Rogue Warriors
posted at 2:15 am on October 4, 2009 by Doctor Zero
The unprecedented pre-order sales of Sarah Palin’s memoir, Going Rogue, have prompted numerous attempts to either explain, or dismiss, her popularity. Steve Schmidt, the chief strategist for the McCain campaign, pins his hopes for the future on Mrs. Palin… squarely between her shoulder blades, with a knife. Says Schmidt:
I think that she has talents, but my honest view is that she would not be a winning candidate for the Republican candidate in 2012, and in fact, were she to be the nominee, we would have a catastrophic election result.
In the year since the election has ended, she has done nothing to expand her appeal beyond the base. … Th[e] independent vote is going to be up for grabs in 2012. That middle of the electorate is going to be determinative of the outcome of the elections. I just don’t see that if you look at the things she has done over the year … that she is going to expand that base in the middle.
Schmidt adds, “The leadership of the party cannot be outsourced to the conservative-entertainment complex.” Oh, so that’s why zillions of people are pre-ordering her book – they’re hungry for entertainment. With any luck, Palin will throw in some recipes, and maybe a few sudoku puzzles. The sour grapes about Palin’s supposed inability to “expand her appeal beyond the base” are ludicrous. If the hardcore Republican base has become large enough to push an unwritten book to the top of the best-seller lists, 2010 is going to be even more unpleasant for the Democrats than I suspected. The last remaining Democrat senators will be able to carpool in the last remaining Saturn.
Schmidt’s position is unpleasant, but understandable. As the architect of a disastrous campaign, he needs someone to blame for his failures, or else his career is over. A much less hostile analysis from Raphael Alexander of the National Post offers this explanation for the Palin phenomenon:
Sarah Palin is a classic populist politician. What makes her so popular is her very nature. She is the definition of “grassroots”, a working mother who successfully entered politics at the municipal level and worked her way up to the governorship. She didn’t manage this by impressing people with her five different institutions of education, or how many books she had written on Russian foreign policy. No, she managed it because she inspired Americans who felt that Sarah was “one of them.”
For every housewife who dreamed of being more, but had to contend with the responsibilities of raising a family, Palin inspires a strange kind of anti-feminism. There is a perceptible sense of pride that one can be “just average”, with all of the same human failings and shortcomings as everybody else.
So people are scrambling to order Palin’s book because she’s “one of them?” She’s the new Erma Bombeck? Certainly her approachability and friendly, common touch are part of her appeal, but they’re not the most important part. She’s not sitting on top of the Amazon and Barnes & Noble best-seller lists because she’s average.
What fascinates people about Sarah Palin is that she’s provocative.
Every movement needs its scholars, the engineers of its philosophy. It also requires representatives, people who can get elected to office and implement its ideas. To get those representatives elected, there must be people who can master the scholarship, make it understandable to people who aren’t political junkies… and add a little extra zing, a jolt of electricity to capture the imagination of those non-political people.
There are many ways to be provocative. Some of those methods are rude, or confrontational. The only memorable moment in President Obama’s address to Congress on health care reform came when a previously obscure Republican representative couldn’t stomach any more mendacity, and called him a liar. It was an ill-mannered outburst, for which the Congressman apologized… but it was also devastatingly effective. It got people buzzing, and because the Congressman was correct, his outburst prompted furious last-minute adjustments to the President’s legislative proposals, along with weakening the already soft public opinion of those proposals.
The most aggressive provocateurs walk a tightrope across a canyon of bad taste and controversy. Glenn Beck says some wild, hilarious, and outrageous things, in his desperate struggle to awaken rubber-frog voters before the waters of mega-state socialism boil them alive. He’s also been spectacularly right about some very important things, like the Van Jones scandal. Even as Beck reaches new heights of popularity, and drags sleazy characters like Jones out of an administration that major media outlets worship as flawless, a couple of soft-spoken young people with a video camera shock America into action against ACORN, an organization they should have become enraged about long ago. Sometimes you don’t have to say anything to be provocative – you just have to show Americans something their media gatekeepers didn’t want them to see.
