Romney advisor on Palin: “She’s not a serious human being”
posted at 6:34 pm on July 15, 2010 by Allahpundit
Huckabee’s taken potshots at her from time to time, but between this fusillade from unnamed Mitt advisors and the furious counterattack on Romney at Conservatives 4 Palin, I’d say that the 2012 primary is now, at long last, officially on.
In the immortal words of Greg Stillson, “The missiles are flying. Hallelujah.”
Still, few express much regard for Palin’s ultimate chances. One adviser to Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, and, by traditional standards, the putative 2012 frontrunner, says of Palin, “She’s not a serious human being.” Another Romney intimate warns, “If she’s standing up there in a debate and the answers are more than 15 seconds long, she’s in trouble.”
One of the most experienced Republican national political operatives in the country suggests that while Palin might be envied and sleek, she lacks the endurance required for a protracted nomination fight. “She’s like a cheetah. She can run really fast, but not really long.” In the end, this school of thought about Palin goes, she is too polarizing to be seen as likely to beat Barack Obama, and Republicans will be too hungry in 2012 to risk nominating someone who could cost the party the White House — maybe even in a landslide…
Such a disjointed field can only provide more encouragement for Palin.
And nothing would make the White House happier. The President’s political advisers, troubled by the weak economy and Obama’s image as a big spender, are more worried than he is about re-election and more worried than they let on publicly. Obama himself has told people that he believes the Tea Party movement will still be going strong in 2012, leaving the party to go into battle against an incumbent with a candidate too far right to win. In fact, the President’s advisers believe that if Palin is the nominee, New York’s billionaire mayor, Michael Bloomberg, could enter the race as an independent, scrambling all the conventional rules yet again.
Bloomberg as a self-funded stalking horse for his pal Barry intent on taking down the GOP? Why, that sounds … entirely plausible, actually. As for the nastiness about her being unserious, righties as respected as Krauthammer and George Will have made the same point. And I’ve noted before myself that, given the media’s obsession with painting her as a female Quayle, she’d have to be virtually perfectly on the trail for more than a year to avoid that narrative. The tiniest, most innocent flub — think Bush being quizzed on the names of foreign diplomats — will be hyped into the second coming of the Katie Couric interview, with the press breathlessly insisting that no sane person would vote for such a doofus. Can she be that perfect on the trail? Can any human being, including Barack “Bitterly cling to guns and religion” Obama?
Follow the link and read all of that piece, actually, if only for the bit about Bush and Cheney both reportedly pushing their old pal Mitch Daniels to GOP movers and shakers. Given the reviving influence of Team Dubya over the party’s establishment, I wouldn’t underestimate Daniels’s ability to burst out of obscurity quickly via a huge push from prominent Republican donors and groups. And speaking of quick bursts, more on Palin from Mark Halperin:
She would be the only woman against a half-dozen or more Republican men. As long as she leaves the door to a race open, she can freeze the field, prevent other GOP hopefuls from gaining much traction, keep the media in a perpetual will-she-or-won’t-she frenzy and jump into the race whenever she likes. That would be impossible for an ordinary candidate, but Palin could splash in as late as November 2011, just a few months before the voting begins. There is no deadline for signing up for the Iowa caucuses, and when it comes to competing in early-state contests, she will have a far easier time than any previous insurgent. Her candidacy would require almost none of the usual time sinks that force politicians to jump in early: power-broker schmoozing, schedule-intensive fundraising, competitive recruitment of experienced strategists, careful policy development. She would have immediate access to cash, with even small Internet donations likely bringing in millions.
Fred Thompson splashed into the last primary late, but not as late as November. Then again, Fred wasn’t the grassroots phenomenon that Palin is and he suffered from the perception that his late start was due to him not caring quite as much about winning as the rest of the field. That wouldn’t be the case with Palin; her late entry would be seen as calculated for dramatic effect, which would probably give her boost. And the point about small donations is well taken: Romney’s PAC has dwarfed hers in fundraising so far this year, but according to the Globe, most of the money’s come from events and large donors. By contrast, three-quarters of SarahPAC’s haul came from small donors. That’s not good news for her in terms of raw numbers — Mitt can almost certainly use big-money bundlers to crush whatever amount she’d rake in from grassroots contributors — but the media will go bonkers for a storyline about plucky blue-collar conservatives trying to propel Palin to victory against the Romney fortune one five-dollar donation at a time. And of course, that media coverage will be worth millions in itself. Remember: The default press narrative in 2012 will be Palin vs. Anti-Palin, with the task for Romney, Daniels, or whoever emerges as her nemesis to try to embody the good qualities the Anti-Palin is supposed to have — smart, competent, experienced — while avoiding the bad ones (elitist, white-collar, uncharismatic). As such, they’d better be awfully careful with how far they push the condescension towards her, especially given the potential alluded to by Halperin for gender politics to enter this race.
For what it’s worth, former McCain associate Mark McKinnon thinks she’s going to run even though neither she nor the country are ready for it. Note well his point at the end about what a Palin loss in the primary would mean; given the fervor her supporters are known for and the likelihood that the race will turn nasty, he’s totally right about the possibility of devastating party divisions in the general election. Exit question: Some Palin critics are speculating that the Bristol/Levi tabloid wedding announcement was secretly blessed by Sarah. Um, given the fact that her alleged unseriousness is already a major political liability for her, why on earth would she do that?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »
I’m going to correct that last statement though, I get depressed when I see the few vocal extremists here, I need to remember you are a very small minority.
scotash on July 16, 2010 at 1:23 AM
Still waiting on those facts.
But while we wait, why don’t we look at what some conservatives said about SP’s decision to quit:
Fred Barnes, editor at The Weekly Standard:
Editors of The Wall Street Journal:
Mark Steyn, in National Review:
Yeah… that left-wing MSM really working overtime on poor SP.
BTW, those quotes are opinions, not facts. Maybe you should learn the difference.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 1:23 AM
Yeah, I can see all the commie profs ranting and raving in apoplectic fits, cursing the day the hicks and troglodytes stole the country back. I hope it comes to pass.
If Palin’s in the race she’s got my vote over Romney, like right now.
Gang-of-One on July 16, 2010 at 1:24 AM
Your attraction for Palin is very creepy and unnatural. It really borders on the pathological. I thought the Obama cultists from 08 were scary. You are a very troubled individual. You’ve taken your religious zealotry and applied it to your politics in very dark ways. Whatever it is that is wrong with you is no small thing.
dakine on July 16, 2010 at 1:25 AM
Hey Jenfidel…
JG23 is squawking about facts.
He’s boring me so how about you copy and paste what facts we and others have posted regarding Palin and maybe, just maybe…this time he won’t pretend he hasn’t seen them.
On second thought…nah. Not worth the time. He can scroll up or click on the previous pages if he’s really interested.
But he’s not. He’s too impressed himself and what he perceives as a “gotcha”…which is true, if you’re totally delusional and willing to ignore the rebuttals people write to the point where you refuse to admit they exist.
Other than that, he’s spot on!
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 1:31 AM
Err… there’s nothing dark about applying a principle from story of Esther to Palin.
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 1:32 AM
All 3 of the opinions you cited were written over a year ago.
I don’t suppose they’ve re-evaluated what they had to say,have they?
A lot of us were puzzled by Sarah’s decision to resign and didn’t understand why and worried that it might not be a good thing.
Apparently this includes Steyn, Barnes and the WSJ.
In the year that’s past, she’s had a successful book tour, sold 2.2 million books, given dozens of speeches, started SarahPAC and used it to raise money for conservative candidates (most of whom have won their primaries) and has raised millions of dollars for her political cause, plus there are her postings on Facebook and Twitter and in the op eds of national and international newspapers.
(Her FB Notes have been quoted on the front page of The Times of London regarding energy policy.)
If she were “irrelevant” and an “idiot woman” who “quit” the Governorship because she “couldn’t handle it,” wouldn’t she have slunk away to Wasilla never to be heard from again?
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 1:34 AM
I take it you’re a brain dead religious zealot as well powerpro?
dakine on July 16, 2010 at 1:34 AM
She wanted to get paid you blithering idiot!
dakine on July 16, 2010 at 1:36 AM
No, my friend, they are very light ways!
That you would think there is something wrong with me only indicates that you are deep in darkness yourself.
We’ll pray for you, too.
You need it.
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 1:36 AM
Paid for what?
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 1:38 AM
I’d love to see some “facts” from you.
Yeah. That’s pretty much what I expected. You have not failed to live
updown to expectations.JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 1:38 AM
Mitt operative trash talks Palin. Everyone shocked. Women and children hardest hit.
Other commenters chime in on how hopeless a Palin candidacy would be.
Obviously, the goal here is to convince everyone Palin doesn’t stand a chance before she even announces she’s running.
Let’s not be so gullible. I guarantee that no one is just going to hand Palin the nomination. Various well-connected Republicans will be pushing someone else entirely.
If Palin wants to be president, she’ll have to earn the nomination.
I’m fine with that. The question you have to ask is, why are so many trying to keep her out of the competition?
Because they’re afraid she just might win it.
As for being unable to win in the general, I’d just point out that in the PPP poll released today, Palin, Romney, Huckabee, and Newt were all statistically tied with Obama. And this is still 2 years away from the election.
There Goes The Neighborhood on July 16, 2010 at 1:38 AM
I thank you for your kind and undeserved words. I’ll be proud to fight with you and other mama grizzlies, nationwide.
Go mama grizzlies, tear ‘em up!
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 1:39 AM
Are you seriously that dense you fundamentalist twit? She wanted to cash in on her fame and rake in as much dough as humanly possible while the gettin’ was good. For Chrissakes, get a clue.
dakine on July 16, 2010 at 1:41 AM
And here, you nicely demonstrate your mind numbing religious zealotry. You’re the poster child for what’s wrong with certain sects of organized religion.
dakine on July 16, 2010 at 1:43 AM
I’ll one up that. Romney is not a human being.
MSimon on July 16, 2010 at 1:46 AM
Don’t you start with the cussing and blaspheming!
Sarah had no reason to believe that there was any “fame” or “dough” to be had after she left the governorship.
The election was long over, too.
Do you remember any interest in the losing VP candidate from any other election?
No.
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 1:46 AM
And what it is that you think is so wrong with “certain sects of organized religion?”
I don’t belong to or go to a church because all the ones I know preach “social justice” rather than the Gospel.
I’m just a baptized, Bible-believing Christian–no sect or organization is involved.
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 1:49 AM
In the wake of the mistake. When exactly would have been proper to write about it?
I don’t know. Why don’t you enlighten us?
Whoa!!! I thought this was all a left-wing MSM meme. Are you now saying legitimate conservatives had legitimate concerns?
Once again, maybe there is hope for you.
Of course, if I were to go back through the archives, would I find that you really expressed concern over the wisdom of that move? Or would I (as I suspect) find that you thought it was a brilliant move that would pave the road directly to Pennsylvania Ave?
Good for her, and I think good for our party. She made some coin, she spread it around, and is taking steps towards furthering the conservative cause.
That doesn’t make her decision to quit her office any more of an advance towards the WH. Outside of making the money, she could have done all of the above as governor.
I doubt I have ever called her an “idiot woman”, or “irrelevant”. I’m quite certain I have not done so tonight.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 1:49 AM
No. I’m a Christian. Apparently you have some issues with that…with understanding that Christians believe that God has a plan for their lives.
You probably think this comment is wacky too: “I have only been an instrument in the hands of Providence.”
You know what crazed loon said that? George Washington.
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 1:50 AM
Since you’ve ignored the facts I and others have posted, it’s not worth the time. The fact you continue to disregard that and quote the same drivel over and over makes you a bore, really. So either go back and read what we wrote, or go away.
But stop pretending that your questions weren’t answered just because you don’t like the answers.
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 1:54 AM
Mittens is in need of a serious adviser right now, Maybe Sarah can borrow him one?
The White Obama is gonna have to get out his scrying device and pray to the White Jesus to save his Mormon White House hopes (Mormons support Jihad, don’t they?).
At the VERY LEAST Sarah is Kingmaker. When Sarah Speaks, Voters Listen. I think she’s much more and the filly wires the field in 2012.
I will indulge Mittens fans Mormon delusions of him having a chance and ask them this:
If Romney can outlast Palin in the primaries, surely he would want her endorsement wouldn’t he?
Are his advisers to stupid to know this or just sexist pigs who hate women like all the other Palin haters?
Then again, maybe they advise Mittens by using a scrying device to read nonsensical inscriptions written on gold plates.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 1:55 AM
Still waiting on those facts.
Let me see if I can help you.
Sarah Palin resigned her office = Fact.
Sarah Palin faced an impossible situation = opinion (and not a very good one).
Do you see the difference?
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 1:56 AM
For about an hour…until I heard Sarah’s explanation as to why she made the decision.
Oh, yes, but is there hope for you?
Truth to tell, I don’t remember what I said or if I commented that day…Frankly, Sarah had me at “Hello” (Her acceptance speech at the RNC Convention).
I don’t expect a political cynic like you to understand, but once I heard her speak, I knew she was “The Real Thing.”
I have trusted her and her judgment ever since.
It’s a gut check thing…I felt the same way about Reagan (and President Bush 43, too, for that matter).
These people are real and tell the truth, even if it might hurt them.
And they need to be in the White House.
They ooze honest, good conservative leadership from every pore.
On election day, I voted for Sarah.
I never wanted McCain to be President–he was awful.
He would have been a much better President than Oilbama, but the nation would still be faced with the welfare state and Liberal tax and spend policies reaching critical mass, only not as dramatically and quickly.
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 1:58 AM
I’m not going to get into any kind of exchange here, but your extremely insulting pronouncement from on high, that Jenfidel is a Palin “cultist”, just because she enthusiatically supports her, and has itemized very intelligently why she supports her, and also has the spiritual and intellectual depth to see parallels between our age and Biblical times, says something very bad about you.
And with full disclosure, I am a Palin supporter and also see many things happening here that have spiritual consequence. That’s hardly a news flash; the battle between light and darkness has been going on since the snake got into the Garden.
And to clarify what would constitute a true cultist: that would be someone who attributed salvific or divine attributes to a person who they supported. They would probably see the person as the “messiah”, the “One” or “the one they’ve been waiting for” or “sort of a god” or “gives me a tingle up my leg”…if such a person existed and was given this type of treatment, I’m sure, dakine, that you would recognize THAT as creepy cultism, and would never confuse that behavior with Jenfidel’s enthusiastic, (yet throughly grounded knowledge of who is the creature and who is the Creator), support for a Palin candidacy for President.
She has every right to support her, and every right to her faith, and you are in fact coming across as weird and creepy by taking such trouble to condemn her so insultingly.
I wonder what issues are behind your rude and uncalled for post.
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 2:00 AM
Actually, I don’t see that she had much choice except to resign.
(Do you?)
Her political enemies were literally making it impossible for her to govern and they fully intended to do so.
In a way, they won…but she definitely had the last laugh.
I’m only grateful that it opened the door for her to take her message to the lower 48 instead of having her conservative awesomeness confined to AK.
America needed Sarah and she was able to answer the call.
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 2:01 AM
dakine – your comments drip with venom and bile. Apparently you see anyone with a different world-view as having no value whatsoever . . . untermenschen was the term used in recent history.
History has shown where that mindset leads, and many of us know where that mindset comes from, that’s why (whether you want it or not) we’ll pray for you.
least1 on July 16, 2010 at 2:04 AM
Let’s put it this way…
When operatives bash Palin “under-the-fold” on a blog, their sweaty little palms tremble with excitement.
When Sarah Palin types a couple words with her right pinky on twitter, it shakes the entire Western world.
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 2:07 AM
Yes Condescendo Man, I understand the difference between a fact and an opinion. You ignored the facts posted and focused only on the conclusion posted and continue to pretend they exist. I know others have posted about it. I know I did too.
Let’s see if this helps. Endless frivolous complaints. Stringent state ethics laws. Her office wasting the people’s money by spending 80% of the time dealing with the complaints. Her inability to leave the state without another ethics charge. Her inability to campaign for conservatives without an ethics charge. Her inability to defend herself from ethics charges without another ethics charge. Her inability to fight back against the true source of the attacks against her given the laws in place. The money costing the state (ie, the people). The money costing the Palins. The stonewalling of any advancement of her agenda. Etcetera. I could go on…but you’ll just ignore that too.
To me, the above is an impossible scenario. That’s MY OPINION based on the facts. You, being wholly ignorant of the facts continue repeating the same crap as though if you say it more and more it’ll make it true. You refuse to understand the laws, the game being played and who the players were. On both sides of the aisle. So please…continue to be impressed with how awesome you are if you want… and keep on plucking that chicken!
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 2:08 AM
Fact.
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 2:09 AM
Actually, I don’t see that she had much choice except to resign.(Do you?)
Her political enemies were literally making it impossible for her to govern and they fully intended to do so.
In a way, they won…but she definitely had the last laugh.
I’m only grateful that it opened the door for her to take her message to the lower 48 instead of having her conservative awesomeness confined to AK.
America needed Sarah and she was able to answer the call.
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 2:01 AM
It kind of reminds me of Obi Wan Kenobi. (I guess I can make this comparison because it’s not all icky and religious and stuff):
They thought they had her. They were wrong. By trying to destroy her in Alaska, they freed her up to take the fight right to their doorsteps. Fools. :)
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 2:11 AM
Gah! I meant to quote you! Sorry Jenfidel.
powerpro on July 16, 2010 at 2:11 AM
Absolutely. I’ve already laid one option out for you… get the legislature to change the ethics law so that that partisans can’t ruin an official with mountains of baseless accusations.
It’s not contrary to the American Way of government (and BTW, the assertion that it is contrary to the American Way is an opinion, not fact). It is not some article of personal convenience for her. I think we can all agree that changing that law would not only be good for SP, but would be good for the commonweal. Can we not agree about that?
And it might be difficult to get her political enemies to go along with it. But Johnson did it both as Majority Leader and POTUS, and Reagan did it in spades as Gov of CA. And she might have had to engage in politics she finds distasteful… twisting political arms frequently is. But I want my POTUS to be able to stick the knife in and twist it with relish when necessary.
But even beyond that, she didn’t even need to follow that track. She simply could have done what all types of politicians do… form a legal defense fund. Given her popularity (even before she quit), I have trouble believing she would have had any trouble raising enough to cover her legal expenses.
And then she wouldn’t have the label of “quitter” hanging over her head. Which, fair or not, she does.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 2:20 AM
LOL!
That’s cool, Powerpro!
We’ve had a great discussion, but it’s late and I’m tired and I’ll bet you are, too!
Jenfidel on July 16, 2010 at 2:21 AM
Yes, John, Sarah resigned the office of Governor of Alaska.
You think this matters; is significant. Others don’t think it will register even a blip on the radar.
Maybe because, RIGHT NOW, and for the FORSEEABLE FUTURE, or until we remove or vote obama and minions out of office, the United States of America is in danger of destruction, disintegration and anarchy.
Whoever can, besides giving all the credit to God, rescue the Republic from obama’s economic, social, and racial plan for America’s collapse could have two heads and would win in a landslide; with the chaos obama is unleashing, what you are talking about doesn’t even qualify as a molehill.
Look at the big picture, and prepare for the obamalanche.
You need to let go of the bone you’ve had for too long on this thread, Johnpitbull.
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 2:22 AM
ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz…….
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 2:23 AM
You do realize the constant ad hominem attacks are an admission you lost the argument already?
I am of course including the “fundamentalist twat” remark and the attempt to label every Palin supporter as a fanatical cultist.
There Goes The Neighborhood on July 16, 2010 at 2:24 AM
Oh no…
…she must be destroyed.
ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz…..
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 2:26 AM
“…read all of that piece, actually, if only for the bit about Bush and Cheney both reportedly pushing their old pal Mitch Daniels to GOP movers and shakers.
I like Cheney, but Daniels telling us we must surrender to the Democrats on social issues was plain stupid.”
I think your mis-stating the facts there a tad, Daniels said “temporary truce” not surrender, pressumably from the stance of a Rep controlled House & possibly Senate as well. Hence having the strong hand trying to get Dhims on board to COMPROMISE WITH HIM on buget issues in exchange for not pushing the social agenda out the gate. Not an unreasonable strategy to address our deficits which will sink the USS America if not remedied IMMEDIATELY, if there is no nation left to govern then its really a moot point anyways as the chaos that would ensue would leave the land lawless. If there is no-one who can enforce the law it really doesn’t matter which ones you pass, does it?
This seems to me a rather rational position in that light, no?
Archimedes on July 15, 2010 at 7:23 PM
Now if only Republicans could hold that thought indefinitely (focus on economics – forget about social issues) they might actually be unbeatable for 30 or 40 years.
MSimon on July 16, 2010 at 2:28 AM
That is exactly what this constant, concerted smear attack is.
Sarah scares the corrupt status quo and they do not want some outsider to threaten the gravy train they’ve carved out over the years.
She scares the left – but she scares some on the right even more.
It is sad to think that Allah and so many others can willfully go along with (and join in) these tactics. It is like watching the German people treat the Jews as subhumans in the years before they started putting Jews on trains and sending them to death camps.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 2:30 AM
Doing a little sleeptalking, Salty?
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 2:31 AM
Doing a little sleeptalking, Salty?
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 2:31 AM
Well, at least you’re trying now. Not very well, but you’re trying.
Not endless. Numerous, maybe. And frivolous, until adjudicated, is not fact. That is opinion.
Stringent? Compared to what? Judgment, not fact.
Wasting their money? By defending oneself against “frivolous” assertions? Not only is that a judgment, it’s a pretty shallow one at that.
And 80% of her office’s time? I’d like to see that quantified before calling it a “fact”. Sounds like out and out rhetoric to me.
So every time she left the state, an ethics charge was leveled? Why do I doubt that?
So, every time she defended herself, another ethics charged was leveled? Once again, why do I doubt the veracity of that claim?
What is the “true source” of those attacks? Name names, and it approaches “fact” status. Otherwise, it is a claim best classified as “conspiratorial”.
Yeah, your just chock full of “facts”. So much so your eyes must be brown.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 2:32 AM
The big picture, as you stated, is unseating Obama.
Is it your contention that Sarah Palin is the GOP’s and America’s best chance to do so?
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 2:35 AM
Are you even familiar with the case or the laws referenced?
I think you need to follow up on the case and get yourself up to speed before you start asking someone else to do your Googling for you.
It doesn’t matter who filed the ethics charge once it is filed. That is the intent of the statement and you completely missed it – and demonstrated basic ignorance of the facts as well.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 2:40 AM
If she was running, why hasn’t she been hiding. I thought they usually went together.
When Reagan said that communism would be left on the ash heap of history, there were plenty of commenters, including conservatives, who said he was wrong. But Reagan was vindicated.
When Palin resigned, it defied the conventional wisdom and looked like a mistake. There was no shortage of people who said her political career was over, including Ed Morrisey.
It was, if you’ll pardon the expression, a very ballsy move to resign from a position where she had to suffer constant attacks without being able to defend herself, in order to go on the offense. Obviously, her political career is not dead, so she’s already partially vindicated. I think she made the right choice, and considering how much it looked like the wrong choice, I’d have to say it was a brilliant move.
There Goes The Neighborhood on July 16, 2010 at 2:44 AM
In that case, why would she be unable to fight back against the charge? What, was she unable to hire an attorney to do so for her?
Once again, fail on the fact front.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 2:45 AM
She scares the left – but she scares some on the right even more.
Some on the right are scared of their own shadow. They don’t understand that it is part of their essence.
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 2:48 AM
What, you’ve never heard “You can run, but you can’t hide”? I thought that was a pretty claim. In fact, I always thought it was rather hard to do both at the same time. I mean, running sorta makes you stand out, doesn’t it?
And when the CommSymp’s in Congress dragged him through the Iran-Contra mud, did he quit because it was dragging down his presidency? No, he fought, got the lawyers (and had his associates do the same), and came out on the other end.
Seems like the right thing to do.
Still looks that way to a lot of people.
I don’t know if Ed said her career was over or not. I’ll take your word for it though.
Of course, he wasn’t the only conservative to criticize the mistake. As I posted earlier, the WSJ, Fred Barnes, and others thought it was a mistake. And yet for holding that claim, the Palintologists say you must be a troll, because it is the left-wing MSM meme you are holding. Well, I’m sure Fred Barnes would be surprised to find that he is a vital cog in the MSM machine.
First of all, she had lawyers; the assertion that she was unable to defend herself is nonsense.
Secondly, I would hold that staying to fight the righteous fight would be the ballsy thing to do. Quitting is rarely ballsy.
She’s made some good moves in the last year, granted. But to think her decision to quit an executive post halfway through isn’t going to come back to haunt her is simply naive.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 2:56 AM
Fight back against the charge? As if there were only one, or perhaps a couple?
If only it were that simple.
It was an unending series of ethics charges. She had to hire a lawyer at her own expense for each charge. When people tried to set up a legal defense fund, they immediately filed an ethics charge that the legal defense fund was basically enriching her, and therefore tantamount to accepting bribes. Even though each ethics charge was eventually dismissed, she still had to pay the lawyers and their legal fees. She didn’t have much money back then.
These were not just ethics charges. It was a coordinated campaign of attack by means of ethics charges, each one immediately — and illegally — leaked to all the papers. It was political warfare.
And I don’t care who you are and how careful you are, eventually the constant ethics charges would find something, no matter how trivial, that could not be dismissed. And by the time 2011 rolled around, Palin would have been known as the ethically-challenged do-nothing governor of Alaska.
Anyway, that was the plan. Didn’t quite work out that way, though.
There Goes The Neighborhood on July 16, 2010 at 2:56 AM
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 3:00 AM
Fact.
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 3:01 AM
Look at the big picture, and prepare for the obamalanche.
You are being a bit selective in trying to summarize what I said.
Yes we must unseat obama, BECAUSE he has this nation on a collision course of destruction. Therefore, the fact that Sarah Palin (who I do think is the only candidate who can take him on and not only fight like hell, but win) resigned her Alaska governorship, is a fact that will pale in comparison to, oh say, complete financial meltdown, record unemployment, rampant deflation-inflation, destruction of the dollar, Iranian nukes, obamacare/financial bill stripping freedom and destroying the economy, race riots, terrorist attacks, food shortages, purposeful destruction of the Gulf of Mexico and several red states environmentally and economically, loss of the free market and shredding of the Constitution, martial law, the current 2 trillion and ongoing Grand Larceny of obama and co. of the Treasury as the nation is socialized, unfettered voter fraud, an unprecedented criminal in the oval office….I could go on, but it’s getting late.
Compared to the above, and it’s all set to go off as per obama’s legislation, executive orders and “policy”, do you think that Americans are going to be worried about what you have been trying to insist is a big deal?
Maybe in 1950′s America. Not in the age of obaterror. Not on your life.
Big picture, John, and goodnight.
P.S. Sarah has lived such an admirable life, the media vultures can’t find a single scandal in her closet. She’s been vetted into teflon and tortured into triumph. No one I can think of could have withstood, let alone remained trimuphantly on the attack, a fraction of what Sarah took.
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 3:02 AM
You can fight the charge, and the charge was probably frivolous. In fact you either fight or admit guilt.
What was quoted above said she cannot fight back against the true source. You can’t defend yourself by saying ‘it’s the 13th time this deranged leftist blogger has filed an ethics complaint against me – she laughs about how frivolous it is on her own blog’.
You simply have to defend the charge and prove your innocence.
I’ve heard Sarah talk about her stepping down saying she largely put in place most of the legislation she had envisioned for her term after 2 1/2 years, was only going to be wasting money defending against these frivolous ethics charges, and quite frankly she had other options she felt she could pursue.
Stepping down gave her a louder voice nationally. It allowed her to go on her book tour, appear at Tea Party rallies, get some TV time.
The left really has made Sarah what she is today. She was more moderate and had very high ratings before the nomination.
Once nominated – the left decided she must be destroyed. Did they let her quietly go back to Alaska? No. They filed frivolous complaints endlessly and tried to end her political career.
Sarah just doesn’t give up, and how some of you fools can willfully ignore the facts simply to join in on the latest leftist smearfest is appalling.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 3:04 AM
Truth be told, based on who looks like they’re running, I would probably put up Mitch Daniels, but Palin would probably be second.
But having quit her office mid-term does not help the argument in her favor.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 3:06 AM
Ah, semantics. She’s clearly been on the attack, so “running” and “hiding” are both wrong.
Well, some people are a little slow….
No, they were wrong at the time. Many are beginning to change their minds, though.
Nonsense? When defending yourself costs more than you have, and no one is allowed to help you financially because the legal defense fund is itself the subject of an ethics charge, that’s hardly nonsense.
Defending the indefensible may be brave, but it’s a lot more daring to outflank the attackers.
Obviously, you and others will keep trying. But I don’t think it will have as much traction as was hoped for.
There Goes The Neighborhood on July 16, 2010 at 3:10 AM
I would prefer not to have a candidate arrested for pot, but that’s just me.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 3:10 AM
OK, Captain Hyperbole…
Record unemployment? As bad as things are, we’re a far cry from it (and in fact the POTUS during the actual record unemployment was, in fact, reelected). Race riots? Food shortages? Martial law?
Is it possible that Obama can have a bad presidency without these things happening?
The fact is, judging by history, he could have as bad a presidency as FDR, and still be reelected. Of course, he could still be defeated. In which case, we should be prepared to put up a winner against him.
You say that SP is, IYHO, the only one able to take him on. I disagree. There are lots of reasons to disagree with that, not the least of which she can, fairly or unfairly, be labeled as a quitter.
Of course, there are reasons to believe she can beat him. Her charisma, her dedication to first principles, her good looks all argue for that. But right now, I think there are candidates that, at least on a winnability scale, could be better.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 3:19 AM
tigerlily on July 16, 2010 at 3:02 AM
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 3:20 AM
At what point during your stint behind bars for a drug charge do you decide ‘Gee, my life is really going the wrong direction, but maybe I can use this experience to turn my life around and become POTUS someday’?
Ya think it would be:
A) While still high on the drugs
B) While coming down off the drugs
c) While going thru withdrawal from the drugs
D) While getting raped by another inmate
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 3:22 AM
The voters of Indiana apparently disagree with you. Twice.
Sarah Palin was elected statewide… once. Could she have been elected governor twice?
I guess we’ll never know.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 3:22 AM
Who?
That’s a rhetorical question.
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 3:23 AM
Oh please.
You want more facts? How about a 29% approval rating? That’s not emotion… that’s hard cold reality.
Although I guess for the Palintologists, that’s just a sign of shrewd strategy.
JohnGalt23 on July 16, 2010 at 3:28 AM
Late to the thread, I know (so many Palin threads to track tonight!), but this is complete and utter bullshyte. At the end of the day, Palinistas will be voting for the GOP candidate no matter WHO it is. If anyone is wringing their hands over the possibility of some Republicans staying home or voting for a third-party or — worse! — Obama, look to the anti-Palin contingent: The RINO squishes, elitists, and Paulnuts. They’re the ones who are unreliable conservative voters. I don’t think I’ve seen any Palinista on this blog threatening to vote for Obama if she doesn’t get the nomination, but I’ve seen quite a few haters vowing to do so if she does. And anyone who would vote for Obama ain’t no conservative.
NoLeftTurn on July 16, 2010 at 3:31 AM
Mitch Daniels isn’t even known well enough to HAVE an a national approval rating, as Palin does.
He’s got a LONG ways to go to be half the candidate Palin is today.
Sarah had an approval rating of 80-90% in Alaska before she was nominated. Becoming a target of the left can change public perception of you in a hurry.
I don’t think Mitch will receive the same intense media focus Sarah receives – but I also don’t think he would have been able to handle what Sarah has and emerge largely unscathed.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 3:34 AM
JohnGalt23, you need to put down the shovel, brother. Quit digging that hole.
NoLeftTurn on July 16, 2010 at 3:45 AM
Dude…
…calm yourself.
11/2012 is over two years away. I recommend keeping a cool head.
Here
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 3:48 AM
The RINO squishes, elitists, and Paulnuts. They’re the ones who are unreliable conservative voters.
NoLeftTurn on July 16, 2010 at 3:31 AM
Well…
…there you have it.
I was disgusted with the McCain nomination, but I voted against Obama anyway.
Saltysam on July 16, 2010 at 3:56 AM
Romney, misspeaking (blowing wind out of his lying Rhino ass) about a fictitious NRA endorsement:
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1318
Godzilla on July 16, 2010 at 5:25 AM
Not necessarily.
If Palin did not win the nomination and the candidate is not a ‘Tea Party approved’ type candidate there could be 3rd party candidate endorsed.
You may think that is a ‘throw away’ vote by her supporters – but ‘matching funds’ are given to parties with a certain threshold of the popular vote (like 10-20% I believe).
Perot won enough votes in his ’92 POTUS bid and thus the America We Stand Party gained matching funds (later renamed the Reform Party). Jesse Ventura was able to run for MN Gov as a Reform Party candidate and he promised to return all donations made to him once the matching funds came in. He kept that promise.
So – no, Palinistas aren’t going to ‘automatically vote for the GOP candidate’ because there are no other options available.
There are some very good options available.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 5:36 AM
Much as I hate to say this, if Romney by some miracle were to win the nomination, I’d have to vote for Obama for pres, and then go normal and vote republican for the down ticket. If Romney were to become president in 2012, we would have, basically, Obama-lite in the white house. What that would do to the republican party, I fear to even think about. For starters, the millions of thoroughly pissed-off and disgusted tea partiers might actually form a third party – who could blame them? – and the Republican Party could be facing extinction. A democrat would win the white house in 2016, because who could actually stomach a second term of Romney? This means that the next time we could have a chance of getting a real conservative in the white house wouldn’t be until 2020. Very depressing indeed.
Hence my vote for Obama if Romney is the nominee. I’d rather vote for a true conservative in 2016 than elect a Rhino in 2012. Pray that Romney doesn’t win the nomination.
Godzilla on July 16, 2010 at 5:37 AM
Actually the party was called ‘United We Stand America’. Goofiest party name ever.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 5:37 AM
Exactly. A vote for Mittens is a vote for our continued spoon feeding of socialism in small scoops until the government controls every aspect of our lives.
Fight back at the ballot box before we are fighting in the streets.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 5:40 AM
CUDA
Metro on July 16, 2010 at 5:49 AM
The way Romney takes shots at his opponents reminds me of a “girlie-man” liberal.
ncjetsfan on July 16, 2010 at 6:07 AM
Does Romney actually think statements like that are going to HELP him?
If anything, it’s going to rally her supporters even more so, and it certainly won’t warm her supporters to support him, should the field narrow down to him and one or two other candidates.
sarainitaly on July 16, 2010 at 6:14 AM
Well Romney.. We are not putting up with this garbage anymore. Whether you support Sarah Palin or not, this bashing will not continue. We will not lower ourselves to scum that the democrat party proved themselves to be with the Hillary campaign. You had better call this person out today and man up. I hope Sarah Palin runs for the presidency, for no other reason to mop the floor with these so called elitists that believe they have a turn at this…… I is our turn.
shar61 on July 16, 2010 at 6:23 AM
WELL TO ROMNEY’S HOTSHOT ADVISOR NEITHER IS YOUR MAN, A WARMONGERING GLOBAL TAX ENDUCING FAKE OF AN IDIOT!
BobAnthony on July 16, 2010 at 6:32 AM
Romney’s (assistant’s) quote reminds me of the one attributed to the captain of the Titanic: She’s not a very serious looking lifeboat -I think I’ll stick with my unsinkable ship.”
Don L on July 16, 2010 at 6:39 AM
REALLY?
The GOP is going back to its vomit of “CORONATING” the next white guy in line because its HIS TURN????
REALLY???
Just tread water long enough and the shit surely DOES float.
seejanemom on July 16, 2010 at 7:02 AM
My hope is that, unlike Bush who seemed to take pride in turning the other cheek, whoever the nominee is, knows how and does throw punches. Say, a Chris Christy type. Romney, Huckabee, etc., to me is just more of the same – my friends across the aisle type.
Palin’s writings impress and inspire me. I’m turned off when I hear her speak. I think it’s her cadence and inflections that drives me crazy.
I do know this. When it comes time to pull the lever in 2012, I’ll pull it for whoever the most conservative nominee is running against Zero. I may be holding my nose, but I’ll still show up and vote.
SoldiersMom on July 16, 2010 at 7:09 AM
Ahem.
I participated at the start of this thread (pages 1&2) and had to go off get stuff done, upon peeking back in to see where the discussion went this AM I am disappointed to find that absolutely no where to be the result.
I happen to like Palin, have since the outset, but as anyone can plainly see in tracking the discourse of this thread and any other like where Palin is the subject matter, she is not a unifying figure upon which the party, let alone the nation, seems willing to rally around. Its a long way till 12 and maybe that’ll change, but appears more than likely that the pro & anti Palin factions will just dig in their heels more.
This is not an optimal recipe for coalescing our forces to undo the damages wrought by Obama and his not so merry band of collectivists is it? In my mind it is time for we on the pro Palin side to realize that as unfair and as unwarranted the slams on Palin have been, correcting the disaterous course our nation is on should rank higher than redeeming Palin’s reputation.
We have to face up to the fact that if Palin cannot unite the rabidly right (excepting the trolls and token squishies) of us Hot Heads here in the HA comments, putting together a coalition to wrest the White House back is well nigh improbabale, if not impossible. It is time to lick our wounds and move on to who might be our next best choice to lead us, we can’t just stomp our feet and have a fit, we have to be adults about this.
With that said, IT WILL BE A COLD DAY IN HELL BEFORE I’LL AGREE TO GIVE ROMNEY THAT MANTLE!
Archimedes on July 16, 2010 at 7:21 AM
“We are the Hollow Men,
we are the Straw Men,
we have really black hair
and we really want to be President
because we really want to be President,
We are the Hollow Men.”
JohnBissell on July 16, 2010 at 7:46 AM
Gotta love some of you on the right. You say you would vote for Obama over Palin and then we hear she cannot win. Well then vote for Palin. She won’t win anyway and then you won’t have to tell a pollster years down the road that you forgot who you voted for.
CWforFreedom on July 16, 2010 at 7:48 AM
Governor:President
The only potus who resigned was Nixon.
As bad as things are with Congress, neither Palin nor Romney would EFFECTIVELY lead a successful charge rescinding the impossible situation presented.
Palin’s talent is cheer leading. Cheer leading has no affect on her opposition that includes everyone who is not her fan.
Archimedes hit the nail on the head.
Without the entire party supporting the candidate, there’s no way the squishy Republicans in Washington will unite to effectively negate Obama’s new laws.
maverick muse on July 16, 2010 at 8:06 AM
That could all change with Palin or a Palin approved nominee replacing Steele.
She would instantly become the candidate to support within the party. Others would follow her lead.
I think it happens shortly after the November elections unless a few minds change before then.
Mr Purple on July 16, 2010 at 8:21 AM
What I’m looking for in a Presidential candidate is simple…
I’m looking for a conservative with integrity.
Mitt is neither.
Of all the candidate names being brandished about, Sarah has acted consistently in attacking the horrible policy decisions of this administration (while GOP establishment RINOs sat quietly on the sidelines). She refuses to bad-mouth her fellow Republicans, unlike Mitt and Huck. Sarah displays conservative policy in her Facebook postings, and integrity in how she handles fellow Republican detractors.
Mitt can’t say the same.
I made the mistake of getting strong-armed into supporting that idiot RINO McCain. I will not vote for a RINO in 2012. You can whine and moan and play fearmonger all you want. A RINO will not return our country to greatness. Only a Conservative will do that.
If you want my support in 2012, nominate a Conservative.
If you want me to sit out in 2012, nominate a RINO.
dominigan on July 16, 2010 at 8:53 AM
Absolutely. We’ve had the squishy RINO socialist-lite forced on us before.
If a RINO gets nominated / elected in 2012, I will support a conservative movement to cut loose from the Republicans and form a third-party. I say that knowing full well what that means.
It will prolong the pain for decades, but conservatives form the base of the Republican party… if an arm has gangrene… you cut it off and rebuild your life from there. You don’t let it spread so bad that it kills the core.
Our country has been decimated by progressive ideas, and infected with disdain for the Rule of Law. Only a return to founding principles will save our country… even if it means abandoning the GOP.
My country is more important than any political party.
dominigan on July 16, 2010 at 9:03 AM
I’d be happy to vote for Obama over Palin. And I wouldn’t be embarrassed a bit to say so. Those of you who vote for Palin might be embarassed on the other hand.
Jimbo3 on July 16, 2010 at 9:38 AM
I’m sorry, but nonsense. Electability always has to be a factor. Always.
And separately: I don’t know why some of you are dismissing the fact that she quit as governor. I understand her motivations for doing so (which were purely monetary, for those who think there were more nobler reasons at play), even respect them. But her quitting is going to cut her -badly – if she runs.
Again, I do not feel the Palinistas understand how independents view Palin. In the end, there just isn’t enough support there. They don’t love her like you do, so they have no investment in her. They’ll eventually abandon her.
Vyce on July 16, 2010 at 9:47 AM
We can’t save you from your foolishness. Seek help elsewhere.
Inanemergencydial on July 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM
Conservatives form the base of the party, not Independents. Why are we expected to abandon our principles and support your candidate. We tried this last time. I say its time for Independents to support our candidates, not the other way around.
A conservative can return the country to our founding ideals. A RINO will just march toward the socialist cliff at a slower speed.
No thanks.
dominigan on July 16, 2010 at 10:01 AM
Hmmm did Gov. Palin throw her hat in the ring already?
If Romney thinks he can win the nomination by attacking Sarah Palin’s “being”, he may, get to carry Utah and Massochewshats, but he will lose the rest of the country by a landslide. His Scott Brown trick won’t play in the Red States.
Mitty’d be wiser to choose a better ideas strategy, or he’ll be marked down as a clown on par with Mike Hucklebee, if he’s not already there.
Make no mistake “The Tea Party” has the trump cards, and will hold’em at least through 2012. Gov. Romney can’t win the Presidential game without them – no matter how many times the LEFT and their RINO’s moan the mantra “a candidate too far right to win”.
“Let’s Roll”
On Watch on July 16, 2010 at 10:04 AM
Why would you vote for a communist who hates America and is desperate to destroy what the founders built over someone who wishes to restore us to those principles?
Do you support communism? I’m not being glib, it’s a serious question.
darwin on July 16, 2010 at 10:13 AM
For those still beating the drum on behalf of Romney as he possess’ the electability factor, all I can say is people, get a grip on reality willya.
I ask any of those making this arguement to show me how Mittens can even win the nomination. Really, will any Republican candidacy survive woithout the TEA party on board? I
thinkknow for a fact that without a TEA party endorsement there is precicisely ZERO possibilty a Republican nomination, and I do mean ZERO.So while it is probable that Palin can’t round the bases and bring it home, Mittens ncomparably can’t make it to 1st base. I have stated my case above in regards to Palin, but the pro-Romney crowd needs a dose of reality as well.
Archimedes on July 16, 2010 at 10:26 AM
Anyone who has been on this site for long can answer that question about Jimbo3.
Why yes, yes he does.
Jimbo3 is just a progressive troll that enjoys posing as a conservative to stir up trouble. He’s a prickly little Obamabot operative. Just ignore him. Its what most of us try to do.
dominigan on July 16, 2010 at 10:33 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »