being cast aside and ignored, but it is significant.
you cannot win the general unless you win the party nomination. first things first. palin knows this. the old guard knows this, and they are sweating blood because she is a growing power.
minimize her all you want. you just play into her hands.
john jay
b.a., poli sci, whitman college, 1970
j.d., u or oregon law school, 1977
p.s. i like her. she’s smart enough for me.
p.s.s. i think i will go listen to my curtis mayfield rendition of “there’s a train a’comin’.” you know, “people get ready, there’s a train a’comin,’ … you better get on board.” laughing.
p.s. those of the “chattering” classes either miss the point entirely, or wish to obscure it.
and, it is simple.
the old guard democrats, in states like delaware, don’t mind so much that republican candidates lose elections there. hell, they’ve been nominating people who lose for years, and as long as they maintain their spot at the trough, they don’t mind so much.
what has their noses in a genuine twist, however, it that conservatives like palin and the tea party threaten to take over institutional control of the republican party machinery, and evidence no particular desire to maintain the spoils distribution now in place.
that is why they attack palin. not because “her candidate” lost, theirs have been loosing for years, but because palin and o’donnell threaten their institution prerogatives.
simple as that.
you know, being the wolf hound under the kings table was not the best position in the court, not the loftiest, but it provided warmth, kept the rain off, and beat the hell out of being a cur begging for scraps in the street.
that’s why the wolf hound snapped at anyone that threatened its position, no matter how humble.
gosh, that’s kind of an apt metaphor, ain’t it.
john jay
milton freewater, oregon usa
Fine, let’s talk about something other than Palin.
The liberal/conservative divide has a new definition, and it isn’t get a whole lot of attention. When the democrat party goes shopping for a candidate, since about 1992 it is fair to say their criteria is: “We want someone with such an engaging personality, that you can hand him a bag of pure bullshit to sell door to door and he’ll get it sold.” Now, think on that seriously for a minute and recall each democrat champion, or front-runner, since then. You’ll see it fits like a hand in a glove. Even when they couldn’t find what they really wanted and had to settle for Kerry — that is what they were trying to find. That was the target. A salesman of ideas who might emerge successful, even when the ideas he’s selling are bad.
Bringing it back around to Palin: I would submit that all these cantankerous objections to her, amount to the clear and irrefutable observation that she is lacking in this quality. That’s what the crap about “unelectable” is all about. Palin’s credibility, her rep, her personality, the deficiencies that have been identified along those things…they all point to the plain truth that she lacks this quality. You hand an idea to Palin and it better be a good one, or she won’t be able to sell it.
But you probably can’t hand her an idea, unless you’re the nominee for the presidency and you’re naming her as your running mate. Short of that, she’ll hand you a polite, warbling “fuck you” and continue with her own ideas.
And if they aren’t good, she’ll fail at selling them.
I think that’s completely awesome. You don’t need to theorize about the alternative, you can just look to the people we have in charge right now. How’s that workin’ out for ya?
Bring on the bad salesmen, the salesmen who are sure to sale if their ideas aren’t good. That’s what this country needs. Starting with her.
I’m sick to death of the wonderful salesmen who are capable of selling shitty ideas. We’ve had as much of that as we can afford, plus some.
“We want someone with such an engaging personality, that you can hand him a bag of pure bullshit to sell door to door and he’ll get it sold.”
An excellent description of Palin, who seems to be selling the second wave of the McCain/Bush brand of stealth liberalism.
Au contrair.
I suggest you keep this phraseology in mind next time you hear of another candidate who is more “electable” than Caribou Barbie. Seriously.
You’ll find the GOP is, indeed, becoming the “We’re just like democrats just not quite as much” party. The establishment is on a recruiting drive, trying to become the party of the donkey with a different label. Why pick Mitt over Sarah? Because some people might say yes…when the ideas being sold are bad…packaging over substance all the way. The same is true of the other four or five gentlemen who might be contenders.