Sarah Palin is provocative by her very existence, having followed none of the scripts prepared by the media, or the bitter vampires of McCain’s campaign staff. She electrifies people by speaking with confidence and cheer, to convey ideas that strike the average listener as simple common sense… and which make them realize how radical and deranged the world outside their window has become. Palin’s recent speech in Hong Kong was upbeat and plain-spoken, describing an America of liberty and opportunity, and frankly addressing the murderous evil of our terrorist enemies. The speech becomes electrifying when you realize these ideas would be as incomprehensible to the current Administration as Quaddafi’s lunatic rant before the United Nations.
Palin’s famous “death panel” commentary was powerful because it brought the midnight whispers of an unpleasant truth into the public consciousness. The provocations of someone who used to carry the ancient banner of a great political party must be delivered with elegance and wit… especially if they contemplate taking up that banner again.
The conservative movement requires champions who can make both moral and practical arguments, and show how they are woven together. America has swung so far to the left that simply standing athwart history and yelling “Stop!”, as William F. Buckley put it, makes one into something of a radical. I don’t think we conservatives appreciate our provocateurs enough. The editorial power of the mainstream media has been greatly diminished by the rise of alternative news and commentary sources, but the media still has the power to keep silent, and bury important stories. More importantly, they control the culture, which administers endless injections of their ideology to the apolitical “swing” voters who are so critical to elections. The parade of businessmen and religious zealots who serve as Hollywood’s corps of villains, plot lines designed to make liberalism seem irresistible, a thousand little jokes and asides that paint the Right as psychotic… It takes a lot of wattage to blast a conservative idea through all that white noise.
Look at the way our major media culture has treated Obama’s radical ideas to take control of the medical insurance industry: a blatantly unconstitutional scheme that becomes sheer insanity in the face of towering government debt, and self-destructing Medicare and Social Security entitlements. The media regards this as a perfectly reasonable, almost uncontroversial idea. What would be an equally dramatic conservative idea? Instead of nationalizing a massive industry, what if a conservative politician proposed privatizing one, like the embarrassing public school system? The proposal would be immediately treated as unthinkably radical, an unacceptable heresy, and the media would portray its advocates as borderline lunatics.
You can’t fight your way across a slanted battlefield like that with quietly respectable speeches and erudite policy papers, submitted as genteel points of order. You can’t have leaders whose monocles drop from their widened eyes, as they reel in astonishment from savage and unfair attacks. You get around the media by saying things they have to repeat, expressed in language the public will find unforgettable. You provoke so much interest that people shove biased journalists aside, as they rush to pick up a copy of your book.
The Obama presidency has given many people who dislike politics no choice but to become political. Political control has infiltrated every aspect of their lives. As they awaken to this reality, they’re looking around for someone besides Obama, someone who can show them an alternative to the total State, which they can no longer pretend not to see. They will not turn to someone quietly waiting to be noticed. The announcement of Going Rogue marks the moment when Palin’s future became more important than her past. What she “used to be” is no longer as important as what she is, and may become.









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 2 3 4 Next »
tartan on October 4, 2009 at 8:02 PM
Quickly I just want to end on a more optimistic note and say I surely hope we can avoid any military involvement with Iran and or anyone else. I want desperately to avoid another war. And after seeing the demonstrations over the summer, I have no appetite to fight Iran. For the record.
tartan on October 4, 2009 at 10:17 PM
ParisParamus= Concern Troll
heshtesh on October 4, 2009 at 10:24 PM
Doc you are awesome.
On the Palin threads in the conservative blogging world I see a lot of geniuses come out with Weird logic. There was a term invented and used by so called conservative bloggers – Palinbots. She is not experienced. She is not ready. She would make a great VP. Romney is the guy. Huckabee is the guy. If she can help fund raising other candidates that would be great. WHAT? Why do you think she should do that for anybody who does not return the favor or ASK for the favor. While you are all ready to accept her support, you guys are rejecting her even before she has announced anything.
Come on people. Stop comparing. No two people are same. Also you will never get a candidate you like 100%. NEVER. For 100% agreement you would have to run yourself.
Do you agree with 80% of her positions? I agree with her on life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. I agree with her when she calls out things as she sees them.
I will give you a few recent examples of failures….
The educated class is no good – See President Obama
The business folks are no good – See President Bush
Former Governor’s are no good – See President Clinton
Of course there are exceptions.
Stop comparing and see whether you agree with her positions / ideology. Let us not second guess her next move. Let her decide her next steps. If and when she decides to run you will have an opportunity to accept, reject or promote her.
