Third Party & Independents Archives

Sarah's Springboard

I’m really happy for Sarah Palin. If anyone says she doesn’t embody the American dream then they’re blinded by their hatred of her. I’ve always stayed away from Sarah Palin as a subject because shooting fish in a barrel isn’t much fun, but now I can come out and cheer on her smashing literary debut.

Quitting her job as Governor halfway through her term because of media/political/legal harassment was obviously genius. There was a springboard passing her by and she had to jump on it without hesitation or risk plummeting back into the cold waters of obscurity.

I don’t think the obscurity part was a real danger, even if she stuck out her term, but she jumped for that springboard with complete abandon. Signing a book deal and having it ready for print within three months makes this leap for stardom all the more inspiring. Many people would love to write a book of any kind and have it published, including me, and I think everyone is impressed by the 1.5 million copies being printed as we speak. I won’t get into details about HarperCollins and Rupert Murdoch; that’ll be left to those looking for that barrel of fish.

Palin then recruited Lynn Vincent of WORLD Magazine to lock in her new life by “helping” her write this book so quickly, but who cares? Most political ventures into the literary world are “guided” by such ghost writers, except of course Barry’s books, but he’s an anomaly.

To top it all off, Sarah has made it crystal clear what direction she’s heading in with the doubly apt title of her life story. “Going Rogue: An American Life” pulls its first and most prominent meaning from where she’s going. It basically refers to the late October 2008 story about Sarah’s rogue-like behavior as she broke out of a constricting campaign that botched her rollout before it went crashing into the dung heap with past failed presidential campaigns. The other meaning of the word “Rogue” in her title is a goodbye message to the people she abandoned in Alaska. Many Alaskan’s remember “Troopergate” for Sarah’s slandering of her ex-brother-in-law as a rogue cop and then the superior who defended him as the same. Her ignoring the obvious meaning of a word she used before the 2008 election to take down a family enemy signifies the completion of her journey from the past to a future as a political media dynamo.

In my opinion, Sarah Palin has embraced the American dream of becoming more than successful, more than rich. She’s becoming famous. I don’t think there will be a foray back into political office for this American celebrity. She’s gonna make Rush seem like a Chihuahua with lipstick. When the media struck her down in 2008, they made her more powerful than anyone can possibly imagine.

Posted by Frederick S. Friedman at September 30, 2009 12:39 PM
Comments
Comment #288700

Frederick, while I appreciate your irony and sarcasm, I will just bluntly state that the American Dream for most has not been to become wealthy at any cost, but, to live free and pursue their choices and opportunities.

There are of course the Al Capone’s and Abramoff’s and Bernie Madoff’s, but, theirs is not the dream most Americans share, killing and ripping off others and breaking our nation’s laws in the pursuit of money. No, that is not the American Dream of most Americans. And those who pursue wealth as a goal, know all too well, that such a pursuit comes with its own price and opportunity costs. Just ask John Lennon, or any of thousands of wealthy persons who have had children or family members kidnapped for ransom, or ask Billy Bob Thornton who is rare in having successfully maintained an anonymous presence in public despite his acting achievements and fame. It ain’t an easy thing, at all.

I personally have never wanted to be wealthy. In my late teens I acknowledged the costs of pursuing wealth, and chose education and wisdom as being far more valuable. Mind you, in my teens, I was a very unhappy person. I happier today at 59 than I ever dreamed I could be when I was in my 20’s and 30’s and it is not a result of wealth, but, the pursuit of education and wisdom. Of course, all that education and wisdom did help to insure the elimination of the poverty I experienced in my youth. But, I am not wealthy by any American standard and wouldn’t have it any other way. Wealth creates some unusual freedoms, but, restricts many commonly enjoyed ones as well, as many wealthy persons have readily confessed.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 30, 2009 3:27 PM
Comment #288705

David, I’m glad you understand that I was being completely sarcastic, but I’ll elaborate for everyone else now that I am no longer using the voice from the article.
Wealth and fame are not my American dream and it has been argued, by me and others, that the pursuit of this version of the American dream is responsible for our recent credit disaster as well as the different bubbles bursting one after another.
We went from betting with other people’s money to get rich to taking out insurance policies on the bets and betting against the insurance policies and insuring those bets and selling that. None of this produced anything except disproportionate wealth to reward those that act this way.

The figures are long lost, but I remember hearing something about the number of college graduates in 2000 heading to financial services employment as oppose to public service employment was greater, but after Enron and after AIG, this has swung in the opposite direction with more graduates heading for public service now and less going to work on Wallstreet.

Obviously, the definition of the American dream changes over time for some, but I couldn’t agree with you more.

Posted by: Fred at September 30, 2009 4:32 PM
Comment #288713

Frederick: very amusing last line :) I tend to agree with your post. She’s an opportunist, she had a chance to seize wealth, fame, and power, and she took it. I personally dislike her and feel she’s a poor role model for this country, but in truth she has played by the rules that this culture has set up for itself: grab what you can, no matter the consequences, and throw Bacchanalian parties every night at which you waste top shelf tequila on low-class friends.

You do, in a way, have to admire her. She’s probably got exactly what she wants, which is more than most of us have.

Posted by: Jonathan Rice at September 30, 2009 9:21 PM
Comment #288720

She’s just like the rest of those crooked politicians. Al Gore used his position to make millions and when cap and trade passes, he will make millions more selling carbon credits. And what about the crooked Clintons, how much have they made since leaving the WH?

Then there’s that money grubbing George Sorros. Curses on all of them and their money. I’m like you guys, just give me some good grass and a cardboard box in which to sleep. Go 3rd party.

Posted by: 3rdpty at September 30, 2009 10:24 PM
Comment #288723

You’re right Jonathan, she got exactly what she wants and she’ll continue with her divisive chicken-little routine as she rakes in millions.


Posted by: Fred at September 30, 2009 10:53 PM
Comment #288726

3rdpty,

I agree completely. All the money grubbing politicians are the same, they just have different fans.

All the people who squirreled money away in Swiss bank accounts over the past eight years think Bush was great and don’t care how much he’s made or will make off his memoirs (don’t forget Laura’s memoirs).

At the same time, the Clintons made their millions and still deal with donors from Blackwater to AIG while liberals say he was the best president ever. Now the duo is gearing up for their next presidential run. She’s determined to have that office before she dies and wants it more to nail her name into the pages of history, than to help America.

Then we have to admit that Bush did so much to fight AIDS around the world and Clinton’s foundation continues this fight along with many other initiatives.

It’s all about your perspective. There is, however, no way to stop people from loving celebrities of all kinds and thereby make them disproportionately rich.

Posted by: Fred at September 30, 2009 11:30 PM
Comment #288730

How do you beat the system, how are we to survive as a nation. The black congressman in LA who had $90,000 in his freezer. Rangel in NY cheating on his taxes. Dodd taking sweetheart deals that the common person will never get. Not to mention Obama trying to make all his friends in gangster city rich by getting the olympics to come to town.

You got repubs defending repubs and liberals defending dems and in the meantime the country is going down the flusher. The constituton is being trampled on and their aint nothing we can do about it. What’s the answer fred?

Posted by: 3rdpty at October 1, 2009 12:14 AM
Comment #288733

Why is Sarah Palin hated so much? She seems to be hated by those in both parties. What is it about her that brings out the worst in people. It can’t be about her intelligence because congresswoman Maxine Waters from CA has to be one of the most stupid women in the world and nothing is ever said about her.

Posted by: propitiation at October 1, 2009 12:37 AM
Comment #288737

I don’t think Rep Waters is well known beyond the thirty-fifth district of California, and the people she represents certainly don’t think she’s stupid, otherwise she’d lose and election.

Posted by: Warped Reality at October 1, 2009 12:57 AM
Comment #288740

propit. said: “What is it about her that brings out the worst in people.”

That’s the wrong question and propaganda. Your question suggests that being critical of public figure’s actions is somehow an act representing the worst in people. America has always critiqued public figures. That’s not the worst; that is often regarded as one of the best traits about America by many in foreign lands who don’t dare exercise such a privilege in their own land.

The question should be, why is Palin so inept at spinning her flaws that so many universally critique them? I mean, the Republicans are generally masters at spinning their weaknesses and flaws into at least 39% public approval rating. I mean they actually fooled the majority of people for 8 years, from 1998 through 2006. So, what’s Palin’s major malfunction in this regard?

The answer is, a lack of empirically based education. She is a person who operates from the gut, on emotive motives, and in this regard, is similar to that other Republican so many Republicans love to critique and label RINO, or, not mention at all: GW Bush.

There is nothing wrong with young people who make decisions and renege on commitments based on their intuition and gut, that is a part of growing up and learning. But, if they are not seeking leadership positions upon which so many others will depend and exhibiting such adolescent behaviors, they will exemplify the Peter Principle in a pretty big damned hurry, which is exactly what Sarah Palin did.

That in a nutshell is why so very many on all sides of the political spectrum do not, and will not, trust Sarah Palin with power.

I don’t think Palin realizes yet, how disfigured she made herself in resigning her governorship. With money however, comes the desire to exercise the potential power that often attends wealth, and she will, before too long, come to realize the disfigurement she incurred by resigning; even if she does now acquire a solid empirically based education (which is doubtful).

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 1, 2009 1:32 AM
Comment #288741

Warped Reality, the sad truth is, what Americans don’t know about their representatives and don’t care to learn about, would fill the Library of Congress. Americans like things simple. Just give them one President, or American Idol contestant to learn about and decide upon, and they will pride themselves on being so knowledgeable.

But, give them 2 US Senators and two State Senators, and 1 US representative and one State representative to learn about and keep track of, and they become confused and disoriented and capitulate that they just don’t have the time and energy to stay aware of such voluminous information week after week, year after year. The irony is that the majority of Americans trust their representatives enough, despite their ignorance of their positions and voting records on the issues, to reelect them at a rate of more than 90%.

Americans are a very odd lot in this regard, and our Constitutional system of government is just too complicated for them to address in an aware fashion based on the paltry education they received these last few decades from their public, and even private, schools.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 1, 2009 1:58 AM
Comment #288742

3rd party, the voters need a simple strategy that will accommodate a more responsible government. Voting Out Incumbents until the majority of voters can approve of the job their government is doing, is just such a strategy. Spread the word.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 1, 2009 2:01 AM
Comment #288743

3rdpty

Changing a Romanesque decline into an intentional national transformation would be a start, but any attempt within a two party system is inherently partisan and becomes canceled out by the half of America that isn’t for it. You know my solution to that. The only successful third party will be one that undercuts the role of money in a politician’s career. Careful though, controlling how much money all the politicians have will get you labeled a socialist.

A deep judicial rediscovery of the 9th and 10th amendments would be great too as would a withdrawal of our forces from the various nations we occupy once the war on terror decides to end itself (nobody is in control of when this war ends anymore).

Past all that, we must help each other to understand that today’s world is too complicated for ideology. Things need to be understood on an issue by issue basis. It’s America’s obsession with ideology that makes us think we are about to tear each other apart.

When people are trying to mentally digest everything into a black and white ideological tug of war, they will naturally self fulfill this perception of the world. If we drop this “us versus them” mentality, then we may find ourselves a unified nation again.

Posted by: Fred at October 1, 2009 3:17 AM
Comment #288755

DRR:

When I asked the question, why the very mention of her name brings out the worst in people, I was referring to the vitriol being spewed from one human being to another. The very mention of her name causes vicious attacks on her children, grandchild, husband, her person, her intelligence, her career, and now her book. I have to believe the hatred for her goes much deeper than running as a VP. Is it her religious views, is it her conservative values, is it because she was not anointed by the MSM, is it because she is considered some kind of country bumpkin, or is it because she is a self-made woman? All I know is the very mention of her name brings out the worst ranker from people. Or is it because she is considered to be such a threat to liberals? I wonder if there is one person on the left who can give a real intelligent reason for the hatred of Sarah Palin?

You state:

“The answer is, a lack of empirically based education.”
“even if she does now acquire a solid empirically based education (which is doubtful).”

And in post #288741, you said:

“Americans are a very odd lot in this regard, and our Constitutional system of government is just too complicated for them to address in an aware fashion based on the paltry education they received these last few decades from their public, and even private, schools.”

I might say first of all, this statement is the height of arrogance for a vast majority of Americans who have sought out skilled labor rather than higher education. It takes arrogance to say most Americans are too stupid to understand how their government works.

So what is the answer, an education based on observation or an education based on classroom? Isn’t an “empirically based education”, one that is based upon experience and observation alone? What part does “gut” play in an “empirically based education”? In the history of this great country, we have had many great presidents who based their decisions on “gut” feelings, especially those with a military background. Would you care to guess how many victorious battles were the results of a “gut “ feeling of what the enemy would do? So your premise, concerning Sarah Palin is false.

Secondly, there was a time in this country when a man’s word was his bond. But your statement: “There is nothing wrong with young people who make decisions and renege on commitments based on their intuition and gut, that is a part of growing up and learning”, shows what is wrong with our country today. This is the very basis of education that is taught in our public education system. The public education system in our country is the one you liberals have set up and continued to finance with unlimited funds. Now you say, it is insufficient to even interpret the constitution, interesting.

Sarah Palin fell in the old cliché, “damned if you do and damned if you don’t”. If she had stayed in office as governor of AK, the left would have been calling for her impeachment or resignation, and when she resigned, now you condemn her for leaving. Lastly, might I ask, when did Sarah Palin ever announce she was running for another office? I have not heard this announcement. Perhaps she can do more damage to the democrats in the current role. In fact, I think that was her plan.

Fred said to 3rdpty:

“A deep judicial rediscovery of the 9th and 10th amendment…”

So I guess you support “activist” judges who will rewrite the constitution and bill of rights? Which means you support a single branch of government, interesting, and you write in the 3rd column?

“If we drop this “us versus them” mentality, then we may find ourselves a unified nation again.”

This is code among liberals that means “when the right concedes to the left, we will be unified”. Great!

Posted by: propitiation at October 1, 2009 11:32 AM
Comment #288758

Propitiation

Read the 9th and 10th amendment and your vast confusion may abate.

The 9th and 10th are in the bill of rights already, exactly how does supporting these rewrite the constitution?

I really want an answer to that one P. Otherwise my loss of intellectual respect will be complete.

Lastly, you obviously have the “us vs them” mentality so bad that you are clearly a perfect example of exactly what I was talking about. I bet you see imaginary “code” everywhere.

Have fun with your endless right-left battle, but try not to hold on to everything so tight and check your blood pressure now and then:)

Posted by: Fred at October 1, 2009 12:45 PM
Comment #288759

Propitiation

Palin’s plan was to get the hell of the Alaska nightmare and make some MONEY!!!

She’s is making MONEY off of people like you, so just sit back and enjoy the con, because your swallowing it hook, line, and sinker.

Posted by: Fred at October 1, 2009 12:53 PM
Comment #288777

“The very mention of her name causes vicious attacks on her children, grandchild, husband, her person, her intelligence, her career, and now her book. I have to believe the hatred for her goes much deeper than running as a VP.”

Props remember what your side was doing to Obama and Biden at the time? Remember what the cons/repubs have been doing to the dems for years? Why would you think the repub candidate for VP should get a free pass ?

“Is it her religious views, is it her conservative values, is it because she was not anointed by the MSM, is it because she is considered some kind of country bumpkin, or is it because she is a self-made woman?”
No to all Props.

” All I know is the very mention of her name brings out the worst ranker from people. Or is it because she is considered to be such a threat to liberals?”
Still None of the above.

” I wonder if there is one person on the left who can give a real intelligent reason for the hatred of Sarah Palin? “

Well props I think first of all hate is to strong a word. Her obvious ability to talk a lot without saying anything intelligent causes my stomach to turn perhaps because of that you mistake my feeling of nausea with hate. Secondly, She was the only candidate being seriously considered for the office of president that made the movie “Idiocracy” seem all to possible. That to me is a very scary thought.
To watch all of the talk radio conservatives deify her simply because she was the best available conservative McCain could con into taking the position at the time is also scary to some of us. Just think of the damage she could do to this country were she actually able to convince the cool aid swilling conservatives she was the best person for the job.
Personally I hope the far right wing nuts do go off the deep end and cause Palin to be on the ballot in 2012. I believe the center and left as well as many on the right that have not overdosed on the cool aid will be energized against her as we have not seen in this Country in many years. And that,IMHO, is what this country needs in order to set us back on track after the conservative assult we have faced in this country the past 10 years.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 1, 2009 7:48 PM
Comment #288783

propitiation
I’ve noticed that the more folks hate someone the scarederd they are of them.
Why are they scared of Sarah? My guess is that they’re afraid she just might up and run for President in 2012. And win.
But then, what do I know. I’m just a rain soaked hillbilly. :)

Posted by: Ron Brown at October 1, 2009 8:27 PM
Comment #288792

I am reminded of the similarities of Jon and Kate and Sarah Palin, as well as the other fifty bajillion reality shows on TV. It makes you want to just blow it all up.

THAT is why I hate Sarah Palin.

She makes fools out of the very people who support her, while profiting from it.

By far, my favorite, is the Dallas TV minister, Robert Tilton.

A former friend revealed how he and Tilton came up with the con game that made Tilton rich. all you need is a lack of conscience.

Posted by: gergle at October 1, 2009 10:12 PM
Comment #288795

Sarah Palin has received exactly what any insolent upstart who emerges from the working class gets if they try to mix it up with the elite establishment. Bill Clinton had to deal with the same thing at many points, but at least he knew enough to get his card stamped with Ivy League certification and to display his left-wing bonafides whenever they were demanded. And it didn’t hurt that he’s male.

You don’t have to support her politicaly to recognize that Palin is somebody who came from absolutely no privilege whatsoever but got to where she is today on pure grit and determination. Unlike the other most prominent female political figure in America, she sure didn’t get to where she is now because of who she married. Something it seems to me that those interested in women’s issues used to admire, and would admire greatly if the person in question was on the left wing of the political spectrum.

Posted by: Paul at October 1, 2009 11:28 PM
Comment #288800

Thnx Ron,

I think the rain soaked hillbilly is correct. Any liberal has to admit Sarah Palin taking the presidency is the scariest possibility in their minds.

I already know that if a president turns out to be completely incompetent, the majority of people don’t get this until the second term is underway and the destruction caused by this incompetency sends the political pendulum hurling back to the other extreme (other party).

If Sarah could handle the job, which I think she is woefully underqualified for, then fine, but otherwise she would just destroy the GOP again. She’s young and the cycle of rebirth and destruction might give her a shot in 2016, but I think it’s more possible for her later.

Paul,

I think you could say Sarah got to where she is through grit, but Hillary didn’t necessarily fall into her power through marriage. She staked out a claim in the Senate among all the male prima donnas (she fit in well as would Palin) and earned a reputation that has Republicans wishing they had her over Obama.

I always thought that funny. Conservatives definitely respect Hillary more than Liberals respect Sarah, but a lot of that has to do with everyone’s perception of their intelligence. However, Liberals probably hate Sarah just about as equally as Conservatives hate Hillary.

Maybe that’s it! The Liberals have decided Sarah Palin is to them what Hillary is to the right. These women are fulfilling some kind of complimentary role in the evolving political psyche of America as it slowly accepts women into the highest office of the country.

Posted by: Fred at October 2, 2009 4:00 AM
Comment #288802

To all, while I appreciate your attempts to answer the question, “I wonder if there is one person on the left who can give a real intelligent reason for the hatred of Sarah Palin?” Most have failed to intelligently answer the question. Most of your answers are based upon your personal feelings of the woman. Therefore, your opinions are based upon emotion and not logic.

Let us take a look at each response:

#288759 - Fred said she left the AK nightmare for the purpose of making money, and those on the right are buying in hook, line, and sinker.

Actually Sarah Palin had very high polls as governor in AK. The only nightmare was the continuous frivolous lawsuits brought on by those bent on her destruction. The statement about making money is typical of those on the left. Anyone who makes money is “evil” unless the ones making the money are from the left. Actually her book is bestseller on NYT and Amazon and the book hasn’t even hit the market yet. Say what you want, but someone wants to hear her story.

#288777 – j2t2 implied Obama and Biden were receiving the same personal attacks as Palin and her family, and tit for tat was okay. This statement is based upon the false premise that Biden and Obama’s attacks were worse than those on Palin. Perhaps you could back this up with proof?

Yes, hate is a strong word, but I don’t believe it is strong enough for the feelings the left has for Palin. IMO to correct word would be “despise”. Palin was not the best conservative available, but McCain chose her. I must admit, it is puzzling why he would. I assume he did so to rally a conservative base, but it backfired, because choosing her magnified the differences between McCains moderate stand and conservative ideals.

Again, you allude to Palin running for office in 2012. Either you have information that none of the rest of us has, you are using Palin as a straw man, or in reality you fear her running. I believe it is a combination of all three.

#288792 – gergle compared Palin to a TV reality show. This statement doesn’t deserve an intelligent answer.

Lastly, I would say, IMO, there are many liberals who now wished they had voted for Hillary. She is dangerous to the country, but nothing she would do compares to the Chicago style politics taking place in Washington under this administration.

In closing, not one person gave an intelligent reason for the attacks on Sarah Palin.

Ron Brown, you are correct in your assessment.

Posted by: propitiation at October 2, 2009 9:17 AM
Comment #288803

I think we’re all missing the real issue here: that Tina Fey was actually kinda cute until she started lampooning Sarah Palin. Now I can hardly even watch 30 Rock because she’s there… all the time… just off to the sidelines… lurking…

Bah!

Posted by: Jonathan Rice at October 2, 2009 11:00 AM
Comment #288809

Fred
I have to agree with you. I don’t think Sarah Palin is qualified for President at this time. And the sad thing is in 08 she was the most qualified person on either major party ticket.
I don’t really know if she’ll be qualified for the job in the future or not. I somehow doubt it.
The problem is if she does run in 2012 she just might up and get the Republican nomination. And with the way things are going now I’m predicting big Republican wins in both in both 2010 and 2012.
This would mean that we’d have the first women President. And sad to say she aint qualified for the job at this piont.

Posted by: Ron Brown at October 2, 2009 12:14 PM
Comment #288812

Prop,

I wasn’t pointing out she was evil, you put your right-left words in my mouth every time you comment and it’s getting boring.

As anyone can see from my comments, both the right and left are making money in this way.

My point is that you are being suckered by these people and so is anyone who buys Obama’s books.

Once again, you’re putting words in my mouth and making constant straw man arguments with your talking points.

I never said it was okay when the left made money, but it was evil when the right made money, you said that and revealed your endlessly embattled mindset.

Posted by: Fred at October 2, 2009 12:24 PM
Comment #288819

fred

I think the point prop is making is, laying aside the hatred for SP, what intelligent reason can be given for the attacks? So far you haven’t answered.

I mean, you were the one who wrote the article, based on personal hatred for SP.

Posted by: beretta9 at October 2, 2009 3:02 PM
Comment #288822

“j2t2 implied Obama and Biden were receiving the same personal attacks as Palin and her family, and tit for tat was okay. This statement is based upon the false premise that Biden and Obama’s attacks were worse than those on Palin. Perhaps you could back this up with proof?”

Props I implied what? False premise? Here is what I actually said “Props remember what your side was doing to Obama and Biden at the time? Remember what the cons/repubs have been doing to the dems for years? Why would you think the repub candidate for VP should get a free pass ?”
Where do you get “Biden and Obama’s attacks were worse than those on Palin.” out of that? It seems you are the one doing the implying and false pretense to me.

BTW, Where were you during the run up to the 08 election? The far right is still on the “birther” kick for crying out loud. Have you forgot the “associates with terrorist” line used by the conservatives? How about the “he’s a Muslim and the Saddam Hussein association because of his middle name? Oh and of course the “he’s the Messiah” attack. Ah yes then of course the “he is having an affair” smear from your fellow conservatives. See this is the problem Props when you want to forget all but the past 9 months, you think my comments were a false premise when in fact the conservatives had been smearing Obama long before Palin was on the national stage.
In fact Palin herself lowered the bar by smearing Obama and well… if you are going to sling mud expect to get dirty.
The real question props is why would you defend her when she making a career out of attacking others with no merit to her comments?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/palin.obama/index.html

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/berman

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1076695/Obama-hit-affair-smears-following-claims-attractive-aide-banned-wife.html


“Again, you allude to Palin running for office in 2012. Either you have information that none of the rest of us has, you are using Palin as a straw man, or in reality you fear her running. I believe it is a combination of all three.”

Props I didn’t allude to anything I said “Personally I hope the far right wing nuts do go off the deep end and cause Palin to be on the ballot in 2012.”

It is only my hope, as I said, that the far right gets her on the repub ticket in 2012. I have no more information than anyone else, no crystal ball and no fear of her running, in fact I am encouraging you to take action to get her on the ballot. It seems you are more fearful of this idea than me Props.
Strawman! Are you kidding try to read what I wrote for once. “I believe the center and left as well as many on the right that have not overdosed on the cool aid will be energized against her as we have not seen in this Country in many years. And that,IMHO, is what this country needs in order to set us back on track after the conservative assult we have faced in this country the past 10 years.” After all who really wants another GWB leading the country, even the repubs learned that lesson Props.


Posted by: j2t2 at October 2, 2009 4:08 PM
Comment #288823

I wrote the article with a fair amount of sarcasm, but there was no hatred in there. I’m pointing out what she is doing fair and square. If you don’t think she’s getting money and fame from all this fine, I don’t agree. I do agree that all politicians do this, right and left. They all go for money and fame. When I hold SP up to that light, nobody should be complaining that I hate her. It’s clear as day she left her job and signed a book deal, do you contest these facts?

I tried to point out to you guys that the reason for such attacks on her is their is a true fear of her becoming president just as the attacks on Hillary are vast because people are terrified she will take power as well. Perhaps you should read the article and all of my comments again in order to better synch with my train of thought before jump to conclusions. She is doing what all other politicians are doing and just because you guys can’t believe how much trouble she is having doesn’t mean she should get a free pass.

This women made a brilliant move for herself and will soon have a show on Fox. Following either Hannity or Huckabee, it depends on how the focus groups fill out their surveys.

I stand by my other comment that Sarah Palin is to Liberals what Hillary Clinton is to Conservatives. What’s the big deal? Each party has it’s own demons to deal with when it comes to a female president.

Posted by: Fred at October 2, 2009 4:11 PM
Comment #288829

Fred your article was pretty clear and did not display any hatred towards Palin, IMHO. I thought it to be an accurate reflection of the facts.
I think Palin set herself up for some of the media in 08 by coming to the national scene at election time totally unprepared to do so. I mean did you see her interview with Couric? Why shouldn’t the Repub VP candidate face false accusations as well as half truths from those on the left that were against her election to national office?
The repubs have been dishing half truths, false accusations and outright lies out as standard fare for years with the help of some of the media. Both side do it now to a greater extent because it works. If the repubs/conservatives get so offended why don’t they insist the right wing smear machine stop the onslaught of propaganda instead of complaining when others do the same?

Palin certainly jumped right in and smeared Obama every chance she got, facts be damned. She did not let truth nor veracity stand in her way as she engaged the public with misinformation and sound bites why should anyone in the media not expose her?

Posted by: j2t2 at October 2, 2009 5:56 PM
Comment #288963

j2t2, I agree entirely. I too hope she is on the ticket in 2012 as the frontrunner for her Party. You can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all the time, but, not all the people all the time.

She has been exposed for what she is, a mascot for the Peter Principle in executive government office. The majority in this country recognize that. She could be Obama’s biggest wedge supporter should she be the GOP’s nominee.

And that would define the GOP in a way as to assure their minority Party status, (not that having one relatively permanent dominant Party like the Democratic is a healthY condition for our nation), but, it beats the last 8 years in many ways for a great many Americans now thanking their lucky stars for Democratic Party safety nets and jobs.

9.8% unemployment (or 22% in some places) are hard numbers to live with, but, for the millions who kept their jobs over the last year due to TARP bailouts and stimulus spending, appreciation is felt if not covered by the media as headline news.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 6, 2009 8:28 AM
Comment #288975

I believe Steve Schmidt, McCain’s campaign adviser, shares your sentiment about Palin in 2012, http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/02/mccain-campaign-manager-palin-in-2012-would-be-catastrophic/

It’s only the die hard radicals that believe in her election prospects. I’m just not too sure how much of the GOP is made up of these radicals. I know there are sane Republicans allowing themselves to be held hostage, but the Colin Powells of the party are long gone. It could still happen, anything is possible these days, but there’s no doubt it would be a catastrophe for the GOP in the general election if she got the nomination.

Posted by: Fred at October 6, 2009 5:52 PM
Post a comment