If you really think Palin is more of the same and oppose her for that reason, then I agree with you. But something tells me you’ve got a few more bones to pick with her than that one. Heck, line up all the Republicans with name recognition, and rank them according to their ability to sell shitty ideas…Sarah Palin’s name is going to be on the BOTTOM of that list. Anyway, that’s my take on it.
Stop projecting, Morgan. It’s a fault you shouldn’t indulge.
Palin campaigned for McCain.
I think one has to go back and remember how they felt when the Old Guard trotted out McCain as their anointed choice. I don’t know of anyone who liked the choice. The choice of McCain, from the Old Guard that somehow “knows how to win elections” put the GOP in deep shit and they knew it. I knew it, you knew, everyone knew it.
The selection of Palin as his running mate absolutely charged up the pre-Tea Party base. And one has to go back and remember one’s first thoughts about her, her accomplishments, her speeches, her background before the MSM began their ages-old ploy of playing the tiresome “idiot” card.
I have been watching the dread fear begin to creep like a chocking fog over the landscape: OMG! We’re not smart if we like Palin!!
I’ve read your essay twice to make sure before I state this: I do not see any reason given for your chary misgivings about Sarah Palin, but I do sense a capitulation, subtle as it may be, to the most crippling fear known to modern man: a fear that perhaps one is not perceived as intelligent.
That ploy has been losing traction, and the tactic has changed to “concern trolls” doubting her electability, and the newest tactic which I certainly have used as regards Pelosi: oh please elect her your leader, she has so much baggage!
Now, Pelosi’s baggage is real, not perceived nor pushed upon her by her opponents. There is no need because she proudly owns her horrid accomplishments. Palin’s only baggage may be her personal beliefs which, to my knowledge, have never impinged on her governing style or substance to date; other baggage has been manufactured by the Imaginary Media.
As for the elections, I think your facile acceptance of the results as a black-and-white proof is a bit disingenuous, for I don’t yet think you so foolish or blind to not have seen the tremendous infighting from the GOP Elite against the plain choice of the Republican electorate in the key areas you cite. So why put it forth as a reasonable measurement?
Any friend of Daphne has my attention and my polite respect which I here proffer with a caveat: give up your own thoughts, what you in fact know about her or her thought processes that cause you dismay.
Is it her religious mien? Her cultural bearings? Her political vision? What?
p.s. one final comment, flogging a dead horse, and that is the delaware campaign.–
the old guard says, hey, 175 to 125, a spread of 50, we coulda run a standard run of the mill republican and delivered the margin, taken 1/2 the margin, and prevailed at 150 to 149 on a good day.
(in fact, they said more than that, they said they coulda won by 15%. well, leave off arguing about whether that is a ludicrous claim.)
ask one simple question of the old guard.–
that is, if you coulda delivered it to the old guard guy in the general and prevailed, then why couldn’t you deliver it to the old guard fellow in the primary and defeated o’donnell with that “deliverable” margin? eh?
the simple answer is, they didn’t in the primary because they couldn’t, nor more than they could have in the general.
now, as to the conversation between daphne and morgan k. freeberg.–
i always love it when folks assert that those in public life are not so bright, and that they cannot “deliver” “brightness” to the scheme of things. oh, so regrettable, they intone. if only they were so bright as i.
well, daphne & morgan. deliver us. take a little time off, eat some rubber chicken for a couple years, speak before 100′s of gatherings, impress and mobilize an electorate, help deliver another stunning electoral triumph, and, … , deliver us.
demonstrate how well you speak and write in public, over myriad of things, often off the cuff.
and, deliver us, … , and deliver those votes. pick some good ideas, and sell them. it should be as easy to sell good ideas as crappola, and all you gotta do is think of them. and, convince others.
piece o’cake. laughing.
now, the guy who wrote the article daphne quoted at length in the post, he thinks palin is dumb, but smart enough to mobilize people, and sell the idea.
hey, maybe he’s saying she communicates to us on our own little simple level. you know, where we live. right to our guts, since we haven’t minds. laughing.
oh, to be clever.