2010 is more important than anybody / anything else. Don’t think about 2012 for now. Focus on pushing conservative Republicans into house and Senate and putting squishes / RINO’s out of the primaries. Get involved at local level.
For now I like Governor Palin. We will watch as things play out. I will give her a fair shot when time comes and she decides to run for any elected Office.
antisocial on October 4, 2009 at 10:37 PM
The comments are running off the page! Oh, the humanity!
Mr. Wednesday Night on October 4, 2009 at 10:45 PM
Zero is number one!
RobCon on October 4, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Is Palin hiring speech writers? Zero get your resume to Alaska!
RobCon on October 4, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Kick AP out of the way and get Zero on the Top Picks column.
RobCon on October 4, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Amen.
RobCon on October 4, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Timing is everything. Be a star but W A I T Sarah. One of the problems with the Obambi presidency is that he didn’t wait a couple of senate terms before running. Though I think that every Democrat is a disaster an Obama after 12 years in the senate would have been MUCH better than the dolt we are currently experience.
Wait. ‘kay?
Mojave Mark on October 4, 2009 at 10:53 PM
As usual, thoughtful and well written.
The bonus: I think Dr. Z just gave AP’s nose a hard flick.
It was a pleasant thought.
CPT. Charles on October 4, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Go Sarah!!! Vaya con Dios.
Unless someone new rises up in 2012, none of the former aspirants have the rogue cojones to fight for this country, other than Fred.
I used to like Mitt, a lot. But he’s too busy scoring political credits and favor with incumbent RINOs, instead of gaining favor with We The People. Didn’t see him at teaparties or 9-12, either in spirit or deed. Tells me all I need to know about his priorities.
For Veep, Liz Cheney is fine by me as well. I wouldn’t have a problem with Jindal.
But I absolutely don’t want to see anybody that is a part of the Beltway Insider circle, nor the RINO sycophants running for any office, evah again. Put any of those pansies on the ticket and I’ll sit on my hands.
AH_C on October 4, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Thanks, Doc, for expressing the appeal of Palin here better than either Ed or Allah have. You rock!
Christian Conservative on October 4, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Get real. Regardless his maddening insistence on following Meghan McCain Allah is a quick wit. Dr. Z can’t express anything in less than 300 words. He’d turn sports scores into a Think Piece. If every AP post was a Dr. Z column it would take two hours just to read the Top Picks. Commenting would be cut 75% with 75% of that being “Great Doc!” posts. Boring!
AllahP is a real Headline News kind of guy. He’s a pain in the ass but always interesting. Michelle knows he’s always got his eye on Traffic. That’s the name of the game.
rcl on October 4, 2009 at 11:57 PM
In the world as it should be Fred is prez.
beachgirlusa on October 5, 2009 at 12:02 AM
The more I read from and about Gov. Palin, the more I like her. Not being a SoCon myself, I’ve never been especially sanguine about this aspect of her positions…but I have admired the integrity with which she has espoused and (more importantly) lived those positions. And, more to the point, the more I learn about her, the more I realize that those social positions are not even the central point of her appeal (shrill protestations from the nihilistic Left notwithstanding). As a staunch advocate for personal liberty and fiscal discipline, and an unwavering adversary of this nation’s sickening slide toward collectivism, she has earned my esteem.
That said, I have witnessed some truly terrifyingly toxic vitriol hurled at her from people to whom the “Palin is an idiot/theocrat/demagogue/etc.” memes are as self-evident as gravity. The very notion that there is more to her than meets the eye is greeted with the sort of reaction a flat-earther would get at an astronomer’s convention. This worries me.
I would very much like to live in the sort of country in which Sarah would have a strong shot in a general election. Truly, I would. I fear that we do not (yet!) live in such a country, and so I very reluctantly must conclude that her role at this time is more that of a John the Baptist than that of a certain Nazarene carpenter. I know, the analogy strains a bit, but you know what I mean.
If Sarah runs and survives the primary process in 2012, then she will get my vote. But it will be a vote cast with no small measure of anxiety, given the prospect of another four years of an Ayn Rand villain in the big chair. I would be far more comfortable with her role as rising star and candidate advocate and standard-bearer in ’12, keeping her formidable and growing bunker of powder dry for a less equivocally robust run in ’16.
I am fully prepared, indeed, eager to be wrong on this.
Noocyte on October 5, 2009 at 12:17 AM
ParisParamus, why are you insisting that Sarah Palin subordinate herself to someone else when SHE is the one that Conservatives want? Once more, Conservatives are asked to wait while some squishy GOPer gets a chance.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Mitch Daniels of Indiana is the best “fresh face” out there. A Daniels/Palin ticket would win, Palin bringing the name recognition, Daniels the street smarts and gravitas. Daniels won with 65% of the vote in Indiana in the same election Obama snatched the state for the first time for a dem in 40 years.
/
But that alone isn’t why he’s the man: he has the ability to PHILOSOPHIZE about the U.S., to see it in grand narrative rather than petty political terms. He can go toe to toe with Obama on his strength of sounding good.
/
Daniels/Palin, 2012. Let it be.
MaxMBJ on October 5, 2009 at 1:03 AM
If Sarah Palin running as VP is powerful enough to get Mitt Romney elected, what is the reason that people will not vote for her as POTUS again?
ParisParamus is putting forward the silliest ‘arguments’ against Palin as a Conservative candidate for president. Who is ParisParamus and why should this person be attempting to manipulate our views on who’s the best candidate for the GOP to run?
ParisParamus is telling us that we have a light that we must put under a bushel if we are to beat Obama. Palin has a message and an agenda that can and will sweep the Dems out of office. She means what she says. Why should we refocus on some guy out there that we don’t know and aren’t interested in? What’s in it for us? More years of being out of power, is what.
Palin has been eviscerated by the media and the talking heads, yet she is still alive and kicking the crap out of Obama. He fears her like cats fear water. I’m tired of hearing how Palin lacks experience. She has experience. In two short years as governor of Alaska (a huge and important state for American energy independence), Palin accomplished more than most governors achieve in two terms.
ParisParamus, I have no idea who you are. All I know is I question your agenda; therefore, I’m not interested in what you have to say and reject your efforts to tell us what to do.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 1:14 AM
Here is another silly mantra: “I worry about Palin’s character and her mental preparedness to go head to head with Ahmadinejad and that is where we could find ourselves in 2012 if not sooner, to say nothing of the state of the economy. I suspect the left media will succeed in convincing the electorate of her inability to deal with such important issues, especially since she left her role as governor. She didn’t want to work under the pressure of the countless petty claims against her in Alaska. Will she be able to serve as commander in chief when we are fighting three wars and while we are dealing with potentially explosive inflation generated by congressional spending?”
Palin’s resignation demonstrates her ability to deal with complex and difficult issues. The question that she asks is “what is good for Alaska/the United States?” At each turn, the answer will be different. In the case of Alaska, resignation was the only principled thing to do, not because Palin is afraid of a fight or doesn’t have the stomach for it, but because the business of the state was being hindered by false ethics charges and Democrats who cared more about weakening Palin than they do about what is good for Alaska and the United States.
That sort of principle in politics is rare. That she asked the question at all is rare. Politicians usually ask ‘what is good for ME?’
Those “petty claims” came with a hefty price tag to Alaska and the Palins. Should the state continue to pay for frivolous lawsuits when the chief executive can resign and measures can be taken to change the law? No, the state should not, especially when the state is forced to depend on federal handouts because the Feds will not let Alaska take care of itself.
Should the Palins with four children to provide for be forced to waste the family’s resources on lawyer’s fees just so Palin could remain in office, just so the media wouldn’t call her a quitter? No. $500K in legal bills is way more than enough, especially since the Dems were mounting an assault against her LDF because their intent was to break and bankrupt the family.
So, what did Sarah Palin demonstrate by her resignation: 1) she doesn’t want power at any cost; 2) she is capable of making and implementing hard decisions; 3) her family’s future is more important than political power; 4) she’s a powerful tactical and strategic thinker—if you don’t think she beat Obama and the Democrats (the MSM is included) in their vicious game to grind her down and destroy her utterly, then you need your head examined.
America deserves to have a POTUS who can think, can think decisively, can make good decisions for sound reasons, can put the country’s welfare above himself, can make sound fiscal decisions, and does not regard the country as less than himself.
That’s why America will vote for Palin in 2012. The MSM can spin this how they want. Only the weak minded will go for it after Palin’s book.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 1:46 AM
You really live on Pluto don’t you?
