A rising young governor from a state remote from America’s media is given a big national chance. The governor does not perform well, hideously badly in fact. But the governor learns from past mistakes, executing a shrewdly planned strategy to win a presidential nomination and then the Oval Office itself.
That’s the story of Bill Clinton. As Sarah Palin planned her own comeback strategy, she could have learned a lot from it.
Clinton’s big chance took the form of a prime speaking slot at the 1988 Democratic convention: the speech nominating the party candidate, Michael Dukakis. The speech was a disaster, boring and condescending. The biggest applause line was when he intoned, “In conclusion …”
Clinton understood his mistake. He wangled an appearance on Johnny Carson’s Tonight Show eight days later. He told jokes. He played the sax. He left host and audience laughing and clapping.
Clinton plunged back to work in Arkansas, winning re-election in 1990 to an unprecedented fifth term in the governor’s office. He honed his credentials as an effective chief executive, and sat for interviews with the country’s toughest journalists. In January 1992, on the eve of the New Hampshire primary, a cover story on Bill Clinton proclaimed: “The first primary has been about IQ rather than cash — and Clinton is the easy winner.”
The rest, as they say, is history.
Now it’s Palin’s turn. In a recent Gallup poll, 63% of Americans said they would “never” consider voting for her for President. A candidate for president would normally wish to counteract such a negative impression. Palin’s post-campaign actions have reinforced them.
Instead of attending to her job as Alaska governor, she quit halfway through her first term.
Instead of following Charles Krauthammer’s advice to “go home and study and spend a lot of time on issues,” she has cashed in on the paid speaking circuit, always off the record.
She has declined to face questioning from the press. She has been drawn into an unseemly public flame war with the father of her grandchild.
She did no fundraising for the two Republican gubernatorial candidates on the ballot in November. She has had little of substance to say about the huge public decisions of the first Obama year. What she has said has been inflammatory and untrue: especially her accusation that the Obama plan would haul Down’s syndrome children before “death panels” empowered to deny them life-saving medical care.
Now come the book and the book tour. According to an AP report about the book (which hasn’t been released yet), anyone who hoped it would reveal a more thoughtful side to Palin is in for disappointment. The book is a folksy personal story, spiced by score-settling against her campaign colleagues and the media.
Unburdening yourself of grievances can feel good. But given that Palin’s detractors have depicted her as thin-skinned, aggrieved, and vindictive, it hardly seems smart to publish a book that confirms the negative impression.
Bill Clinton was thin-skinned too, but he took care not to show it. When Johnny Carson asked him back in 1988 what candidate Dukakis had thought of the speech, Clinton answered that Dukakis had liked it so much that he had asked Clinton also to introduce George H.W. Bush at the Republican convention. He laughed and clapped at Carson’s jokes at his own expense. No “quit making things up.”
But maybe Clinton is the wrong comparison. Maybe Palin isn’t really running for president. Maybe she is running to consolidate her status as a merchandisable victim-icon: not Bill Clinton after 1988, but Al Gore after 2000.
In the first three years of the Bush administration, Gore gave voice to the rage of the Democratic base. A lifelong centrist Democrat, he suddenly steered hard to the angry left. He equated George W. Bush to Orwell’s Big Brother and damned Bush’s supporters as “digital brownshirts.” He trafficked in conspiracy theories about the Iraq war and apocalyptic exaggerations about the environment.
Gore disqualified himself for the presidency. The candidates he backed — Howard Dean, Ned Lamont — mostly lost. But he made himself first a martyr, then a celebrity, next a global brand, and finally a multimillionaire.
It’s not the presidency. But it may be more fun. Why campaign, when you can tour? Why seek votes, when you have fans? Why be Evita, when you can be Madonna?
Originally published November 14, 2009 in the National Post.
133 responses so far
1 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 11:33 am
A look at some of her statements in ”Going Rogue,” obtained by The Associated Press in advance of its release Tuesday:
——
PALIN: Says she made frugality a point when traveling on state business as Alaska governor, asking ”only” for reasonably priced rooms and not ”often” going for the ”high-end, robe-and-slippers” hotels.
THE FACTS: Although travel records indicate she usually opted for less-pricey hotels while governor, Palin and daughter Bristol stayed five days and four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House luxury hotel (robes and slippers come standard) overlooking New York City’s Central Park for a five-hour women’s leadership conference in October 2007. With air fare, the cost to Alaska was well over $3,000. Event organizers said Palin asked if she could bring her daughter. The governor billed her state more than $20,000 for her children’s travel, including to events where they had not been invited, and in some cases later amended expense reports to specify that they had been on official business.
——
PALIN: Boasts that she ran her campaign for governor on small donations, mostly from first-time givers, and turned back large checks from big donors if her campaign perceived a conflict of interest.
THE FACTS: Of the roughly $1.3 million she raised for her primary and general election campaigns for governor, more than half came from people and political action committees giving at least $500, according to an AP analysis of her campaign finance reports. The maximum that individual donors could give was $1,000; $2,000 for a PAC.
Of the rest, about $76,000 came from Republican Party committees.
She accepted $1,000 each from a state senator and his wife in the weeks after the two Republican lawmakers’ offices were raided by the FBI as part of an investigation into a powerful Alaska oilfield services company. After AP reported those donations during the presidential campaign, she said she would give a comparative sum to charity after the general election in 2010, a date set by state election laws.
PALIN: Rails against taxpayer-financed bailouts, which she attributes to Obama. She recounts telling daughter Bristol that to succeed in business, ”you’ll have to be brave enough to fail.”
THE FACTS: Palin is blurring the lines between Obama’s stimulus plan — a $787 billion package of tax cuts, state aid, social programs and government contracts — and the federal bailout that Republican presidential candidate John McCain voted for and President George W. Bush signed.
Palin’s views on bailouts appeared to evolve as McCain’s vice presidential running mate. In September 2008, she said ”taxpayers cannot be looked to as the bailout, as the solution, to the problems on Wall Street.” A week later, she said ”ultimately what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy.”
During the vice presidential debate in October, Palin praised McCain for being ”instrumental in bringing folks together” to pass the $700 billion bailout. After that, she said ”it is a time of crisis and government did have to step in.”
——
PALIN: Says Ronald Reagan faced an even worse recession than the one that appears to be ending now, and ‘’showed us how to get out of one. If you want real job growth, cut capital gains taxes and slay the death tax once and for all.”
THE FACTS: The estate tax, which some call the death tax, was not repealed under Reagan and capital gains taxes are lower now than when Reagan was president.
Economists overwhelmingly say the current recession is far worse. The recession Reagan faced lasted for 16 months; this one is in its 23rd month. The recession of the early 1980s did not have a financial meltdown. Unemployment peaked at 10.8 percent, worse than the October 2009 high of 10.2 percent, but the jobless rate is still expected to climb.
——
PALIN: She says her team overseeing the development of a natural gas pipeline set up an open, competitive bidding process that allowed any company to compete for the right to build a 1,715-mile pipeline to bring natural gas from Alaska to the Lower 48.
THE FACTS: Palin characterized the pipeline deal the same way before an AP investigation found her team crafted terms that favored only a few independent pipeline companies and ultimately benefited a company with ties to her administration, TransCanada Corp. Despite promises and legal guidance not to talk directly with potential bidders during the process, Palin had meetings or phone calls with nearly every major candidate, including TransCanada.
PALIN: Criticizes an aide to her predecessor, Gov. Frank Murkowski, for a conflict of interest because the aide represented the state in negotiations over a gas pipeline and then left to work as a handsomely paid lobbyist for ExxonMobil. Palin asserts her administration ended all such arrangements, shoving a wedge in the revolving door between special interests and the state capital.
Blog
The Caucus
The latest on President Obama, his administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.
More Politics News
THE FACTS: Palin ignores her own ”revolving door” issue in office; the leader of her own pipeline team was a former lobbyist for a subsidiary of TransCanada, the company that ended up winning the rights to build the pipeline.
——
PALIN: Writes about a city councilman in Wasilla, Alaska, who owned a garbage truck company and tried to push through an ordinance requiring residents of new subdivisions to pay for trash removal instead of taking it to the dump for free — this to illustrate conflicts of interest she stood against as a public servant.
THE FACTS: As Wasilla mayor, Palin pressed for a special zoning exception so she could sell her family’s $327,000 house, then did not keep a promise to remove a potential fire hazard on the property.
She asked the city council to loosen rules for snow machine races when she and her husband owned a snow machine store, and cast a tie-breaking vote to exempt taxes on aircraft when her father-in-law owned one. But she stepped away from the table in 1997 when the council considered a grant for the Iron Dog snow machine race in which her husband competes.
——
PALIN: Says Obama has admitted that the climate change policy he seeks will cause people’s electricity bills to ‘’skyrocket.”
THE FACTS: She correctly quotes a comment attributed to Obama in January 2008, when he told San Francisco Chronicle editors that under his cap-and-trade climate proposal, ”electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket” as utilities are forced to retrofit coal burning power plants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
Obama has argued since then that climate legislation can blunt the cost to consumers. Democratic legislation now before Congress calls for a variety of measures aimed at mitigating consumer costs. Several studies predict average household costs probably would be $100 to $145 a year.
——
PALIN: Welcomes last year’s Supreme Court decision deciding punitive damages for victims of the nation’s largest oil spill tragedy, the Exxon Valdez disaster, stating it had taken 20 years to achieve victory. As governor, she says, she’d had the state argue in favor of the victims, and she says the court’s ruling went ”in favor of the people.” Finally, she writes, Alaskans could recover some of their losses.
THE FACTS: That response is at odds with her reaction at the time to the ruling, which resolved the long-running case by reducing punitive damages for victims to $500 million from $2.5 billion. Environmentalists and plaintiffs’ lawyers decried the ruling as a slap at the victims and Palin herself said she was ”extremely disappointed.” She said the justices had gutted a jury decision favoring higher damage awards, the Anchorage Daily News reported. ”It’s tragic that so many Alaska fishermen and their families have had their lives put on hold waiting for this decision,” she said, noting many had died ”while waiting for justice.”
——
PALIN: Describing her resistance to federal stimulus money, Palin describes Alaska as a practical, libertarian haven of independent Americans who don’t want ”help” from government busybodies.
THE FACTS: Alaska is also one of the states most dependent on federal subsidies, receiving much more assistance from Washington than it pays in federal taxes. A study for the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found that in 2005, the state received $1.84 for every dollar it sent to Washington.
——
PALIN: Says she tried to talk about national security and energy independence in her interview with Vogue magazine but the interviewer wanted her to pivot from hydropower to high fashion.
THE FACTS are somewhat in dispute. Vogue contributing editor Rebecca Johnson said Palin did not go on about hydropower. ”She just kept talking about drilling for oil.”
——
PALIN: ”Was it ambition? I didn’t think so. Ambition drives; purpose beckons.” Throughout the book, Palin cites altruistic reasons for running for office, and for leaving early as Alaska governor.
THE FACTS: Few politicians own up to wanting high office for the power and prestige of it, and in this respect, Palin fits the conventional mold. But ”Going Rogue” has all the characteristics of a pre-campaign manifesto, the requisite autobiography of the future candidate.
——
2 BoolaBoola // Nov 14, 2009 at 11:35 am
One key difference: Bill Clinton may have been a poor candidate at first, but he never quit his job as governor. Palin has a lot more to make up for than just stupidity and general kookiness, if she wants to be a serious political candidate.
Also, she still has not released her medical history. This can only be because there is something critically damaging in it–remember that weird letter her doc published, whose almost-explicit subtext was, “She’s ok now, in spite of whatever may be in her history”? My bet: an involuntary hospitalization for suicidal behavior/danger-to-self.
I saw people just like her in the psych wards when I was in med school–unable to hold a thought long enough to finish a sentence, uncomfortable meeting your eye, hyper-assertive, vapid and twitchy. It’s because they are so uncomfortable with themselves that they can’t stand to pause and focus.
3 Chekote // Nov 14, 2009 at 11:38 am
She just wants to cash in on her fame. She is not serious about running again but she needs to keep up that illusion long enough for her fans to buy up her book.
4 BoolaBoola // Nov 14, 2009 at 11:40 am
PS: Nice dig at Al Gore, but we don’t yet know whether or not he has “exaggerated” the danger to the environment. As I recall, the melting of the polar ice caps was not indubitably manifest until after the Y2K campaign. (Tick, tick, drip, drip…)
5 sdspringy // Nov 14, 2009 at 12:36 pm
I am not stating that TeaBag is lame, just he/she source, AP is.
AP assigned 11 reporters to hammer this book from a no name, no chance, conservative woman. WHY?
PowerLineBlog.com does a nice job looking into a few of these “Fact checks”.
Again is it fear or fear or crappy pants that results in Eleven (11) reporters being assigned to refute every statement made by Palin.
Did Obama, who is actually President, a fact that may have escaped the AP, recieve the same “Fact Check” of his book. Doubtful.
Crazy, and of course Frum and his little drum is out in front too. Great job Dave. And also wonderful advice to emulate Clinton. One of the most disgraced public servants to date. Why not provide same sage wisdom to, say, some Democrats. Don’t want to hurt their chances?
6 Churl // Nov 14, 2009 at 12:48 pm
teabag, here is a hilarious sendup of the findings of those 11 (eleven!) AP fact checkers of whom you speak
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTE2YmEyMDZkM2Y3NjAzYWZjOTRmYjExZDg4MGE0NzE=
“… the Associated Press assigned 11 writers to “fact-check” Sarah Palin’s new book, and in return the 11 fact-checkers triumphantly unearthed six errors. That’s 1.8333333 writers for each error. What earth-shattering misstatements did they uncover for this impressive investment? Stand well back:”
7 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:04 pm
“… the Associated Press assigned 11 writers to “fact-check” Sarah Palin’s new book, and in return the 11 fact-checkers triumphantly unearthed six errors. That’s 1.8333333 writers for each error. What earth-shattering misstatements did they uncover for this impressive investment? Stand well back:”
They list twelve porkie pies (lies) in the book as above so it was one each. I am guessing they split the book into sections and gave each guy a section to fact check. That way they could do it quickly and get in first with the shake down of this momentous work of fiction.
8 dragonlady // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Frum, the Attorney General announced he’s trying KSM and other 9-11 co-conspirators in civilian courts, and your top headline today is about Palin? Let your obessession with this woman go. There are so many problems this country is facing and all you can do is rant about Palin. GET.OVER.IT–YOU’RE COMPLETELY MISSING THE BOAT!
Either you have a secret crush on her, or you derive some sort of sick pleasure of constantly putting down this woman and her supporters in order to elevate yourself. You have a real bad case of Palin derangement syndrome.
9 Churl // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:26 pm
teabag, 11 highly skilled, objective, real journalists carefully combed the book, fact checked, source verified and performed all the other sherlockery that media operatives are supposed to do and THOSE things are all they found?
Thin stuff, teabag old chap, thin stuff.
10 Churl // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:32 pm
dragon lady, you’re wasting your time expecting Frum to tackle important matters, but give him a break: he needs a job.
“Speechwriter for George W. Bush” is the darkest most ineradicable resume stain you can imagine at this time and it sits prominently on his CV. It is very likely that Mrs. Frum needs an occasional new frock or a replacement for a worn out skillet and, if there are little Frumlets, they want bread crusts and an occasional new pair of shoes. I applaud his efforts to earn a living, and only disagree with his messing with conservatism as a means to do it.
That said, criticizing Sarah Palin for self-promotion just broke the needle on my irony meter.
11 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:35 pm
“teabag, 11 highly skilled, objective, real journalists carefully combed the book, fact checked, source verified and performed all the other sherlockery that media operatives are supposed to do and THOSE things are all they found?
Thin stuff, teabag old chap, thin stuff.”
I agree nothing earth shattering, just more of the same lies, once a liar always a liar I guess.
It will serve it’s purpose though. To make Palin rich at the expense of her worshipers.
12 Oldskool // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Whatever she decides to do, I hopes she’s in the 2012 campaign as a candidate or a king maker. Once she’s bounced out of the primaries it would be a hoot to see who panders for her endorsement and who doesn’t, while she bides her time the way John Edwards teased everyone for months. He’s probably a better comparison to Palin than Clinton or Gore, full of shine and not much else.
13 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:44 pm
“Frum, the Attorney General announced he’s trying KSM and other 9-11 co-conspirators in civilian courts, and your top headline today is about Palin”
Don’t worry dragon. I am sure they will eventually drag some chickenhawk has been here to write the usual tripe about the CIA sources telling FF how terrible this is and how it will end civilization as we know it.
Or one of the usual suspects peeing themselves at the thought of a few terrorists being tried and convicted on US soil when 160 have been successfully tried and convicted in civil courts and the word did not come to an end.
Why are conservatives so scared all the time?
14 dragonlady // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Churl,
LMAO!
15 dragonlady // Nov 14, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Oh, it didn’t appear, but I was laughing at your last line:
That said, criticizing Sarah Palin for self-promotion just broke the needle on my irony meter
16 sdspringy // Nov 14, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Well hopefully TeaBag those terrorists were tried in criminal court and not civil court. I am sure you are aware of the difference.
And the 160 number will require some documentation, not to cast dispersions on your “Fact Checking”. But since you have used AP, there exists some doubt.
And the issue of whether we are returning to the old practice of charging terrorist with crimes or treating them as combantants is going to determine the safety of this country.
17 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Sorry I meant criminal court.
18 dragonlady // Nov 14, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Teabag, when folks proudly sexualize political opponents with their handles, that tells me all I need to know about them. Really–can’t you get a bit more original than taking cues from your favorite lefty anchors?
19 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Dragon Lady. I drink a great deal of tea, hence my handle. What makes you a dragon?
20 sdspringy // Nov 14, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Over at NRO, Mark Steyn actually facted checked the “AP Fact Checkers”. Funny
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTE2YmEyMDZkM2Y3NjAzYWZjOTRmYjExZDg4MGE0NzE=
21 SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 14, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Chekote wrote: “She just wants to cash in on her fame. She is not serious about running again but she needs to keep up that illusion long enough for her fans to buy up her book.”
Partially true. I don’t think she’s motivated entirely by money. She, like Gingrich, also enjoys the influence that comes with a high profile. Neither of them will ever run for president because they know they couldn’t even get the GOP nomination and would then lose all of their influence.
22 sdspringy // Nov 14, 2009 at 3:34 pm
I will apologize in advance for leading this thread astray. But again the Apologist in Chief, Obama, commits yet another error.
Did you guys catch the bow to the emperor?
Another bow, can you believe it?
During the past Democrat President this was considered a big NO NO. Yet the media has bent over at the waist to please Obama so be prepared for no condemnation here either.
What a patsy this Obama is revealing himself to be.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/04/03/video-no-obama-wasnt-cleaning-the-floor-when-greeting-abdullah/
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/14/obamateurism-of-the-day-156/
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/14/flashback-nyt-blasts-clinton-for-almost-bowing-to-akihito/
23 Rocketship7 // Nov 14, 2009 at 5:43 pm
David: I read the column this morning in the National Post.
I think she is just having fun and capitalizing on her fame, and I do not blame her.
I think she has no plans to run for President. BUT. She keeps every door open.
If the elitist left, and dare I say, the elitist Republican (including you) keep degrading her… regular working class folk (that includes a lot of Democrat’s) will gravitate to her, just like Richard Nixon in the late 60’s.That coupled with a potential Obama disaster could make her President, and I do not think she will be asking you to write her speeches.
24 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 5:57 pm
This is so spot on and funny as He**
Joe Mathews
Senior Fellow, New America Foundation :
Comebacks are not something they and the media and the powers in Washington DC like. And comebacks are something they’re going to outlaw in the Department of Law there in the White House, with all the lawyers and the death panels. But the death panel lawyers aren’t the real America. In those pockets, those wonderful pockets, the real hard working patriotic and um, pro-America areas of this great nation where the people believe in God and don’t believe in judges or logic or speaking coherently, let me tell you that the God-fearing people there really truly love comebacks. Because we know that Putin could be coming right across the border into our hair space right now, and where is he going to go? Alaska. And we need to be coming back to fight him. And all the unborn children, and the children with Down’s Syndrome, and the teenage moms preaching abstinence while their ex-boyfriends have a photo spread in Vanity Fair, they need to be coming back. And in our neighboring country of Afghanistan, they need to be coming back even though Obama is going to abandon them and send the hard-working troops that protect us so close and to some place far away, like Fort Bragg. But comebacks aren’t for ordinary politicians or Washington DC. Comebacks are for mavericks.
25 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 6:00 pm
“Did you guys catch the bow to the emperor?”
Hi You Holiness/Shiekness. My name is George Bush. May I kiss you full on the lips twice. Can I hold your hand like a schoolgirl with a crush on her teacher as we skip through the garden. Can I pretty please your Highness/Shiekness
26 Churl // Nov 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm
teabag, old bean, Bush is gone. His canoodling with Saud was certainly shabby, but Obama was whooped as something better. Every time Obama pulls some ridiculous gaffe, somebody pops up and says that Bush did something stupid as well. They never defend or explain Obama’s international ineptitude, they just keep reminding us that Obama is apparently no better than Bush.
27 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Churl,
Just being “Fair and Balanced” (TM)
28 Arch // Nov 14, 2009 at 7:31 pm
I don’t care if Obama bows or curtseys. Let’s stay on topic.
Like her or not Sarah Palin is a major force on our political scene and she represents the schism in the GOP. It will be interesting to see if she does campaign. I suspect she will start, find it a little too hard and remove herself from the process “for the good of the party”. She’s also become very selective about her appearances since Couric, but she can’t seriously campaign and keep the press at such a distance as she has at the same time. I guess we’ll see how she does on Oprah next.
29 Socrates // Nov 14, 2009 at 7:35 pm
I agree with Chekote, palin is trying to cash in her fame. and who can blame her? afterall, this is America.
While the comparison between clinton and palin was meant to show how one could make a come back in politics, this is a bad comparison. Clinton’s mistake was his long-winded speech, while palin’s “mistake” was losing the election. these are not comparable. pushing it a little further, palin is no where near clinton’s political and intellectual skills.
more and more, palin is being mentioned with the likes of beck, limbaugh, hannity, etc. while i don’t deny that she has good political instinct, her problem has to do with her lack of substance. there is not much underneath the shiny wrapper. even former vp dan quayle was not as bad as this woman.
30 MI-GOPer // Nov 14, 2009 at 7:37 pm
DragonLady asks: “Teabag, when folks proudly sexualize political opponents with their handles, that tells me all I need to know about them. Really–can’t you get a bit more original than taking cues from your favorite lefty anchors?”
Teabag is a troll, DragonLady. He proves it nearly every comment, multiple times in a thread and when he loses the debate –per usual– he launches into invectives and half-truths that would make Obama smile with pride.
People who read here regularly know teabag to be a troll –and a bore. He’s here to incite, inflame, irritate and annoy –and just like many trolls on this site, he revels in the comforting thought that he may have made some conservative, somewhere, some time a bit angry.
It’s a pathetic lot for teabag the troll. He doesn’t deserve your anger, he deserves your pity.
31 MI-GOPer // Nov 14, 2009 at 7:42 pm
sdspringy @ 20 confirms what we all knew: “Over at NRO, Mark Steyn actually facted checked the “AP Fact Checkers”. Funny”
Notice how quiet the usual collection of trolls become when truth, once again, enters the room?
I wonder if the trolls are here because they couldn’t keep up in the sleaze-postings with their fellow far Left peers over at the DailyKos or BlogAmerica?
32 anniemargret // Nov 14, 2009 at 7:48 pm
rocketship7: “If the elitist left, and dare I say, the elitist Republican (including you) keep degrading her… regular working class folk (that includes a lot of Democrat’s) will gravitate to her, just like Richard Nixon in the late 60’s.”
So people in this country who sincerely believe she is not presidential material, are all ‘elitists?’ “Regular working class folk” – just what is this please? Three quarters of American are ‘regular working class folks.” Do you mean college graduate, or post college grads? So if I have a masters degree, that automatically makes me an elitist? Or… if you don’t originate from the Deep South or from small town USA you are an elitist? My husband comes from a small town in upper New York state… is he an elitist? Am I because I’m from a blue collar working Mom and Dad from Manhattan?
Just what in God’s name does this nonsense mean? If they want to continue the culture wars going, created and birthed from Karl Rove under GWB, by all means go ahead. The last election was a referendum on the idiocy of it.
She is not president material. She fawns before every camera and engages the ‘liberal media’ every chance she gets, while disparaging them. She has avoided any semblance of real tough questioning on vital issues facing this country, and all I hear from her supporters is that she is a ‘good Mom,’ her family loves her, and God loves her more than all of us ‘elitists’ outside of “God’s Country.”
Evidently I didn’t learn in Catholic school that God was a not only a Republican, but a small town only God too.
What are her qualifications for the Presidency? Leave out her beauty/family/mentally challenged son/kids/God. Stick to the issues…what are her views other than the same old tired sound bites? Her ‘death panel’ remarks were repugnant and maliciously a lie. And her speeches are word salads, full of trite phraseology and platitudes.
What are her views on Afghanistan and Iraq? Is she still yelling for the ‘drill baby drill’ mantra, and if so, why? What are her views on climate change, the failing dollar, China’s rise, loose nukes, or do her followers think both Medicare and Medicaid should be shelved because they are ’socialist’?
In short…either she is a serious person, or she is not. And everything I read and hear and listen tells me she is not.
33 anniemargret // Nov 14, 2009 at 7:53 pm
….oh, one more thing. A very important one. She cut and ran from her governorship. Not because she was being hounded, but because she saw an opening to make money….lots of it.
That leaves me feeling with a deep lack of respect for her capabilities in any way as a leader. Leaders don’t quit. Ever.
34 dragonlady // Nov 14, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Thanks Mi-GOPer. I figured as much–just wanted to acknowledge to him that I know what he’s up to.
35 sinz54 // Nov 14, 2009 at 9:37 pm
dragonlady:
Yes, I’m surprised Frum has had nothing to say about it.
Too bad.
As someone who was born and raised in New York City, I have a great deal I would like to say about it.
36 sinz54 // Nov 14, 2009 at 9:41 pm
MI-GOPer:
One of the nice features of the old Usenet was killfiles: If there was a troll who was plaguing the newsgroup, you entered his name in your killfile, and from then on your newsreader would ignore all his posts.
I wish blogs had that feature. Especially this one. It might also minimize the need to ban posters outright (what some might view as honest dissent, others might view as trolling).
37 teabag // Nov 14, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Free speech I understand is a right. And as I also understand it something that righties cherish. However it only applies to them of course. All others shut up!
38 getsmart // Nov 14, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Why be David Frum when you can be anybody else?
The one thing you cannot deny about Sarah Palin is that she doesn’t try to be someone else.
She is her own woman–strong, talented, and determined.
Initially, the Frums of this world were soooo afraid of Palin becoming the first female president,
they set out to nail her to a cross.
They now realize that Palin has resurrected herself and they are petrified all over again.
I have news for the left, Jesus isn’t dead and neither is Sarah Palin–
long live President Sarah Palin.
39 getsmart // Nov 14, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Why be David Frum when you can be anybody else? Surely, he’s the last person even David Frum
(the ugly, smarmy, and always wrong David Scum) would want to be.
One thing’s for certain, Sarah Palin is always herself–strong, fascinating, and determined.
Last year, the David Scums of this world were sooo scared that Palin would become the first
female president (instead of the goddess hilary)–they set out to crucify her.
They never counted on Palin to resurrect herself–and now the Scums are, once again,
petrified that the former Governor will become President.
I say, long live President Sarah Palin. The Scums of the world need to be punished.
40 trajan // Nov 14, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Frum, you could have written about a lot of things today but you chose Palin. Hey, she’s a private citizen now so what’s bugging you? Maybe I’m mistaken but weren’t you one of the pundits who pronounced her dead when she resigned as governor if not before? You got your wish. Might you not be just a little bit obsessed?
As for her mental acuity, it can’t be any worse than the idiot Obama’s so what’s the big deal?
So 63 percent of Americans would never vote for her for president. First the media beats the crap out of her, a jumble of mixed lies and truth, the emphasis being on the former, and then amazingly 63 percent of Americans would never vote for her as president. Duh, what a surprise.
41 Chekote // Nov 14, 2009 at 11:56 pm
“Are you going to let those idiots run you off?” Track Palin asked, according to the book. “You can’t tap out!” But the book suggests Sarah Palin resisted the advice of her son, who was serving in Iraq, in an attempt to shield her family from the media.
So Palin decides that writing an autobiography and doing lots interviews to promote it is the best way to protect her family from media scrutiny. The woman is a TOTAL clown.
42 Skeptic // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:12 am
My guess is that David Frum keeps writing about Palin because he loves the Republican party and the conservative cause, he would like to win an election, and he just can’t believe this great country (and cause) might be handed over to a mediocrity like Palin — or influenced by her.
And please…this resentment about so-called “elites.” What a smear. Just because you’re bright or live in a city doesn’t make you part of some sort of evil “elite.” Conservatives should look at the qualities of an individual as an individual, whatever his or her particular origin.
And by the way, do these critics of elites also attack the Founding Fathers as an elite? Because, with very few exceptions, that’s what they were.
Also, why in this country, can we not respect an opponent? Obama is wrong on most issues, in my view, but he has an extraordinary story — a classic American story, rising from very difficult circumstances– and he is certainly not an “idiot,” as Trajan, displaying the typical generosity of the ideologue, describes him. It should be a point of pride that, in this country, we can elect such a man President? Why can’t we disagree with him, but accord him the respect due a President?
43 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:23 am
chekote: “So Palin decides that writing an autobiography and doing lots interviews to promote it is the best way to protect her family from media scrutiny. The woman is a TOTAL clown.”
And she is not depicting behavior typical of being a ‘great mother.’ Good mothers sacrifice their own needs for the needs of their children.
44 jakester // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:49 am
Why would any one even bother to fact check such a superficial, dumbed down ghost written book is beyond me? Palin supporters have no substance so they would enjoy any drivel written by her. Glad to see that media bashing hasn’t gone out of style, after all it’s Evil Couric fault for stumping goodly little Palin with such trick questions.
45 jakester // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:53 am
Trajan, if you honestly think that Obama is not as smart as Palin then you must be as stupid as she is. Grow up, all I hear is the same old blame the media nonsense. It’s Palin who makes Palin look bad.
When I hear a Palindrone whine about “elitists”, all I hear is a dumbed down version of reverse snobbery where the Palindrone really means, “not someone stupid, small minded and smug like I am”
46 jakester // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:59 am
MI Goper
so a partisan hack like Steyn, a clever one at that who fills in for Rush, snipes at some AP fact checkers and that makes her crappy book something to be treasured? Get a life, that is just more “beat on the messenger when you don’t like the message” trash.
47 Chekote // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:51 am
Skeptic // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:12 am
Great post! I am so sick and tired of the “people vs. elites”. How is that different from the class warfare by the Democrats? Also, I too thought that conservatives look at the individual and don’t engage in identity politics.
48 mymy // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:14 am
For a washed up ex Gov.Mrs Palin certainly can cause a stir in the media.Newsweek is declaring her bad for America.Mr.Frum can’t stop talking about her.Every TV station is trying to get an interview.If she were so useless wouldn’t they all ignore her?
49 Socrates // Nov 15, 2009 at 9:19 am
Mymy,
you touched on something there: why hasn’t the msm ignore Palin?
imho, the msm (or the corporate media) has become a tabloid media that focuses more and more on trashy news. this is a disturbing trend: instead of doing anything of substance, many in the media is picking on low lying fruits, “news” like palin’s book. in the mean time, they ignore many books that are much more substantial.
this is becoming a national tragedy: the dumbing down of america.
50 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 9:22 am
mymy: “Every TV station is trying to get an interview.If she were so useless wouldn’t they all ignore her?”
No. Media is in the business of making money . She is a celebrity and darling of the right wing of the GOP. She has put herself on talk shows and on the speaking trail and much ado about Oprah. We have 24 hour news now and they have to fill every moment of it.
Only the GOP can make a decision whether or not she is not a serious person, or should be ignored. My own prediction is that three years from now, she will have a talk show a la Rush Limbaugh to ‘fire up her troops’, rather than a serious candidate for office. She knows to do that would require her to actually take a tough no holes-barred interview and she won’t do it. One more nonsensical statement and she would be history. She is not a stupid woman by any stretch, although she is not presidential material. She knows she can make money and still be a star attraction for the right wing.
But I understand David Frum’s concern and why he writes for her. She is a polarizing figure – her main dish served up is continuing the culture wars, and he knows (rightly) it will ultimately hurt his party come 2012. He knows a fractured party is a weak party.
I don’t blame him one bit for writing about her.
51 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 9:40 am
mymy:
Because Sarah Palin is such a favorite of the GOP base, they can’t ignore her. She’s connected with them on an emotional, visceral level, just like Obama connected with Northern liberals on that same level.
52 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 9:41 am
anniemargaret:
Surprisingly, a recent Gallup poll of self-described Republicans showed that more of them would prefer Huckabee to run in 2012 than Palin.
53 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:19 am
A fractured party, left/right, moderate/Blue Dog, is the normal state of affairs. No doubt the Dems realize this as much or more than the Reps. Any Lib willing to high-five Emmanuel on his strategy to elect a bunch of conservative Dems to normally Rep districts?? After the headache of healthcare. Any Lib willing to point to the Blue Dog Dems and wanting more of their voting block added to the Dem majority??? Doubtful, just read the vitriol directed at the Blue Dogs by members of their own party. I would say is more severe than what conservatives are saying about RINOs.
And the qualifications Palin may or may not bring are always viewed through the lens of partisan politics. Her years as a mayor are equal to Obama’s as a community organizer. At the very least it is much more easily qualified as a political office.
Palin’s years of experience as governor equal Obama’s years as a Senator. And based on effectiveness and legislation passed exceed anything Obama did as Senator. As viewed through my political lens.
And according to Frum’s Clinton analogy her appearance on Oprah and book tours and various media presentation will provide the same springboard Clinton was offered. You know that Folksy, Home Boy, yuk,yuk good ole boy image that Clinton used to be elected to 2 terms. Whether Palin even runs in 2012 is open to debate and idle speculation but the fear she causes the Left and Northeast Reps is palpable.
54 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:01 am
sinz: ‘Surprisingly, a recent Gallup poll of self-described Republicans showed that more of them would prefer Huckabee to run in 2012 than Palin.”
I actually like the man. He is sincere and it shows. I may not always agree with his views politically, but I respect him a lot. I think he is underrated and underestimated. I would take him over Guiliani and Romney any day… well, if I were a Republican, that is. ;0)
55 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:02 am
sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:19 am
……Since this is another episode in the Republican civil war that is causing palpable hilarity amongst Democrats this comment just demonstrates how begrimed your political lense has become ………Palin makes all sorts of outrageous claims about the Republican operatives in the McCain campaign and of course they are going to respond as Wallace did a couple of days ago to Palin’s risible claim that she only did the Couric interview because Wallace told her that Couric suffered from “low self esteem.”…….This Oprahesque dialogue is going to go on for weeks during her book tour and since paper trails exist for much of this stuff they are going to be leaked (in fact several have already have been leaked) and will demonstrate that she is a pathological liar that exists in her own delusional environment…….this won’t matter to most of her admirers like sdspringy since he lives in the same place……but the rest of the country will be entertained and just roll it’s eyes and hold its nose as she performs a skunk-like role with the Republican brand……..as for Palin she’ll just go on shearing the sheep who while electorally a minority are quite sufficient in number to keep her in suites at the Four Seasons and designer duds.
56 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:16 am
springy: What you mistake as ‘fear’ about Palin is simply serious folks thinking serious about serious issues. When we think of her it is not in a serious vein, but it a statement of how far down the goalpost has gone when Sarah Palin is considered as presidential material.
However, some of your points are valid. True, Obama did not have a long extensive political career before he was a ‘community organizer’ which most people can respect, and a short stint as senator. All true.
But a politician can come from small towns or big cities, from a diverse background and slow rise to the top like Obama’s, or meteoric rise like Palin’s, but in the end it is what they *say* that means everything.
Palin’s views are far to the right of the majority of Americans are most issues. Her background as small town beauty queen to mayor to governor is nice in itself, but not enough to sway voters. That she is ‘one of us’ which I hear so often from her supporters is absolutely uncritical to be president.
Her interviews showed her to be unserious about the issues when asked in otherwise a non-scripted format. She stumbled appallingly when asked about the Bush Doctrine. It was not a ‘trick question.’ It was in the news that past year all day long, when pundits and journalists were asking the question whether or not pre-emptive war was sane foreign policy. She couldn’t answer it because she really hadn’t thought much of it. If Hillary had been asked that question, we would all know that she would know immediately.
There are other poor showings by Palin.. It has *everything* to do with her views which are far off mainstream America’s views, and her lack of substantive answers when asked serious questions about national and international issues. Her giving pep talks with adoring fans will never cut in in real life. No matter how much you despise Obama, he has shown repeatedly and often that he can extemporize immediately on all the important issues for which he was elected. He sounds intelligent and he certainly can answer questions without being stumped.
She speaks poorly, usually a mishmash of phrases, some disjointed and off point…. I can’t think of anything more damaging to a politician than being unable to articulate coherently.
In the end, it ’s all about perception and ability. That is something Palin’s supporters simply still do not understand. She still has not shown this and it is why the majority of Americans will never take her seriously.
57 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:24 am
I see Otto you completely sidesteps the Dem’s civil or dare I say, uncivil war with your own “Blue Dogs”.
And as is the case with any political book the he said/she said claims will fly fast and furious. And of course your knowledge of geography and my supposed location are as wildly off base as your analysis of Palin. And the term “pathological liar” could be used with any political figure, as a review of Obama will clearly show he has failed miserably to keep even the most basic of his political promises.
This of course matters little to Obama sycophants, such as Otto. While the rest of us can hardly contain the anticipation of the next Obama Bow to yet another Emperor/Sheik/Dictator. Otto as a Big Lib seems to think bending at waist is a normal personal presentation. And the “sheep analogy” is more aptly placed on the Dems and Obama has their policies continue to fleece every American at a spending pace that actually does make Bush appear conservative.
58 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:26 am
sinz: I agree to a point that Obama was elected viscerally and emotionally. After all, why not? We had just been through 8 years of snarling bullying tactics, without an intellectual moment in between, from Bush and Cheney. You bet Obama was a breath of fresh air. But it was also his ability to speak from the heart and from the mind with exquisite precision.
I would never have voted for him if he had shown a lack of substance or an inablilty to understand and speak intelligently on the issues. Never. He proved himself worth of election, both from a standpoint of ‘emotional and visceral’ voting, but also because he simply….. knew what he was talking about.
59 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:30 am
springy….”fleece every American at a spending pace…” Where are you being fleeced? And if you are so upset at spending, where were you and the others when Bush was putting two wars on a credit card and bailing out Wall St? Or is criticism reserved only for Democratic spending and not Republican?
60 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:34 am
sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:24 am
……….As ever trapped in delusion land where normal courtesies between heads of state become the subject of obsessional rantings…..what will be getting the most ink over the next few weeks…….the charges and counter charges between Palin and other Republicans or Democratic blue dog dissent over some minor parts of the healthcare bill that has already actually passed the house?…….No prizes for guessing the right answer…….well it’s all going to be very entertaining
61 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:37 am
Annie, you are correct in your analysis of Palin and her interview performances. The often cited Couric interview will haunt Palin until she appears again and pass muster in another interview.
I am no expert on Palin’s political views and in no hurry to compare hers to Huckabee 2012 is along way off.
I like to compare, Dem/Rep when criticisms are used. Palins ability to speak as compared to Biden, I see as a wash. Joe makes me smile. And as we have learned from Anita Dunn, the media message control exerted by the Obama campaign insulated Obama from any messy interviews. In the future Obama may face a more aggressive press and the reading ability he shows may not translate to actual speaking coherently either.
62 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:42 am
Annie, I believe my location equaled the majority of most Dems as far as Wars and Bailouts are concerned. Did not the majority of Dems vote for War, in both occasions? And did not the majority of Dems vote for TARP?
I will always continue to state that conservatives left Republicans because of the spending. Leading to one of the reasons, not all, for the losses in 06 & 08. Spending will be why the Democrats lose in 10.
63 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:49 am
Otto, as a Lib and thus used to exhibiting feeling of inadequacy mixed with guilt, a curtsy may seem appropriate.
However the elected leader of the most powerful nation on the planet exhibiting those same feelings invites contempt from other world leaders. Not something normally sought after during meeting with heads of state.
64 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:50 am
sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:42 am
“Annie, I believe my location equaled the majority of most Dems as far as Wars and Bailouts are concerned. Did not the majority of Dems vote for War, in both occasions? And did not the majority of Dems vote for TARP?”
…………A majority of house democrats voted AGAINST the Iraq war motion and only a narrow majority of senate democrats voted for it, something like 23 out of 43 as I recall……on TARP a clear majority of democrats voted for it……since following both these votes the Dems sizeably increaseed their majorities in 2006 and 2008 they seeem some what scanty evidence of a civil war which seems to exist largely in sdspringy’s imagination whereas the one in the GOP is very real.
65 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:53 am
springy: Unfair comparison to Joe Biden. Truly Democrats wince when he made some real boneheaded comments. But overall, Joe Biden has served with distinction for over 40 years in a variety of capacities in local and federal government. Sarah couldn’t even finish out her term as governor.
No contest.
I don’t think anyone “insulated” Obama from any ‘messy’ interviews. On the contrary, I think he was put under full glare the entire time during the campaign. At any rate, he is now POTUS, and it’s a moot point! Obviously, the majority thought he was electable.
66 trajan // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:54 am
To judge by the acts and deeds of this administration, “idiot” is far too kind a word for Obama. His perceived intelligence is in the eyes of his deluded and lovestruck supporters and acolytes. Yet another sign of the dumbing down of America. As the man said, there’s one born every minute. Obama is as phony in his way as Madoff was in investments.
67 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:57 am
sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:49 am
“Otto, as a Lib and thus used to exhibiting feeling of inadequacy mixed with guilt, a curtsy may seem appropriate.”
……Actually knowing how to conduct yourself in public is the mark of a self confident man…….I consider religion bunk but I observe the rituals when attending funerals, weddings and so on because to do otherwise would be disrespectful to others present who take religious observances seriously……it’s no surprise that such concepts of good manners are totally alien to someone like yourself although apparently you do have the means to enter the minds of heads of state……tell me do you usually put your feet on your bank managers desk when asking of a loan?…..probably.
68 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:59 am
trajan // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:54 am
“To judge by the acts and deeds of this administration, “idiot” is far too kind a word for Obama. His perceived intelligence is in the eyes of his deluded and lovestruck supporters and acolytes. Yet another sign of the dumbing down of America.”
……..Dumbing down indeed.
69 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I know Annie you love Joe, and have defended him in the past. I however do not see length of service as quality of service. Joe’s attempt at foreign policy, the Iraq 3 state solution, and constant partisan politics may still invoke admiration from you but I find him a fraud.
And the Full glare you state above was directly refuted by Dunn. The Press treated Obama with loving hands throughout the campaign. I really don’t think it would have mattered, a Dem would have been elected no matter what. Not even a Gary Hart moment would have prevented the obvious.
And I voted for two Democrats in 08 specifically because they voted against the TARP in 08. No doubt alot of conservatives did the same. The Democrat party will not get the same response in 10.
70 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:11 pm
springy: “The Democrat party will not get the same response in 10.”
We’ll see.
Not if Sarah and company continue to fracture Republicans and swing them to the right.
71 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Otto:
“……Actually knowing how to conduct yourself in public is the mark of a self confident man…….”
Well Otto this would appear to be your first criticism of Obama, because this is not considered proper conduct of the President of the United States. So Obama, according to your statement, is neither knowledgeable or confident.
72 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Also alittle something you Libs may not have seen on Slate or Media Matters:
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/obama-pissed-when-russian-officials-refuse-to-shake-his-hand
Otto, everyone has seen this video, even our enemies. I doubt any further curtsies by Obama will improve his standing. Especially in countries where it matters.
73 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:37 pm
sdspringy:
There are lots of people out there, like myself, who oppose Obama–but who don’t believe Sarah Palin is a serious alternative either.
I am no fan of Obama. I would prefer that he be a one-term president.
But Sarah Palin has no chance of defeating Obama, either in a one-on-one debate or in the 2012 elections.
Sarah Palin would go up against Obama the way McGovern went up against Nixon in 1972: An ideologue beloved only by the party’s base. And the outcome would be exactly the same: A wipeout.
Unless Obama screws up so severely that any Republican could beat him, Sarah Palin could not beat him.
74 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:44 pm
….and CNN just reported Guiliani stating on national airwaves that Sarah Palin was ‘good for the party.”
Yep. It will be interesting 3 years ahead, indeed.
75 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:45 pm
trajan:
I disagree with many of Obama’s policies. He’s clearly out to deal a death blow to conservatism in America. But I have a high regard for his intellect.
He can think on his feet. Given a question on almost any issue, he can at least analyze it logically. In his one-on-one debates with McCain, he was clearly better prepared and better able to take that knowledge and frame it into a coherent answer.
Obama has that ability. Sarah Palin has not demonstrated it. Over and over, her supporters insist that what’s really important is not intelligence but being of good heart. Being a good Christian is supposed to compensate for ignorance.
Sorry, I don’t agree with that.
It is possible to disagree with someone without regarding that person as an idiot just because they came to a different conclusion than you.
Obama is a worthy opponent.
I respect him even as I strongly oppose him.
76 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I really doubt the Palin/Obama election match is in the cards. But who knows. The reelection of Obama is certainly not in the bag either.
Also a review of the link I posted above is not valid. After review the video is a fraud and not to be believed.
77 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 1:29 pm
sinz: “Obama is a worthy opponent. I respect him even as I strongly oppose him.”
Kudos to you for this honesty.
I voted for him and I have yet come to any regret for doing so. I will not be happy however if he decides to put more troops into Afghanistan. From what I am reading and understanding, it would be trying to create a stability in an clearly unstable nation that is devoted to tribal warfare. Our troops have already been given now two wars that are demonstrably in ‘no win’ situations. I am against another Vietnam type scenario unfolding.
That said, I think all this Obama bashing is over the top. He is now faced with the most excruciating decision a president must face. As I believe he is a thoughtful serious person I am sure he is not ‘dithering’ (Cheney=endlesswar), but gathering all the facts at hand and listening to every conceivable argument pro and against before he lays down a decision.
For just a moment, I would like to think this country can take off the party hats and say a prayer that he makes the best decision he can in a rock and a hard place war thrust on him from Bush/Cheney. After all whatever ensues from his decision, it affects our country.
78 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Annie, Obama’s situation is not unique. Many US Presidents have faced the same problem, a war started by the previous administration.
Obama has consistently stated this war was the necessary war and more manpower needed to be applied. Which would seem he and other Dems are promoting the “more boots on the ground” strategy.
What his decision will indicate is whether via “more boots” he is advocating a war that can be won. Or via a “no more troops” the usual cut and run strategy used by Democrats in the past.
79 Rocketship7 // Nov 15, 2009 at 2:07 pm
I follow follow this blog because of Frum. I respect his opinion, and have read his work longer then anyone here, evidence that Frum can confirm. How about his report for NR on the Winnipeg PC Convention in 1983. A convention that laid the groundwork for the election of PM Brian Mulroney.
The obsession by the likes of anniemargret and the Huffington Post prove how Palin have a hold on them. Everytime Huffington posts a Palin article it has has the most comments.
I sense fear.
80 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 2:57 pm
SD Springy
“Also a review of the link I posted above is not valid. After review the video is a fraud and not to be believed.”
So You posted a link to RW trash without even checking it. Your irrational hatred of Obama is based on something. Fear, upbringing, cultural effects. What makes you so irresponsible?
81 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Teabag, what you see is your shadow, time to go back underground.
82 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:11 pm
SD Springy,
You are so very sad.
83 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Teabag, don’t go all misty eyed, just go away
84 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:20 pm
rocketship: of course Palin evokes the most commentary on liberal blogs. I would suspect that Obama evokes the same type of response on redstate. Doesn’t mean anything other than partisans dislike the most popular on either the left or the right.
The only thing I fear, and I can’t speak for anyone else in the Democratic party, is that I “fear” that we as a country are dumbing down the qualifications for the presidency. Without laboring the point which I already made above, Palin does not qualify for what we as a nation needs in a President. She has proved that already and unlikely to change in the coming months. That is the only thing I ‘fear’ –
Evidently some conservative voices also fear that…so you honestly cannot put this onus on just liberals (read David Brooks today on Palin). Why else would David Frum continue to bring up her name? They ‘fear’ the disintegration of the party into a cultural war, led by Palin, which not only will not do the least bit of good for the GOP come election, but also not for the country.
85 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:21 pm
…apologize for all the grammar and spelling errors above in my last post. Wish there were a ‘preview’ or ‘quick edit’ button…
86 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:27 pm
btw…there was no ‘cutting and running’ from Vietnam. Read your history books. There were 58,000 young soldiers that sacrificed their lives there. And Johnson and aides knew the war was unwinnable, yet continued to send troops there long after better heads than ours calculated the odds. That is not ‘cutting and running’ Sir, but pragmatism.
We are dealing with human lives and any time we ask these young men and women to give them up, and asking their families to watch them give them up, we had better be thinking clearly. We need a clear moral imperative to either support this latest decision for escalation in Afghanistan, or not.
87 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:31 pm
sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Teabag, don’t go all misty eyed, just go away
I would lay a good bet that (A) your username is Vance on that forum you fit Vance’s profile 100%. and (B) the other guys used to laugh at you in the shower. You are a typical Righty chickenhawk.
88 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 3:55 pm
I would like to know what are those qualifications. Two years as a Senator and your qualified. Being associated with a disgraced community organization under investigation for various crimes. Being able to read a telepromoter while standing in front of fake Greek pillars.
Clearly difficult if not impossible standard.
If those standards are first having serviced your country in some compacity, Obama unqualified.
Being able to produce undeniable proof of citizenship, Obama unqualified.
Being to approach foreign heads of state without scraping or bowing, Obama unqualifed.
89 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:00 pm
MY MY Teabag, such slander, such anger. Just because I called you on your mistake in post #13 just means you admit the error without stamping you feet.
Also you fail to mention said forum, and “B” are you being sexist assuming my gender/sexual orientation.
90 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Something, I might add, the left appears to do quite often and quite well. Which is to use insult laced homosexual slang, or derogatory references to describe conservatives. Or anyone expressing a political opinion which is diferent than their own.
91 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:15 pm
So sdspringy, you are a BIRTHER HA to add to your Vance persona. It gets better and better. Keep it up. You are way beyond normal.
92 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:19 pm
anniemargaret:
“Now” he’s faced with it???
In a speech to military veterans on March 27, 2009 (less than 8 months ago), Obama said this:
What happened to Obama’s “comprehensive, new strategy”? What happened to his “careful policy review” that he ordered as soon as he took office? What happened to his determination to prevent al-Qaeda from ever returning to Afghanistan? What happened to all his brave words?
Obama already drew firm lines in the sand last March. Now that he’s faced with a revolt by the left-wing of his own party, he’s scuttling away from the promises he made and the supposed conclusions he had drawn less than 8 months ago.
That’s what happens when the foreign and military policies of the United States Government are allowed to be influenced by such as “Teabag.” You get the humbling of the United States before a pack of Islamist savages.
93 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:22 pm
My how narrow your focus, Teabag, its as though you have some obstruction blocking your view of the world.
Be that as it may, three possible qualifications were listed, you choose to comment on only one.
Perhaps if I added acouple more.
Being able to run your own buisness, Obama unqualified.
Having been provide federal funding in all facets of you life, makes unqualified.
Everyone in your inner circle being associated with failed public policy, makes you unqualified.
94 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:26 pm
sdspringy:
That is out of line.
Obama’s legitimacy to be President is not an issue. Even RedState.com has dropped that subject and won’t entertain any more attempts to raise it. Neither should New Majority.
We are making a serious mistake if we attack Obama as a person or as an American. Polls show that the public is far more concerned with Obama’s policies than his character or his legitimacy. You may not be able to understand it, but Obama comes off as a pretty likable and decent fellow. Wrong on the issues, but decent and likable. You can be wrong on issues and still be a nice fellow.
So let’s drop that particular subject. If it’s not suitable even for RedState.com, it’s definitely not suitable for New Majority.
95 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Don’t worry Sdspringy we had another paranoid BIRTHER here (Franco) and he saw the folly of his view eventually and recanted. There is hope for you yet. You are not michelle Bachman in drag are you?
96 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Sinz54:
“You can be wrong on issues and still be a nice fellow.”
You mean Joe Biden don’t cha.
I don’t read RedState but have heard Lou Dobbs, CNN, discuss this topic. Is Lou bad? It was actually a baited trap for various MediaMatters type trolls and other low brow Lib bloggers. Don’t take the bait Sinz54.
I’m hunting here, in my latest Sarah hunting gear.
97 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Just cannot help yourself can ya Teabag. Always with the mean spirited, homosexual laced slurs and references. (Man, i hope i’m not a turn on for this nutjob).
Anyway back to politics if you please, right Sinz54.
98 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:38 pm
SDsprings you are so full of S*it it;s unbelievable. You get called out for being a BIRTHER which you undoubtedly are and then you BS your way when called. Coward.
Just answer a simple straight forward question COWARD. Was Obama born in the USA and is he therefore eligible by birth to be president YES or NO.
99 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:43 pm
LOL betcha want to know what I’m wearing right now don’t cha Teabag, with those big glistening muscles. Your so forceful.
I like Sarah.
100 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:45 pm
See Springy you are a COWARD pure and simple a big Chickenhawk as I said previously. You don’t have the courage of your convictions. Just say it was he born in the USA yes or no. It’s simple.
101 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Betcha Teabag has been clicking “refresh”, can you picture it. sitting in his underwear in his mom’s basement. And you call me big one more time, I mean really.
Okay though I think Obama is , wait phone call.
102 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 4:53 pm
COWARD
103 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 5:02 pm
I have had so much fun, Thanks Teabag.
Time for full disclosure, Teabag and I are actually twins. Teabag is the evil one, I am the nice good looking one.
We do this on other blogs, Teabag usually the straight guy, but not always, as you may have guessed from his handle, he is a member of the Log Cabin Republicans.
104 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 5:04 pm
COWARD X2
105 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I believe we have accomplished something here, driving this thread completely into the ground. David take the hint and find some other person to obsess over. Maybe in 2011 we can pickup this Sarah obsession again.
It is hard to overcome obsession as Teabag and Calvin Klein are well aware. But David your a big man, on the internet if not in stature, and you can find more substantive issues to post on.
106 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 6:13 pm
COWARD X3
107 Socrates // Nov 15, 2009 at 6:35 pm
anniemargret, sinz54, ottovbvs:
Thanks for your input which made this a good thread (almost until the end). i enjoy reading your well-reasoned comments (here and in other threads). keep up the conversation.
108 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 6:56 pm
sinz: I suspect reality set in with Obama and Afghanistan. I suspect many candidates say one thing during a candidacy and then situations,especially war, do not remain static. (read= GWB saying he would get Bin Laden but then later saying he ‘really didn’t care’ about him, after he went for the Iraq war).
Therefore, I believe that Obama is listening to a lot of voices, as he should.
I was a supporter of the war there from the get-go, but now one has to think about the ramifications of escalation. Do we have the resources to stay there for five years, more? Isn’t that a consideration now that we know how much the military has already been stretched? Tactically wouldn’t it be more prudent to save our resources and strengthen the military than watch it weaken over the years? The Soviets had more more military resources there and still weren’t able to secure it.
The citizens of that country are divided into tribal loyalites, as well as a multitude of different ethnic backgrounds, and they don’t have a centralized ambition to create a stable state. The terrain is extremely difficult for soldiers to fight.
Is the U.S. capable of committing a long term war there with these circumstances? AQ is now estimated to be less than 100. The Taliban is permanent. And AQ can re-establish themselves in a failed state as well in a stable one. We were attacked on 9/11 by by and large mostly Saudi terrorists armed with boxcutters who got their training in the U.S. and in Europe. AQ can assemble themselves anywhere and indeed experts say their cells are scattered.
So are we staying to avoid ‘looking weak?” Because if that’s game plan, it will never work. Eventually our military and financial resources will dry up, exacerbate even more of the problems the military is facing now… we cannot afford a weakened and exhausted military. And if that were to happen, we will be facing an even more tenuous hold against terrorism. In fact, wasn’t that exactly why Johnson didn’t remove the troops earlier in Vietnam?
So what exactly is our goal there? What are we trying to achieve?
109 jakester // Nov 15, 2009 at 6:59 pm
The best analogy to Palin is Sharpton. Both are basically foolish, mendacious people who have a core of loyalist but inspire little but contempt among the rest of us. If you hate Sharpton you are a racist or a reactionary; if you hate Palin you hate Christians, hunters, real Americans, yadda yadda. Palin people seem to be living with this childish mindset where annoying people somehow validates their idol, as if that is some mark of taste and intelligence that a liberal was annoyed or repulsed, not to mention moderates and some cons.
Though Sharpton is smarter, god forbid if there ever was an election between these two miscreants, I’d vote for her.
110 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:04 pm
I apologize for the way this thread went. However when someone reveals themselves as a birther and states that the President is illegitimate because he was not born in the USA I am unable to let that pass.
The rest of you apart from Sinz are apparently happy that this lunacy is stated here as fact. I am not.
111 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:05 pm
sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 5:14 pm
“I believe we have accomplished something here, driving this thread completely into the ground. ”
……..Actually all you achieved was that the rest of us pressed the mute button………however interesting that you confirm your essential nihilism…….that’s basically where today’s Republicanism lives……so keep up the good work…..I’m sure your particualar brand of rationality will win millions of converts…..hahaha
112 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Jakester
I agree with you both are fools, the rub is though that only about 3% of Liberals would suggest Sharpton was a viable candidate for anything while 25% of Conservatives seem to feel that Palin is suited for high office.
That’s where the difference lies.
113 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:11 pm
108 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:04 pm
“The rest of you apart from Sinz are apparently happy that this lunacy is stated here as fact. I am not.”
……..Surely it must be clear sdspringy is a few chairs short of a picnic……..unless one enjoys arguing with the sort of guys one normally sees pushing supermarket carts down the street it’s a waste of time…..all one can do is state the facts and let twits like this rant away………if you are a strong Obama supporter you should be delighted loons like this are basically the core of the opposition.
114 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:17 pm
“all one can do is state the facts and let twits like this rant away………if you are a strong Obama supporter you should be delighted loons like this are basically the core of the opposition.”
You are right Otto, however remember the Karl Rove tactic. ……………..
A Lie repeated often enough become the truth.
So do we allow lies to stand or do we oppose them, even against the lunatic fringe?
115 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:19 pm
teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:08 pm
……..Just lie back and enjoy the show……we’re going to have a couple of weeks of media circus while Palin does her book tour and all her silly and largely invented assertions are torn to pieces by the McCain campain staffers and then replayed on tv……meanwhile sdspringy and all the other true believers try to convince the world that she’s a serious candidate……I’m looking forward to it…..it’s a hoot
116 ottovbvs // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:26 pm
teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:17 pm
“You are right Otto, however remember the Karl Rove tactic. ……………..
A Lie repeated often enough become the truth.”
……….But is it a tactic that works?……..Rove is still claiming invading Iraq was a great idea and we emerged victorious……..outside the base no one takes any of this seriously and in fact the more he says it the more most of the country thinks Republicans are nuts…….ridicule is the only suitable response to the likes of sdspringy…….it’s because I really do believe that the core of the Republican party thinks as he does that I think they have a generation in the wilderness stretching in front of them…….you should celebrate that surely.
117 teabag // Nov 15, 2009 at 7:45 pm
I’m not sure Otto.
On the surface people like Palin,Bachman, Rove,Gulianni, and the Fox nutters like Beck,Hannity,Orielly plus the others like Limbaugh, Malkin, Coulter et al are just a whole load of crazy. They try to outdo each other daily in putting out the most outrageous nonsense. Add in the Republicans in congress like Vitter the hookers friend, Sessions, Joe Wilson Etc and you have a whole shedload of lies on a daily basis.
They add up and are amplified by true believers like springy. I am hoping the general public are seeing through all this. The fact that Obama is pretty much at the approval levels equal to the election results gives me cause for optimism.
118 sinz54 // Nov 15, 2009 at 8:24 pm
sdspringy:
Dobbs shouldn’t be discussing this either. He certainly should know better.
I repeat that insinuations that Obama’s presidency is illegitimate are out of line.
They lower us to the same level as the Truthers who claimed Bush dynamited the Twin Towers, and to the lefty loons who howled that “Bush stole the 2000 election!” We didn’t like THOSE insinuations, did we? Let’s not stoop to that level.
We’ll fix Obama’s wagon, sooner rather than later. But not by trying to force a Constitutional crisis. Leave those gutter tactics to the Left.
119 dragonlady // Nov 15, 2009 at 9:52 pm
“And she is not depicting behavior typical of being a ‘great mother.’ Good mothers sacrifice their own needs for the needs of their children.
Wow, I thought feminists were all gung ho on working mothers. Except in Palin’s case, right? That’s because she betrayed the cause by being pro-life. Palin can’t win as a stay at home mom now even though she can spend more time with her kids. And making loads of $ can be quite helpful for providing for your kids. Rewriting her personal narrative than what the press pushed out about her to be more positive would also seem to indirectly benefit her kids.
Would you rather she do it Levi Johnston style and pose for Playgirl? Haven’t read her book yet, but I heard she doesn’t say a word about him. Seems to me that she’s thinking of her grandchild.
120 dragonlady // Nov 15, 2009 at 9:55 pm
I agree conservatives need to drop the birther story. We come off like 9-11 truthers everytime we talk about it.
121 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:16 pm
dragonlady: That’s because she betrayed the cause by being pro-life.
Pure drivel. There is no ’cause.’ The same old tired caveat that *all* liberals are anti-pro-life. The majority of Americans do *not* want to see abortion become illegal. There are many, many liberals who applaud the fact that she brought that little child into the world.
I see women everyday who also have children with all kinds of disabilities, and in fact, I have one…a child with mental illness who fights hard each day of his life and I along with him.
Once again, get off your high moral horse. There are moral people everywhere including in the Democratic party, or perhaps you are so insulated you haven’t yet met them.
My criticism comes from the simple fact that she gave birth to Trig and was out on the campaign trail within six months of birth, running around the country taking photo-ops and trying to convince us that she was fit for high public office. Somehow I don’t see that as being a ‘great mom.’
. I would have had a lot more respect for this woman if she had spent some years closer to home taking care of that little one, along with her other little daughter, and her 17 y/o that got pregnant. She could have staved off her political ambitions until those kids at least were older.
I just find her ‘mommy’ glorification a little too absurd, given there are millions of women right now not coming from a combined family income of over $200,000, raking in millions with her speeches, her book, etc…… and then calling themselves Mom O’ The Year. Many of them work because they have to, to keep the family finances from bottoming out, and most of them would much prefer staying home in the early years of a child’s life.
The hypocrisy from the Palin supporters is amazing. So now raking in dough is a sign of ‘good mommying?”
Somehow that just doesn’t sound like a ‘conservative’ ideal.
122 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Oh well I see the echo chamber is active.
Do not most mothers work after their 12 week child birth leave is up. Maybe sooner, are they all bad Moms. Don’t think so.
I believe those accusations are sexist, and certainly not very Feminist of you Annie.
And of course the 13 Dems under ethics investigations, and Dollar Bill Jefferson getting 13 yrs are all shinning examples of Democrat ethics and reform.
And Teabag, such nice responses, no slurs or insults, my you can behave. Congrats.
123 sdspringy // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Otto, as usual you fail to read any responses and appear to have missed vast portions of our discussions. If you like I can bring you up to speed.
No responses I have read either know, believe, or are stating Palin will be a candidate in 2012. You however seem to be obsessed by the possiblity. Not unusual given your tendency to obsession similar to Teabag.
I would like you to review any post which states otherwise, or maybe the sound of typing is all that matters to you.
124 txanne // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Palin throws Alaskans under the Exxon Valdez
http://shannynmoore.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/palins-oily-lies-drip-from-the-pages-of-going-rogue/#comments
125 anniemargret // Nov 15, 2009 at 10:55 pm
springy: “I believe those accusations are sexist, and certainly not very Feminist of you Annie.”
I’ve never thought of myself as a Feminist. I am quite conservative in some of my views…ergo…my views about Sarah. I just tend to think that we need more parents sacrificing their needs for the needs of their children. And I think babies and children need their moms especially when they are very young.
An real old-fashioned ideal, that… which sadly is long gone.
126 txanne // Nov 15, 2009 at 11:10 pm
My apologies, the link I provided above goes directly to the comment section.
Here is the correct link to this very disturbing look into the soul of Ms Palin.
http://shannynmoore.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/palins-oily-lies-drip-from-the-pages-of-going-rogue/
127 Socrates // Nov 16, 2009 at 2:14 am
it is interesting how palin accused the librul media for unfairly attacking her, and now she is on a media blitz to sell her book.
i wonder what she will do after the book. my hunch is that she will try to get a tv gig, but i am not sure if she is cut out for it. while she has the look, i don’t think she is very articulate to be a tv commentator (e.g. beck, hannity, etc.). may be she will move to the conus 48 states, or even to the south, and runs for office. somehow i don’t think the book is her last act.
128 Hillary Clinton Versus Sarah Palin — Hillary Is 44 // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:31 am
[...] David Frum, who coined the term “Axis of Evil” for George W. Bush, is an example of a Palin right wing enemy: Clinton plunged back to work in Arkansas, winning re-election in 1990 to an unprecedented fifth [...]
129 DFL // Nov 16, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Well, Sarah Palin sure knocked Elizabeth Lambert out the news.
130 Bugleboy // Nov 16, 2009 at 11:36 pm
AP has 4100 reporters. Some people want 11 to look as looming as Mount Everest. Given Gov. Palin’s high profile that seems about right. The AP will just help sell more copies of the book as probably she intended.
I’m not a fan of hers, but have to admire her marketing genius. She quit her gig in Alaska and put a book out pronto to capitalize on her fame. How you gonna keep ‘em down on the farm after they’ve seen Paris? Goodbye Wasilla, hello lower 48!
131 Independent // Nov 17, 2009 at 7:23 am
i’ve said it elsewhere: i’m no fan of sarah palin’s. but, then, she isn’t any less qualified to be either president or vice president than are mr obama and mr biden. all three of them grab the limelight whenever there’s an open mic or tv crew nearby.
i do think that many commenters from the far left on this site have been ruthlessly unfair to mrs palin, her family and her contributions and talents.
the question i always ask when i hear one more “socrates” or “txanne” or “teabag” dump on mrs palin: why are these people so scared of someone they hold in contempt? and it is fear, irrational fear.
132 Independent // Nov 17, 2009 at 7:27 am
“Just cannot help yourself can ya Teabag. Always with the mean spirited, homosexual laced slurs and references. (Man, i hope i’m not a turn on for this nutjob). ” -sdspringy @ 97
teabag is a lonely, bitter troll living under the darkest, dankest bridge in the democrat underground, sdspringy. he doesn’t deserve your fear… he deserves your pity for he is a pathetic democrat hack. gruesome mind, that teabag… gruesome and distorted by hatred and rank political activism.
133 Independent // Nov 17, 2009 at 9:19 am
“I am quite conservative in some of my views…ergo…my views about Sarah. I just tend to think that we need more parents sacrificing their needs for the needs of their children. And I think babies and children need their moms especially when they are very young. An real old-fashioned ideal, that… which sadly is long gone.” —anniemargaret @ 125
to use your own words, “pure drivel”. and disingenuous. and politically opportunistic, too. you, not mrs palin.
you’ve got a pretty high perch there to be dis’ing moms who work, moms who care for their young children and work, moms who want to have a career and family, too.
if i were playing the game you play here a lot, anniemargaret, i’d wonder aloud what it is about motherhood and the modern woman you hate so much? but i don’t like the games you play here and i won’t stoop to your level.
moms can work. moms can have a career. i bet if we met you somewhere other than on this site and were talking about something other than mrs palin, your oh-so politically convenient position about stay-at-home-mom preferences would be flipped faster than a john kerry policy flop.
it takes some doing, annie, but you were transparently political in your seemingly apolitical stance on working moms and their “duties” to their young children… ever hear of a spouse? ever hear of grandparents? ever hear of a cook to help? or a cleaning lady 1x, 2x week?
your politically convenient and transparently false statements about motherhood & career is at odds with your hardcore democrat activism on most other issues… oh yeah, 30 seconds to the “i’m not a democrat, i voted for bush” lie. spare us, we’ve heard it before, sweetheart.
You must log in to post a comment.