You know what I think is really funny about all this…
How would you characterize GWB’s popularity level as he left office — up or down? A consensus would say “down, and deservedly so” — both on the left and on the right.
Now before Bush came along, what were people saying they wanted in a leader. I’ll tell you: Agree with me or disagree, he states his mind, he sticks to it in thick-or-thin. People pressure him, and he persists in what he knows is right. I want to see some goddamn CHARACTER.
Bush comes along, offers it, people can’t stand it.
Now what are they saying they want. They say: I’m sick and tired of all the gutter-sniping. I’m sick of all the pessimism, all the divisiveness. I want to see someone come along who isn’t afraid to say something is GOOD. I don’t care what. I want to see some appreciation for something. I want a leader who can look on the bright side of things, give me some hope.
Palin comes along and says how much she loves AH-LAS-KA. People make fun of her for it.
The masses are asses. People just don’t know what they want. The time has come to just admit it.
Huh. I had a long comment here. . . banned?
**sorry Joan, it got hung up in the spam filter for some inexplicable reason. I’ve set it free.
The masses are asses.
So sayeth the Oracle.
All y’all Palin fanbois can preach to the choir and/or cheerlead all you want, I’m having none of it. My point, which I believe is shared by Daphne and others, is that the woman is not qualified to be president of the United States. One half of a term as governor of a state with the population equal to or slightly less than the cities of El Paso, Texas or Columbus, Ohio; a budget of $2.6B; and a mere 15,000 state employees ain’t “executive experience” in my book. If the mayor of El Paso had great legs and a reality teevee show, would you vote for her? Apparently you would.
Speaking of being governor… did any of you watch her resignation speech? That has to go down in history as the weirdest speech by a public official in United States history. To say it was rambling and disorganized is being KIND. That speech, along with the fact she quit, was the tipping point for me… I don’t care HOW many books she ghost writes or teevee shows she gets. She ain’t qualified, period, end of report.
Well then, don’t vote for her. Vote for someone who would continue to clock in as Alaska’s Governor every day, waste the Alaskan taxpayer’s money, do nothing, continue to fight bullshit lawsuits based on nothing…and come back the next day & go back, Jack, & do it again.
Someone who would actually be nabbed by one out of two dozen such complaints. Which Palin was not. Eww, there’s a thought.
Find me someone qualified. Find me a gal with ugly legs and hair on her upper lip…who would have the balls to say something like “this is a man who can give speeches about the wars his country is fighting, and never use the word ‘victory’ except when talking about his own campaign.”
But just spare me the milquetoasts who reach across the aisle. Spare me the Newt Gingriches who make couch commercials with Nancy Pelosi about global warming. That isn’t asking too much, is it?
If that’s what you have to do to be “qualified,” I’ll stick with the unqualified thankyewverymuch. Yes, I’m heart-attack-serious. Enough is enough.
This term “qualified” is like the term “beautiful.” It is what it is to the eye of the beholder.
Politics is all about timing.
Palin, at least so far, has done very well building a political movement that could make her a competitive presidential candidate now or in the future. She has also brilliantly managed her public relations enterprise to the point where she now commands a weekly audience in the millions. She is a very savvy customer, and any competitor who underestimates her will make a fatal mistake.
Will she run in 2012? Maybe, but I think not. My bet is on 2016 if Obama wins, 2020 if he doesn’t. Keep in mind, in 2020 she’ll still be in her 50s.
So she can take charge of a jurisdiction — by which I mean, a territory of land within a defined term of time — and assemble an organization. She can lead it, with an agenda in mind, whittling it down as she finds people in the organization who are not loyal to the agenda. Among the people who remain, she can hear ideas that differ from her preconceived notions, and evaluate them productively, accepting what works and rejecting what doesn’t. By doing this, she can produce results.
Obama can’t. He just pulls thoughts out of His ass, and in His organization, those become True North. There’s no a single piece of evidence to indicate He can productively hear a challenge to His preconceived notions. He cannot be a real leader, because He cannot be a team player. Palin beats Him here.
Anybody want to offer a challenge to this?
She can fill up a bookstore, or a football stadium, or a lecture hall, without giving away free beer.
So she wins on style and she wins on substance.
Frankly, I do not know what more there is to the “qualifications” we’re trying to fill here. I don’t think any of you nay-sayers have an answer for that either. There is packaging, there is meaningful stuff in the package. Just those two things. And it’s Palin two-fer-two.
I should add that if I loathed the woman completely…and there is actually much about the way she looks at the world that I disagree with…all of the above would still go, word-for-word.
Although I’ll admit the idea of the 45th President of the United States looking good in Daisy Dukes suits me just fine.
Ah, right there: she quit is the number one “concern troll” comment around the blogosphere. I was waiting for it!
Regardless, I’m with Dennis Miller on this: I’m intrigued with her because of the sorts of high-profile people who hate her. That’s a fun little thread to pull on. Why exactly do they hate her? What’s she done to them? Why do they give her so much power to drive their bus?
They are terrified because she leads a real mass movement, the most powerful force in politics.
So she wins on style and she wins on substance.
Roger on the first. You’re delusional on the second.
As for the governor bits… nice regurgitation of the party line; I’m surprised you didn’t cite the applicable pages in her book. Here’s what it looks like to a disinterested observer: Palin experienced adversity and she folded. You can’t tell me that someone with her sterling organizational skills, statesman like bearing, and vast political acumen couldn’t have gone to to the AK state legislature and said “Enough of this shit. Give me a law to stop the petty bullshit ethics claims. This is wasting the state’s time and money.” Is THAT what you’re saying, Morgan? It sure sounds like it.
Now fast forward to 2013 when Hu Jintao threatens to sell off a couple o’ hundred billion in treasuries every frickin’ day for a year or three, or one of a gaggle of ragheads decides to “test” her in some way, shape or form (like, say, detonate a nuke over Tel Aviv), or Kim Jong Un decides he REALLY needs Seoul and sends about a million and a half Norks across the DMZ. Are you comfortable that President Palin would have the wherewithal to respond? I’m not, based on her inability to handle the stresses of governing a state of 700,00 people.
You’ve guzzled the Kool-Aid, Morgan. Of that much I’m sure.
One more thing: we’re talking about PALIN, not frickin’ Obama. We all know he’s a prat, so just put a sock in that, would you?
Buck, those kind of arguments aren’t effective when made by the climate alarmists. What makes you think they’ll work here?
Palin, has one significant advantage given all the scrutiny. There is likely nothing to surprise the voters with during a campaign. Given the high level of publicity most people have made decisions about what they think about her past behavior.
Reducing the voters’ questions is half the battle in an election.
Now fast forward to 2013 when Hu Jintao threatens to sell off a couple o’ hundred billion in treasuries every frickin’ day for a year or three, or one of a gaggle of ragheads decides to “test” her in some way, shape or form (like, say, detonate a nuke over Tel Aviv), or Kim Jong Un decides he REALLY needs Seoul and sends about a million and a half Norks across the DMZ. Are you comfortable that President Palin would have the wherewithal to respond?
Now, that’s a great question. Doesn’t have much to do with the domestics, but on the foreign-policy issues that’s what it is all about and I wish everyone else paid it as much attention.
Answer: Roger. I would much rather have Palin in there than George W. Bush. Almost as much as a President Cheney. When the time comes to speak the language of disembodied horse heads left in beds, Palin will speak it. If you have some evidence that she will not, I’m listening.
As I’ve said many a time: If the question is “what is two and two?” and one guy says four and the other guy says six — the correct answer is not five. That’s a fancy way of saying reaching-across-the-aisle is not always the correct answer.
And I don’t want to bring up the name of…that other guy. But you brought up the issue of “qualified.” This makes the current President relevant. He was supposed to be that, if nothing else, right? So you don’t get to do that. You can’t say “These people are qualified and these other people are not, because popular consensus says that” — and then, when people like me say “Okay, last time we decided something like that, here’s how it turned out” go and say we’re getting off topic. We’re not. The nation has tried this “whoever is popular must be a great leader” school of thought, and it’s been a complete bust.
You keep at it if you want to. I never saw anything redeeming about it from Day One. It’s always looked to me like a trip back to high school, and an unwelcome one.
Qualifications: it’s worth thinking about the alternatives. Say Palin gets the GOP nod. Who would be her opponent in 2012? BHO? As Buck has noted, we all think he’s a prat. Hillary Rodham Clinton? As far as political philosophy is concerned, she’s pretty close to BHO. Her qualifications are fairly thin. She’s greatly loved by gay men, but so was Judy Garland.
Who else? Biden has cemented his reputation as a lightweight. I think we can assume the pretty boy is politically dead. Cuomo?
Faced with these alternatives, I think our southwestern exile would pull the lever for the gal from Wasilla.
[...] of my hometown Buck has written his definitive piece on the former Alaska governor. Daphne reprinted it at the Haven, and there’s been many interesting comments at both places. Sadly, I must defy [...]
Sarah Palin is a standard of how much an ordinary, self-made, God-fearing, American woman can make of herself. In addition to that, she has the added bonus of being comfortable in her own skin and she is a genuinely happy person.
There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t think, “Wow. She started out her political life on her local school board.” (School board meetings are boring as hell, by the way.)
She makes a lot of people aware of how much they could have been and how much they could have achieved, but didn’t.
For a lot of people, that awareness causes pain and rage.
I would vote for Palin in a millisecond. She has political talent shooting out all pores, by which I mean: she knows how to assess a situation, and how to assess human nature, and how to follow through and get things done. She has proven she has the energy and the competitive desire to accomplish things. She has the za za charisma to shift our national thinking further away from leftist fantasy and further towards sanity.
Re Morgan Freeberg’s point about desire to elect good salespersons
This desire goes hand in hand with the desire to play it safe and retain power. However, when you have a natural talent like Palin, i.e. a talent capable of shifting an entire nation further away from leftist fantasy and further towards sanity, its worth taking a risk on a talent like that. Think big. Who wants to play it safe when a talent like that is available and could make a huge difference in our national attitudes and thinking?
And I said THINKING. Palin thinks. Palin trusts her own thinking. Part of why the journo/bloggers who crave gravitas hate her is that she doesn’t give a @#$% about the conventional wisdom which they revere. And the other part of why is exactly what Joan of Argghh pointed to: “OMG! We’re not smart if we like Palin!” i.e. we fail to retain our much sought after and now treasured gravitas. You know who is willing to support Palin? Frickin REBELS!
Radicals. People who are willing to kick conventional hoity toity wisdom in the balls. Trashing Palin is stale. Recognizing her talent is the new black.
Faced with these alternatives, I think our southwestern exile would pull the lever for the gal from Wasilla.
You’re right, Gordon… I would. I’m not one to sit out an election because the Perfect Candidate isn’t on the ballot. Mrs. Palin certainly couldn’t do any worse than the current administration.
That said, there’s a whole lot o’ time between now and 2012. We’ll see what we’ll see as far as candidates are concerned.
And yet, in that time there is not going to be a workable picture put together of that theoretical “perfect candidate.”
Daphne says Rick Perry could take it. He doesn’t have as much “baggage” as Sarah Palin. Obviously, I have to agree with that…but Perry has less baggage than Palin because Palin’s been on a national ticket and Perry has not. She was made a target because she posed a threat. Perry’s trial has not yet come.
Since Reagan, every single Republican who’s won something big, has been transformed, deliberately, into some kind of a dolt. Anyone want to step forward and promise me, cross yer heart and hope to die, that won’t happen to Rick Perry?
Or to anybody else.
This is where the “she has baggage and she’s unqualified” argument is lost on me. Yeah, she’s been given The Treatment. Of course she has! She stepped up and posed a threat! She’s been smeared, and that’s almost by definition.
So who is immune from this. Explain to me how this works: So-and-so pops up and shows all the strengths of Palin and none of the weaknesses. Katy Couric interviews this dude, who is somewhere to the right of Ted freakin’ Kennedy…and she…what? She’s going to pitch softballs that begin with “how does it make you feel when,” like she does with Holy Emperor? Think she can’t make him look like an idiot? Think again — this is what she does. It’s her job, and the editors are on her side on this thing. If all else fails, they’ll play Trivial Pursuit until he can’t answer something, and then it will be all “I can’t believe [name] is stupider than Dan Quayle!”
I understand the trepidation that takes place when a new candidate comes up that’s cast in some different mold. But I lose my patience with people who use words like “unqualified” with some hidden meaning behind the word I have to discover (she’s American-born and over 35, so obviously our New Mexico friend doesn’t refer to the literal interpretation…nor does anybody else who applies it to her).
And, all conservatives should despise the prospect of taking a merry-go-round for another unproductive spin. That is the real definition of “conservative.” And this, friends, is a merry-go-round. Yeah I was on the receiving end of precisely the same lecture when McCain was picked and I didn’t like it. But the lecture fits better in this situation because Palin’s been a stalwart and McCain has not.
So enough about that. I wanna think about TurBaconDuckEn now. My gal just fed me a sample of the bacon and it’s delicious. I’m all excited because after breakfast we’re still going to have six pounds left.
Would someone please name a President and/or a candidate that either party put up since Truman that was worth squat.
Exclude Reagan, he actually did something, which is why he’s so reviled by the Left.
One more thing and then I’m done with this. I wasn’t ignoring you, Joan. Well, check that: yes I was. Because of this:
I’ve read your essay twice to make sure before I state this: I do not see any reason given for your chary misgivings about Sarah Palin, but I do sense a capitulation, subtle as it may be, to the most crippling fear known to modern man: a fear that perhaps one is not perceived as intelligent.
Subtle as it may be, indeed. SO subtle as to be non-existent. If you couldn’t grasp the fact that I said… quite plainly… that I agreed with Mr. Boaz, then, well…
I found the quoted bits above mildly insulting, not to mention the fact you categorized me as a “concern troll” in a later comment. Both bits were beneath a response. But that’s just me.
I admire Palin in a lot of ways. I like self-made women who indeed seem to have it all, or at least most of it, and are happy with their lot in life, and fully embrace it – no matter how big and sloppy it may get at times. So on top of the safety-net shrill chorus of the left that she is dumb as a rock, every time they see that smiling chipper woman they see their own unhappiness and discontent magnified. How dare she not crumble when we’ve judged and condemned her to roll over and show her belly. Where have our powers gone!
People are a miserable lot and they loathe those that push the big rock uphill, overcome and live in the golden.
However, with that, I , too hope she graciously resists the urge to throw her hat in the ring. Ultimately, I don’t think she can win. And I think she’s condemned to wear every false or unwarranted accusation like a stone albatross she will not be able to break free from no matter how hard she tries. Every time she opens her mouth, we (including Palin) will be forced to endure the media slog us through every single thing – from an unwed pregnant daughter to that bridge to nowhere all over again. She’ll never be free from it all. And neither will we. I don’t think it’s right but I think that’s the score.
On the upside, the chick scares the shit out of a whole lot of people – especially her betters. How dare she keep sitting in that damn catbird seat! And they may be too dumb to even get it. Which makes it all the more amusing.
When ultra liberal-snake in the grass- Katie Couric asked Sarah Palin what publications she reads here in Alaska..why in the world didn’t she answer, ” I read everything you read in NYC, next question.”
As much as I adore what she stands for…
I don’t believe Palin has the oratory skills or seasoning to go toe to toe with any Republican that might be interested in the top job.. and Obama’s b/s skills are a half-notch above most of the those.
In spite of encouragement form her impassioned fans, I don’t believe she will emerge as the obvious front runner to oppose Obama. Neither will she be considered for the VP position.. too much of a lighting-rod. She will however play a major role in drawing the blueprints for the Republican platform for 2012, then be considered for a cabinet position.
I never called you a concern troll, and I don’t think you are. I think you are swayed by others’ thoughts and haven’t honed your own for yourself in a way that speaks for you.
That is a critical assessment of your essay, not of your person.
Like Morgan’s last comment, I see way too many people swayed by the irresistible Narrative of the media and the blogosphere that says Palin is . . . whatever.
But you provide nothing about your own assessment based on what Palin has presented to your own personal sensibilities. How do YOU think about her candidacy? And why? What is it about Palin that rankles you? Or even, why do you agree with Boaz and Noonan?
You point us to other accolades you’ve given about Palin as a person, but offer no thoughts except “hell no!” about a Palin candidacy. Peggy RINO Noonan’s umbrage notwithstanding, to portray Palin as vapidly condensing RR’s legacy into one point about his acting career is disingenuous on Noonan’s part and seemingly silly for anyone else to buy into.
I do apologize for offending your person. My intent was more pedantic about your style, but I sorely missed the mark with my own ineptitude.
The “too much of a lightning rod” people are missing a rather subtle point — in addition to the more glaringly obvious one, which is that the “pick a guy who won’t be a lightning rod” technique was thoroughly discredited two years ago.
The subtle point is Pattonian in nature. In more modern times, it is Rumselfdian:
You run against Obama with the Republican party you have.
The point that it’s-still-early is a worthy one…but it fails to adapt to our changing times. In a lot of ways it isn’t that early anymore. We know what our field of candidates is, and we know how they all work. The opposition comes out and says “Hey Republican Candidate! You eat babies for breakfast every morning!” …the guy who loses against Obama, is the guy who says “No, not true! I am emphatically opposed to eating babies! Here’s a website dedicated to me not eating babies, and here’s some video footage of me eating delicious corn flakes with my family!”
The guy who wins is the guy who says “Yeah, whatever. Now back to the subject at hand, let’s cut the corporate income tax and stop groping airplane passengers.”
And all these Republican candidates have demonstrated a well-defined and well-documented pattern of leaping to the defensive. Everybody in the pool does this, save one.
And all these Republican candidates have demonstrated a well-defined and well-documented pattern of leaping to the defensive. Everybody in the pool does this, save one.
Good points, but I think the R’s consistently assume a defensive position – it may be because they like the appearance of being well mannered and not lobbing their own flamethrowers, or believe it undignified to roll in the mud with pigs, or their just easily manipulated. Whatever the reason, it continually permits the D’s to maintain the position of power because they are willing to play hard, mean and dirty if necessary.
The R’s need to buck up and stop being so defensive but rather stay focused on the issue and not give validation and credibility to the D’s by defending every stinking accusation they make.
Talk about the self-sabotage and weakening of a party.
I do apologize for offending your person. My intent was more pedantic about your style, but I sorely missed the mark with my own ineptitude.
Noted; and thanks for that. Peace.
[...] by me, and I don’t even approve of it…there is a fascinating conversation going on at Daphne’s haven of jadedness. In which Joan of Argghh! makes a pointed observation: Like Morgan’s last comment, I see way too [...]
The fulmination and angst over Gov. Palin never ceases to amaze and disappoint me. She has achieved her accomplishments and prominence in a highly unorthodox manner. Furthermore, she has not paid homage to those who seem to thing they are owed such deference. She would have been at home in the 19th century, when when plain-spoken authenticity was valued. So, she has three strikes against her before she gets out of the gate.
In the 19th century she have been honored as the unique character she is, a force of nature. Most of the people who fret over her influence can on their best day neither fill her shoes nor stand up to the vituperation dealt her, so I find the critiques somewhat hollow. I do not care one way or the other whether she pursues the political path. She has my respect, which is far more than what I will grant to the Ruling Class pols who strut on the stage.
When it gets down to cases, our survival of what is coming will not be found in the political system, but in ourselves. The crucible will be glowing white hot soon enough.