Sapwolf on October 5, 2009 at 2:29 AM
As you can see, even Green Room threads are now starting to get more attention from concern trolls and leftists posing as Romneybots.
You can tell they are lefties posing as fake-Mitt fans based on their absolutely SILLY posts.
Axelrod and the lefty blogosphere will stop at nothing to attack Sarah.
The problem is, it won’t work as long as Obama is a complete loser.
Sapwolf on October 5, 2009 at 2:34 AM
Why will Palin, as president, not resign if the same tactics are employed to take her down? For a number of reasons: 1. The Constitution of the United States (COTUS) provides the grounds under which a president can be impeached; whereas, in Alaska, there was a loophole in the law that made Palin’s continuous legal harassing possible. Outside of those grounds and the wrecking of her legislative agenda, and as long as she does not provide grounds for impeachment, there is not much the Democrats can do to break her politically and financially as they tried to do in Alaska. Besides, after 2012, there won’t be enough Dems left in Washington to make Palin’s political life miserable.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 2:40 AM
Why should Palin carry anybody on her back? If the guy can’t bring the crowds by himself, why should Sarah Palin act as another bearded lady or elephant man for any Republican candidate? If Palin’s not at the top of the ticket, she would be wise not to be on it at all. Who is Mitch Daniels? Who’s ever heard of him? Why should Sarah Palin want to carry Mitch Daniels’s books to school for him?
No VP for Palin; only POTUS.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 2:43 AM
Silentwatcher @ 2:40,
I said the same thing when Ed got the vapors at Sarah resigning.
That is :
Governor of Alaska
EQUALPresident of USsilverfox on October 5, 2009 at 4:30 AM
It is clear that Sarah Palin has changed the politics of America.
Since the election of the Obamanation we have seen a remarkable change in the conservative voice. Not the religious right, nor the extremist right, but the average conservative American with average lives, with average day by day issues, and so on and so forth….
Palin’s ascendancy is nothing more than phenomenal since her veep acceptance speech. Like Ronald Reagen, Palin exemplifies that “Down to Earth” folksy common sense reasoning that makes the complex simple and identifiable.
The difference is that Palin doesn’t come from either old money, political heritage, or a famous public background. No, Palin comes from the same America that we see and live in day by day. Palin values are clearly articulated like the kitchen table discussions ordinary Americans have about what’s right for their financial budgets, their children and their future.
Palin also has “skin in the game” with a son in Iraq. Which give her a unique perspective not only on foreign policy, but in military matters from the enlisted perspective. When you compare in contrast Obama’s indecision in Afghanistan and blundering in Club Gitmo’s closure, and all other promises that could not be kept. The four years of damage that the Obama will have committed against America will require a Reaganist leader just to weave this country out of the tangled mass of mismanagement. Is Palin the person to do that? That’s part of the vetting and the culling of the RINO FAT we have in this party.
McCainism and middle of the road coziness to Feingolds, and other RINOism pandering, needs to STOP. We need to shake off this creeping malaise that’s dragging capitalism and conservationism down the toilet of Socialism. I have only heard of two voices in this vast forest of politics that I like.
Sarah Palin and Lynn Cheney. 2010 will be the tripwire.
Kini on October 5, 2009 at 4:49 AM
I don’t know who I want for VP; I know that Palin is it for president. She doesn’t need anybody to lend her any gravitas; her record of ACCOMPLISHMENT provides all the gravitas she needs—Katie Couric and What’sisface bedamned! She doesn’t need to wait for anybody or anything. There is a tide in the times of men that should be taken at the flood. This is Palin’s tide and time, and I think that anybody counseling her to wait is gaming her. How will she deal with Ahmadinejad? Yah, sure, you betcha she won’t get rolled by Obama is being. Palin is a decisive woman; Obama is a ditherer, unless his self-interest is at stake.
As a colored person (aren’t we all?) who’s lived in other colored-governed countries, there’s no magic in a person of color. Obama has taught America most decisively that skin color does not trump ideas, patriotism, common-sense, or love for one’s fellow man. There’s power in IDEAS, in Conservative ideas. Sarah Palin has Conservative ideas and the know-how to restore this country to a Constitutional Republic. Her VP needs to have the same set of ideas and a brass pair of balls to help push their agenda through. I don’t want Palin at the head and a RINO at the tail.
Now, all those who are saying let Palin help someone else before she gets a chance, get the hell out of the way!
WTG, Silver Fox.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 5:06 AM
MaxMBJ, you said miles about Daniels’s character when you wrote this: “But that alone isn’t why he’s the man: he has the ability to PHILOSOPHIZE about the U.S., to see it in grand narrative rather than petty political terms. He can go toe to toe with Obama on his strength of sounding good.”
Let me simplify it: Daniels is just another bullshit artist.
Your post seeks to perpetuate media developed myths about Sarah Palin: dumb, inarticulate, airhead caribou barbie. Your tactic is interesting: say something nice about one guy to cut Palin off at the knees, all the better to cut her throat. Nice try.
Thanks a lot, Max.
We don’t need a pointy-headed philosopher. We have what we need: a woman of substance, of Conservative ideas, of Conservative thought, who understands complex ideas and can simplify them in a way nobody else on the scene can, who has spent time and energy fighting for and implementing Conservative ideas, who has solid executive experience and can negotiate with the big dogs and walk away victorious, who’s faced the media fire undiminished and unbowed, and who knows it’s not about PHILOSOPHIZING that makes ME look good but it’s about America and doing what it takes to make America strong.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 5:20 AM
This from a McCain staffer, eh? Do they really think 2008 was some kind of victory for our side? 2008 couldn’t have been more of a disaster, and it’s because of morons like him and McLame/McShamnesty.
Squiggy on October 5, 2009 at 5:48 AM
Over the next 12-13 mos, Sarah Palin is going to build the Congress that she wants to work with in 2013. She needs to take a lesson from Glenn Beck and, that is, ignore her detractors. Go install the people into Congress she wants, and drop Daisy Cutters on Obama’s agenda.
She needs to operate like an AC130 on Obama’s agenda. Making slow left turns and raining fire on it.
17 NOV–D-Day
ted c on October 5, 2009 at 5:52 AM
We need to stop speculating about whether or not a particular candidate is more or less capable of winning an election. That’s what got us into this mess. Seriously, two years ago now, did anyone see the possibility of a Barack Obama Presidency? Would anyone here have looked at him as the most electable? And secondly, the argument back then on our side was that McCain or Giuliani would be the most “electable”. Look where that got us.
We need to start looking at who would be the best person for our cause and still have a “retail politics” appeal. Sarah is high on that list, IMO.
SalAOR on October 5, 2009 at 5:53 AM
I am going to give money regularly to Palin’s efforts. Talk all you want, she speaks for my family and me. Money wins elections and I will give and work to raise money for Palin. Keep talking you do nothing boobs and you’ll all be behind the wire talking face to face.
jarhead0311 on October 5, 2009 at 5:55 AM
I choose the best.
Sarah Palin is BEST at the moment.
But the problem: No better name is coming out at the moment.
Obambi didn’t come out of blue in 2007. OBAMBI was already a BRIGHT STAR in 2007.
Incumbents always have “edge” [except of course of Bush1 and Carter]. Reagan was already a household name when he fought Carter. In Clinton’s case, it was a third party who destroyed the chance of Bush1. Aga
So, those who say that 2012 is too early for wannabes … think again. YOU ARE ACTUALLY PROCRASTINATING.
TheAlamos on October 5, 2009 at 6:08 AM
Exactly right. It’s likely a little late for anyone new to jump in the game. Frankly, I think the nomination is Sarah’s if she wants it. Picture the Republican debates. Who will be a match for her?
The other commonality between Bush1 and Carter was that they were particularly vulnerable incumbents, as Obama is shaping up the be.
SalAOR on October 5, 2009 at 6:11 AM
She will fight for us.
She will not be put aside.
She will not be denied.
Haiku Guy on October 5, 2009 at 6:35 AM
Batting 1.000, Doctor. But could you please stop reading my mind?! Am I broadcasting my thoughts to you while I sleep?? My God, I’m going to have to actually start wearing a tinfoil hat soon.
munchnstuf on October 5, 2009 at 6:47 AM
Here is my view of Sarah Palin:
She is to America and American Conservatism what Lech Walesa was to Poland and Solidarity movement. Except, she is much cuter and smarter.
I remember when Polish propaganda tried to make him a nobody. At some point during the Marshall Law he was called by his sympathizers “the most unknown person” in Poland.
While Walesa was not a great president she definitely should be.
ktrelski on October 5, 2009 at 6:54 AM
Short…sighted.
ParisParamus on October 4, 2009
As opposed to wearing Romney blinders?
SKYFOX on October 5, 2009 at 7:24 AM
“Steve Schmidt, the chief strategist for the McCain campaign says . . . ”
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Somebody wake me up when Schmidt or his boss become relevant in the Conservative movement.
BigAlSouth on October 5, 2009 at 8:03 AM
I bet if you ask this Schmidt who he thinks would be good he will answer “Huckabee.”
This clown and others like him do not like Sarah Palin because her popularity took the McCain by surprise and made them look as inept as they really were.
McCain is and was all about his ego. Yes, he’s a former POW who sacrificed much for this country. However, he ran a terrible campaign and was NOT what we needed to keep Obama out of the White House.
His half-baked “reach across the aisle” agenda has left us at the mercy of what I believe will eventually be seen as the biggest disaster of a president history has ever seen. It will take us decades to recover from the simple four years Obama is in the White House.
The only saving grace the McCain campaign had was Sarah Palin and McCain and his cronies like Schmidt HATE that she stole their thunder.
There are other people on our side that hate Sarah as well. Can’t figure those folks out yet, but I will. Would love to hear what some of you think about the non-McCain lovin’ Sarah haters.
Mad Mad Monica on October 5, 2009 at 8:16 AM
October 5, 1977: Carter had far better approval ratings than Obama. Nobody took Reagan seriously….he was just an unemployed actor.
November 8, 1980: I stood in line with other grim faced voters, determined to rid ourselves of the worst President in a hundred years.
January 20, 2013: President Palin becomes the first female President.
SteppedInWhat on October 5, 2009 at 8:37 AM
I just LOVE seeing these fools spin inside themselves,forever trying to explain the Palin phenomena in a way that ends with a punch line that closes the door on her history.
A VP candidate on a losing ticket, particularly a ticket that featured a presidential candidate ready-made for concession-speaking, is supposed to fade into history like a drunk falling down the basement steps. Palin breaks this mold.
Why won’t Palin go? Because the people who want her off the stage won’t let her. They keep striking her and every blow gives her more power.
Now we have the startling situation whereing a failed VP candidate and former politician is shaking the victor like a dog with a chew toy.
Gotta love it.
Cricket624 on October 5, 2009 at 9:37 AM
I was not at all impressed with her published editorial, which goes on and on that “common sense tells us ______, common sense tells us ______, and common sense tells us ______“.
We don’t need a didactic Sarah Palin, but one who goes a little more to the heart of the matter.
Anil Petra on October 5, 2009 at 9:42 AM
In a debate, Sarah Palin will beat Obama. Palin is all substance, Obama all symbolism. Typical Democrat … deep as a puddle.
SilentWatcher on October 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Doc Zero once again zeroes in on the heart of the matter. I cannot imagine why he is languishing away here in the Green Room. His commentary and editorials are vastly more resonant than anything else I read out there.
I agree with this post wholeheartedly. I wish Doc had a bigger, broader bully pulpit – we need his voice to cut through all the noise everywhere else.
Redhead Infidel on October 5, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Dude, your sarc is on overdrive. Heh.
Blacksmith8 on October 5, 2009 at 12:55 PM
This bares repeating. It seems it may need repeating DAILY. Again:
FREEDOM!
Blacksmith8 on October 5, 2009 at 1:04 PM
I’ll hold you to that partner.
Blacksmith8 on October 5, 2009 at 1:30 PM
No hold required. What I cited are not conditions for my vote, but worries about electability. Though not a Party guy (I only registered GOP for a crack at my state’s closed primaries), I am so thoroughgoingly disgusted by the Democrats that I would as soon replace my contact lens solution with vinegar and lemon juice than sully my freedom with a vote in their direction. And, much as I like the idea of strong 3rd-party candidates shaking things up, I also know how that story ends.
If Sarah gets the nod, then it’s full steam ahead and to the phone banks with me (I logged more than 500 calls for McCain/Palin. Oy, my aching Sprint bill!). But I have many Liberal and even a few Moderate friends, so I have no illusions about the stiff wind I’ll be fighting, is all.
Noocyte on October 5, 2009 at 2:16 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »