NYT shocked, shocked to find Palin has anti-establishment principles

posted at 12:05 pm on September 9, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

I seriously have no words to introduce this news story from the New York Times:

Let us begin by confessing that, if Sarah Palin surfaced to say something intelligent and wise and fresh about the present American condition, many of us would fail to hear it.

That is not how we’re primed to see Ms. Palin. A pugnacious Tea Partyer? Sure. A woman of the people? Yup. A Mama Grizzly? You betcha.

But something curious happened when Ms. Palin strode onto the stage last weekend at a Tea Party event in Indianola, Iowa. Along with her familiar and predictable swipes at President Barack Obama and the “far left,” she delivered a devastating indictment of the entire U.S. political establishment — left, right and center — and pointed toward a way of transcending the presently unbridgeable political divide.

A “curious thing”?  Really?  Sarah Palin has been doing that very thing, almost uninterrupted, for her entire political career.  Regardless of what people might think of her chances for political office or her activism, Palin has been an anti-establishment voice from the very beginning.

In 2011, the New York Times thinks this is news.  I actually had to triple-check this article to make sure it didn’t fall under the Opinion section.  I don’t want to take too many swipes at Anand Giridharadas for finally getting around to noticing this, but if the Gray Lady took three years to suddenly discover that Palin was an anti-establishment populist who takes on both parties, then that really says something about their approach to the news.

Palin took on the Republican Party in Alaska, blowing the whistle on corruption in the GOP in Alaska as a member of the state oil commission.  She rode that reputation to the governor’s office, where she fought the oil companies to protect Alaska’s interests in its natural resources.  Did they not bother to find out these two basic facts about her political career when the Times and other national media outlets busied themselves reporting on the used tanning bed Palin bought with her own money?

Giridharadas reports on the new discoveries from her Indianola speech:

But when her throat was cleared at last, Ms. Palin had something considerably more substantive to say.

She made three interlocking points. First, that the United States is now governed by a “permanent political class,” drawn from both parties, that is increasingly cut off from the concerns of regular people. Second, that these Republicans and Democrats have allied with big business to mutual advantage to create what she called “corporate crony capitalism.” Third, that the real political divide in the United States may no longer be between friends and foes of Big Government, but between friends and foes of vast, remote, unaccountable institutions (both public and private).

Palin has been making that point on the national stage for more than two years, since Republicans lost to Barack Obama in 2008.  If the Times had bothered to cover her objectively, they wouldn’t have waited until 2011 to notice this.  But like most of the national media, they’ve been much more interested in covering Levi Johnston than the Tea Parties.

Something tells me, though, that the Times knew this all along.  I’m guessing that their sudden interest in the substantive Palin has less to do with being shocked, shocked to find that she’s anti-establishment than in subtly encouraging her to jump into the GOP race, which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office.  That’s flawed, too, but having seen their subtle encouragement of John McCain and their disgusting smears of him as soon as he wrapped up the nomination in 2008, their sudden appreciation for Palin has me just a wee bit suspicious.

Update: One commenter points out that the author calls this a “column,” and not a news story.  Fair point, but it’s also in the NYT’s US news section, not its opinion section.

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 6

Palin is the anti-Trumka, who also has a “divide” article out, in the exact opposite.

One thing missing from here, her great analysis and address to the unions, in NH.

This article is spot on!

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Wee suspicious? you are not alone Ed

cmsinaz on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

subtly encouraging her to jump into the GOP race, which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office

Exactly. This is a reaction to Perry’s popularity.

John the Libertarian on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Love Sarah, just can’t stand many of her supporters. Glad she’s participating in the discussion.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

…having seen their subtle encouragement of John McCain and their disgusting smears of him as soon as he wrapped up the nomination in 2008, their sudden appreciation for Palin has me just a wee bit suspicious.

That makes two of us.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I would argue that neither Palin nor any other Republican has a serious interest in opposing any concentration of power in private institutions. She pays lip service to it in speeches, but she’s never proposed any sort of solution. Whenever Palin mentions specifics, they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

That’s flawed, too, but having seen their subtle encouragement of John McCain and their disgusting smears of him as soon as he wrapped up the nomination in 2008, their sudden appreciation for Palin has me just a wee bit suspicious.

I agree, but the difference is I think they’ve kinda shot their wad. Of course they could just make up stuff like usual.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Well if the NYT likes her then you know she’s going to run.

Cough…cough…

Let’s face it. Sarah Palin has become the Lady Gaga of politics. Sad. It really is.

NickDeringer on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

But Ann Coulter says Palin is our Obama.

Maybe Ann is the Queen of the Rinos?

portlandon on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Operation Chaos Part Deux.

Knucklehead on September 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Combine this NYT story with CNN broadcasting her last two speeches, and I’m beginning to wonder if somehow I got transported to an alternate universe or something…

OnlyOrange on September 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Better late than never?

Dongemaharu on September 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Contrast this wonderful article/and what SP said, with this thug.

Maybe she should run as a third party.

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

the Gray Lady took three years to suddenly discover that Palin was an anti-establishment populist who takes on both parties

What were the hundreds of reporters that visited Alaska in 2008 doing exactly?

faraway on September 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Well if the NYT likes her then you know she’s going to run.

Cough…cough…

Let’s face it. Sarah Palin has become the Lady Gaga of politics. Sad. It really is.

NickDeringer on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Would you like to play with a shiny ball? I have one, it’s over there in the corner.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

They must know that she will not run for the Presidency, so they are calling off the dogs…

jeffn21 on September 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

I would argue that neither Palin nor any other Republican has a serious interest in opposing any concentration of power in private institutions. She pays lip service to it in speeches, but she’s never proposed any sort of solution. Whenever Palin mentions specifics, they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Sarah is a patriot first, a Republican by having little choice of alternatives…

OnlyOrange on September 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

I’m guessing that their sudden interest in the substantive Palin has less to do with being shocked, shocked to find that she’s anti-establishment than in subtly encouraging her to jump into the GOP race, which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office.

That’s exactly what they’re doing.

You KNOW internal polling for Obama must be horrible for the NYT to have to resort to writing puff pieces for Palin.

She should come out swinging and tell them to stuff it; Obama’s a goner and the NYT can’t save him.

Key West Reader on September 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

LOL.

kingsjester on September 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

NickDeringer on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

LSM covers Palin = she’s a joke.

LSM ignores Palin = she’s a joke.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

The editors at the NYT must be all on vacation.

The inmates have taken over the asylum.

technopeasant on September 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Perhaps they are being too clever by half in encouraging her.

PierreLegrand on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Love Sarah, just can’t stand many of her supporters. Glad she’s participating in the discussion.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I doubt that you know many of her supporters.

NoNails on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

I agree, but the difference is I think they’ve kinda shot their wad. Of course they could just make up stuff like usual.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

The NYT having a spent shell has never stopped them from trying in the past.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

than in subtly encouraging her to jump into the GOP race, which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office.

Suspicious, maybe. It’s still “news” for NYT readers. Some heads may explode, and knowing the backlash from their readers they published the article anyway. Good for them.

I want her to run. Americans need to hear her ideas, which will resonant with many. Whether she wins or not, the conversation will move toward Conservatism and cronyism because of Palin. We need that.

conservative pilgrim on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Exactly. This is a reaction to Perry’s popularity.

John the Libertarian on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

SP and RP are great friends and love the country more than themselves. They’ll work it out. The media can implode professionally and explode otherwise. They are the only ones lauding the 961 absent goon who lectures us to “get urgency in creating jobs”. He can go to Hell, take Hoffa and Trumka, and the GE types with him.

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Yet Ernesto or Nick can never dispute what she SAYS! So typical…

hamnj7 on September 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM

What were the hundreds of reporters that visited Alaska in 2008 doing exactly?

faraway on September 9, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Smelling her garbage cans… which they aren’t worthy enough to do on their best day.

Key West Reader on September 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

You should watch The Undefeated, where Palin and 7 of her staff basically destroy the crony capitalist system that ran Alaska for 30 years.

Ted Torgerson on September 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM

The NYT having a spent shell has never stopped them from trying in the past.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

True, just think of all the baseless affair accusations they could come up with.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM

their sudden appreciation for Palin has me just a wee bit suspicious.

Ya think?

Get ready for the “Perry is dumber than Palin” stories.

rbj on September 9, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Be careful what you wish for.

faraway on September 9, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Yet Ernesto or Nick Palin’s detractors can never dispute what she SAYS! So typical…

hamnj7 on September 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Be inclusive here, Ham. ;-)

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Whenever Palin mentions specifics, they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth. ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Links please, Che.

Akzed on September 9, 2011 at 12:17 PM

I would argue that neither Palin nor any other Republican has a serious interest in opposing any concentration of power in private institutions. She pays lip service to it in speeches, but she’s never proposed any sort of solution. Whenever Palin mentions specifics, they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

That goes against her entire history in politics, which I’m sure you know nothing about.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:17 PM

The difference between Palin and McCain, if this is an Operation Chaos scenario,is that Palin plays to win.

RedRedRice on September 9, 2011 at 12:17 PM

As with CNN could this come down to dollars and cents?

We are still 5 months from the first vote in Iowa.

The NYT could begin the smear campaign against her anew whenever she becomes more of a threat to Obama.

As for now, let’s capitalize on her getting in.

technopeasant on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Take this to the bank, the NYTs, the lefties, and quite a few in the ‘hot’ shot rightie establishment are scared witless of the R/C field, announced and unannounced.

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

The NYT likes her? Did none of you Palinistas see the sarcastic tone that the first half of that piece used?

Red Cloud on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Love Sarah, just can’t stand many of her supporters. Glad she’s participating in the discussion.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Thanks for your concern Ann and Laura.

I am one of her “cult” supporters and proud of it. You guys better layoff the Palin supporter insults b/c if she doesn’t run you’ll need the support down the road. And right now, no one in this field excites me (or many of her supporters). In fact, the more I learn about my own Governor Perry, the less I’m impressed with him.

BTW, thanks for a fair piece Ed. Now if idiot bloggers like Ace would get the message.

davek70 on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

The difference between Palin and McCain, if this is an Operation Chaos scenario,is that Palin plays to win.

RedRedRice on September 9, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Seems to me that Palin has quite a bit less statist tendancy, as well. But your mileage may vary.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

As she, and any free person should, you fool. Who do you think pays for your Utopian idealistic stupidities?

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

It begins…

thebrokenrattle on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win,” -Gandhi.

Akzed on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

I seriously have no words to introduce this news story from the New York Times:

Let us begin by confessing that, if Sarah Palin surfaced to say something intelligent and wise and fresh about the present American condition, many of us would fail to hear it.

Why are we still referring to these as “news” stories?

We need a new word for NYT front-page editorialism.

Something like “newsitorialism,” maybe.

logis on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

But will she fall for it?

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Suspicious, maybe. It’s still “news” for NYT readers. Some heads may explode, and knowing the backlash from their readers they published the article anyway. Good for them.
I want her to run. Americans need to hear her ideas, which will resonant with many. Whether she wins or not, the conversation will move toward Conservatism and cronyism because of Palin. We need that.
conservative pilgrim on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Oh, I don’t know. The author seems to be trying to paint Palin as a closet leftist.

Count to 10 on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

ernesto, do you think the Sweedish, Cuban and Venezuelan governments pay for the looters and moochers?

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Whenever Palin mentions specifics, they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

And that’s your real problem. While you believe the individual’s wealth (or most of it) is the property of the government and the government decides how to spend the individual’s wealth, Palin and the majority of Americans believe the individual’s wealth belongs to the individual who earned it, not the government.

conservative pilgrim on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office

Or they could be seeing how the gop establishment is now attacking Palin and have decided to see why the gop establishment doesn’t like her.

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

1000 comments or bust!

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

NoNails on September 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM

You prove my point.

Everyone I know loves here here, but it’s many of her supporters on this site and other sites that have the thinnest skin of any candidate’s supporters out there.

I support Palin. So does my wife. So do our parents. So do my church friends and brothers/sisters.

I can’t even complain about her supporters on this site without getting a snarky reply like “I doubt you know many of her supporters”.

Seriously? We love her, but hate her thin skinned supporters who cannot accept even the slightest criticism. These “supporters” do not convince others to support her. They alienate others. Do you really think Sarah is saying “yeah these guys are really helping me out”? I think not.

Again, I love Sarah as does all of my family, but someone will still attack me. Sarah hasn’t done anything wrong. Her priorities are right and she speaks the truth.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:21 PM

The NYT likes her? Did none of you Palinistas see the sarcastic tone that the first half of that piece used?

Red Cloud on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

It’s not that the NYT likes her. I don’t think more than a couple people here would assert that. But the Palinistas are primarily and properly suspicious that the NYT wrote a piece about Sarah Palin that has some truth to it — especially since it took 3+ years for them to do it.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:21 PM

Memo to Karl Rove:

Shut up. Thank you in advance for your fulfillment of this request.

viking01 on September 9, 2011 at 12:21 PM

You guys better layoff the Palin supporter insults b/c if she doesn’t run you’ll need the support down the road.

davek70 on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Oh no! Whatever will the Republican nominee do without the help of the cultist supporters? They’re crucial to winning the general election.

You know, people like Ashley Todd.

KingGold on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

She’s coming. You betcha.

derft on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Oh, I don’t know. The author seems to be trying to paint Palin as a closet leftist.

Count to 10 on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Did we read the same article? She’s exposing the cronyism of the big corporations, career politicians, lobbyists, et. al. There’s anti-cronyism for everyone, not just Lefties.

conservative pilgrim on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Or they could be seeing how the gop establishment is now attacking Palin and have decided to see why the gop establishment doesn’t like her.

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

unseen, this is a great article. Only thing left out is her reaching out to unions, in a positive way, to help them see the light.

They, the left/righte establishment hate Perry as a similar/a tad different threat.

I have no doubt that both will cut both in half, at least.

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Love Sarah, just can’t stand many of her supporters. Glad she’s participating in the discussion.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Fine, don’t vote for them.

SKYFOX on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Really? Shouldn’t you base your beliefs about a candidate based on what the candidate controls? Especially when you are perfectly capable of avoiding those who annoy you. Thanks for sharing.

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

But will she fall for it?

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

What do you think?

I have to take into account Palin’s deep love and trust of the media.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:23 PM

The NYT knows a threat when they see one. this article is a clarion call to the establishment to not underestimate Gov Palin. They see that she is creating a strong platform on which to run.

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Shouldn’t you base your beliefs about a candidate based on what the candidate controls?

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

I’ve actually seen Palin’s detractors get upset at Palin that she doesn’t call out her “cultists.” So not everyone apparently agrees with you on this salient point.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Whoever wins, we lose.

mythicknight on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

davek70 on September 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM

I wasn’t talking about Ann and Laura. They are great.

People like you prove my point exactly. I can say until I’m blue in the face that Sarah has the right priorities and message. Today I can’t even talk about how some of her rabid supporters turn others off without coming under attack. I would support Sarah over all others if she runs, but go ahead and attack me. You’re convincing so many people to follow Sarah you know.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

NickDeringer on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I’m sure anythings possible in your world Nick.

heshtesh on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

She can use this and some of the glowing CNN(emails coverage/Iowa report) reports about her in her campaign ads.

Dongemaharu on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

CUDA IS COMING !

And I can’t wait – been waiting for 3 years !

Let the “re-do” begin !

stenwin77 on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

“The field is set! No more candidates!” Crony-pundits.

the_nile on September 9, 2011 at 12:25 PM

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:21 PM

The fact that you had the need to level your attack says far more about you than it does about her supporters. You take a handful of people and turn it into the universe.

NoNails on September 9, 2011 at 12:25 PM

SUDDEN, RELENTLESS REFORM.
NOW.

Sarah, we’re ready.

leftnomore on September 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Oh no! Whatever will the Republican nominee do without the help of the cultist supporters? They’re crucial to winning the general election.

.

KingGold on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

They are more important than the moderates. Try to win an election with a good 1/3rd of your base staying home. Ask McCain how that worked out for him.

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Love Sarah, just can’t stand many of her supporters. Glad she’s participating in the discussion.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I wish you folks would stop with that idiocy. “Her supporters” won’t be governing if she were to be elected, she would. And as you already know if you have paid the least bit of attention, she doesn’t pretend to be deaf to anyone but her “closest pals”, in the Chicago way. She listens to the greater voice of the American people, something nobody currently running has been doing.

Claiming that Gov. Palin’s “overzealous supporters” is a reason to not vote for the person most closely aligned with the values, priorities and desires of American patriots, is beyond shallow and imbecilic. It’s wrong.

Freelancer on September 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM

But will she fall for it?
Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

In order for that to happen, the first step would be for this to even make her radar.

Millions of people hang on Palin’s every word – she’s almost as big as Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck combined. The NYT is down to less than a half-million subscribers. And how many of them read it for its political coverage, as opposed to crosswords, social registers, want ads, or simply because it’s their local paper? Maybe a few tens of thousands. It’s the print equivalent of MSNBC.

logis on September 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

I do, I just hate her rabid supporters. Sarah is not the problem here. I didn’t say I don’t support Sarah. I’d support her above other candidates, but that doesn’t matter. I’m still attacked for even complaining about some of the nuts that follow her and turn so many others off.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Today I can’t even talk about how some of her rabid supporters turn others off without coming under attack. I would support Sarah over all others if she runs, but go ahead and attack me. You’re convincing so many people to follow Sarah you know.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Spare us the moby-martyr shtick.

the_nile on September 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

BS. BS. BS… I love Sarah, but the ONLY reason they are doing this is because they are pi$$ scared of Perry.

Queen0fCups on September 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Love Sarah, just can’t stand many of her supporters. Glad she’s participating in the discussion.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Sounds like someone got an idea from Ann Coulter

KBird on September 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

People like you prove my point exactly. I can say until I’m blue in the face that Sarah has the right priorities and message. Today I can’t even talk about how some of her rabid supporters turn others off without coming under attack. I would support Sarah over all others if she runs, but go ahead and attack me. You’re convincing so many people to follow Sarah you know.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Dude, you start off the conversation saying how much you like Palin but hate her supporters. Exactly what kind of response did you expect? Your comment was guaranteed to validate your view.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

I’m guessing that their sudden interest in the substantive Palin has less to do with being shocked, shocked to find that she’s anti-establishment than in subtly encouraging her to jump into the GOP race, which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office.

Negative imo. It may be more about selling newspapers or a case of one rogue journalist. I really do not think Gov Palin has been waiting all this time for a positive write-up from this leftist rag, long declining in influence, in order to finally make up her mind. Maybe everything doesn’t need to be a conspiracy. Maybe it just is what it is–honesty.

RepubChica on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

their sudden appreciation for Palin has me just a wee bit suspicious.

I agree. In the meantime though, I can’t wait for next week’s NYT article on how helicopter wolf hunts actually make for healthier wolf packs and caribou herds and the op ed that calls out the Trigg truthers.

ncc770 on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Palin’s anti-establishmentarianism is just part of her appea. The very fact that she talks, looks, and acts like an average American” who is anything but average is what has endeared her to so many and outraged those looking for a reaching-across-the-aisle, Brylcream-wearing Washington Elitist.

Palin is the real deal. However, she’s not going to make her decision, one way or the other, based on our time schedule.

She’ll do it her way. (Life’s a song cue.)

kingsjester on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Did we read the same article? She’s exposing the cronyism of the big corporations, career politicians, lobbyists, et. al. There’s anti-cronyism for everyone, not just Lefties.
conservative pilgrim on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Agreed, but look at the author’s tone. There is an overtone of that old “false conciouness” meme.

Count to 10 on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:21 PM

I guess you have a point. It’s the same with Perry, which is also too bad.

Dongemaharu on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Everyone who is honest with themselves (and others) fully agrees with this.

Vashta.Nerada on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

unseen, this is a great article. Only thing left out is her reaching out to unions, in a positive way, to help them see the light.

They, the left/righte establishment hate Perry as a similar/a tad different threat.

I have no doubt that both will cut both in half, at least.

Schadenfreude on September 9, 2011 at 12:22 PM

agreed to a certain degree

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

“The field is set! No more candidates!” Crony-pundits.

the_nile on September 9, 2011 at 12:25 PM

These pundits are starting to sound like the guests at the Mad Hatter’s tea party.

RedRedRice on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

But will she fall for it?

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

If she runs she splits the votes, creates chaos in the Republican party, which is exactly what the Dem’s want.

Her career and credibility will be shot.

Knucklehead on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

One of the characteristics of the establishment, though, is that they all pander to illegal aliens, (or more accurately, they are in the loop of those that profit from their exploitation), and Palin is right in with the rest of the crown on the issue, so far.

An open and honest discussion of the problems that are destroying America must include discussion of illegal immigration, and rewarding tens of millions of illegal foreign colonials only encourages more, as history proves. That sad fact dictates that the only way this problem can be solved is to stop rewarding illegal immigrants. Then they will self deport; returning home to help improve their own countries for a change, instead of allowing them to turn into cesspools of crime that now threaten our nation. That means that we must not provide legal status of any sort, and we have to stop giving them taxpayer funded candy.

The polls show that this is an huge winning issue and can help save America! The only people who will regret it is a small minority of corrupt politicians and their cronies.

FloatingRock on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Everyone who is honest with themselves (and others) fully agrees with this.

Vashta.Nerada on September 9, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Hell, I’m all for protecting PRIVATE power and wealth. It’s what makes me a conservative.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

Freelancer on September 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM

No one thinks her supporters will be governing. Again, but you can’t even accept that her rabid supporters turn others off. Do you really think that’s the case? You think a moderate out there is going to hear crap from a rabid supporter and think oh yeah, she sounds good. Do you think Sarah wants this support? She’s not Ron Paul.

I’ve never once said I wouldn’t support her. Go back and read what I wrote. You folks just make stuff up and attack without reading or thinking. I SUPPORT SARAH, but attack away.

kerrhome on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Imagine their shock and amazement that their “compliment” isn’t received in the manner it was offered.

Cindy Munford on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

BS. BS. BS… I love Sarah, but the ONLY reason they are doing this is because they are pi$$ scared of Perry.

Queen0fCups on September 9, 2011 at 12:27 PM

ROFL..sure they are.

After the debate no one is scared of Perry.

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:30 PM

There are quite a few of you folks that clearly have been brainwashed by the Ann Coulters of the world.

There is one chance in the 2012 election that we elect someone that will actually make a substantive difference for the good, and her name is Sarah Palin.

Really, it is silly to think that a career pol like Perry will be anything but another W, or that Mitt would not be exactly like Bush 41

Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain, maybe Santorum, would be better than Perry or Romney, but why should we not elect a candidate that is a natural and that gets the whole “we dont want to work for the government” or be beholden to the bloody lobbyist culture in DC

I am confident Palin is getting in and I am also confident that in Jan 2013 we will be at the presidential inauguration for her in Washington

georgealbert on September 9, 2011 at 12:30 PM

Combine this NYT story with CNN broadcasting her last two speeches, and I’m beginning to wonder if somehow I got transported to an alternate universe or something…

OnlyOrange on September 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Oh, they’ve got an angle…

Ward Cleaver on September 9, 2011 at 12:31 PM

IMO, they’re inviting Sarah in because of Perry’s rapid climb in the polls. They hope she’ll pull enough votes from Perry that their candidate of choice, the Milton Milquetoast, will win…

OnlyOrange on September 9, 2011 at 12:31 PM

they all revolve around protecting any and all accumulation of private power and wealth.

ernesto on September 9, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Didn’t Sarah Give up Power?

portlandon on September 9, 2011 at 12:31 PM

If she runs she splits the votes, creates chaos in the Republican party, which is exactly what the Dem’s want.

Her career and credibility will be shot.

Knucklehead on September 9, 2011 at 12:29 PM

Vote splitting in the primaries is not a bad thing, Knuck. The only vote splitting I’m concerned about is if someone else runs a 3rd-party spoiler in the general. I can say with the utmost in confidence that if it happens, it won’t be Sarah Palin doing it.

Splitting votes, indeed. Am I the only one here concerned that by some accounts we seem to have wrapped up our nominating process before the first caucus in Iowa?!

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:31 PM

which they might see as a way to split Republicans and keep Barack Obama in office

Or they could be seeing how the gop establishment is now attacking Palin and have decided to see why the gop establishment doesn’t like her.

unseen on September 9, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Exactly, right on unseen.
The “unelectable” argument never take into account the Palin Democrat Effect.
I welcome Democrats that Palin can reach. Palin detractors can vote for Obama or stay home. It’s not going to even matter.

mike_NC9 on September 9, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Didn’t Sarah Give up Power?

portlandon on September 9, 2011 at 12:31 PM

No. She quit or something.

gryphon202 on September 9, 2011 at 12:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 6