• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Earlynerd on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    HerstoryRepeating on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    William on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    Sweet Sue on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    William on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    Catscatscats on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    William on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    Catscatscats on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    William on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    Ga6thDem on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    riverdaughter on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    riverdaughter on Healthcare, Medicare and …
    William on Healthcare, Medicare and …
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    February 2010
    S M T W T F S
    « Jan   Mar »
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Could Sarah win? Oh you betcha!


Pop quiz:

Name the top five contenders for the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination

1. Sarah Palin

2. some white guy

3. some white guy

4. some white guy

5. some white guy


There aren’t any official candidates yet, but there are several prominent Republicans trying to raise money and collect IOU’s from GOPers around the nation in preparation for announcing their candidacies a year from now. It’s gonna be tough for all those white guys to start running with Sarah Palin sucking up all the oxygen.

Sarah got a big boost this week, but most of Obamanation was too busy giggling about “hand jobs” to notice. David Broder:

The snows that obliterated Washington in the past week interfered with many scheduled meetings, but they did not prevent the delivery of one important political message: Take Sarah Palin seriously.

That was the guy they call “the Dean of the Washington press corps.” Several people found his column amusing, but the Beltway media take their cues from him. Back in 2006-2007 the media decided an inexperienced freshman senator from Illinois was a serious candidate for President, and also wrote off two more experienced senators, two governors and two members of the House of Representatives. Did Broder’s column signal a change in the media conventional wisdom about Sarah Palin?

Greg Sargent:

Excellent timing! David Broder’s column says Sarah Palin must be taken “seriously” and places her in the company of other successful “populist” presidential candidates — on the same day that new WaPo polling finds 71% say she’s unqualified for presidency.

Mr. Broder, with all due respect: Palin will only remain successful if she confines herself to her current well-insulated role of celebrity quasi-candidate. If she ever sets foot in the presidential ring in earnest — a very big if — she will rapidly implode under the genuine scrutiny she’s now being spared.

A couple a problems with Greg’s thesis. That same poll reflects a bigger problem for Barack Obama – his approval rating is dropping like a rock. I don’t know what planet Sargent has been living on but we know more about Sarah than her husband, mother, father, best friend, hairdresser and gynecologist put together.

If the media haven’t found a way to knock her out by now they’re not gonna. And if she starts getting treated seriously by the media like Broder suggests her approval ratings will go up.

Sarah Palin is not running for President yet. She is running for the GOP nomination, and she is following Nixon’s advice and running to the right towards her base. With the way the GOP “winner take all” primaries are set up a sizable minority of motivated voters could easily produce plurality victories in a crowded field of candidates, giving her early victories and momentum.

With Mike Huckabee out of contention Sarah should do very well among the religious conservatives that comprise a big chunk of GOP voters. (Mitt Romney has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the fundie votes) The Tea Partiers like Sarah as much or more than they like any other contender, and her book signing tour demonstrated that she’s got lots of supporters in the GOP rank and file.

The biggest obstacle for Sarah is the GOP establishment who will favor someone like Romney. The last thing they want is a nominee that’s a real maverick reformer. If Sarah convinces them to support her (or at least not oppose her) then she has an excellent shot at winning the nomination.

Sarah has been collecting establishment IOU’s by making appearances in support of GOP candidates around the country. Expect to see her doing a lot more of that this year. What you won’t see will be the private meetings and dinners she will be having with GOP power brokers and big money donors.

Lets assume for a moment that she wins the GOP nomination. That’s the easy part. It’s hard to make long-range predictions about the general election because there are a couple major variables.

The first variable is Barack Obama. I fully expect him to run for reelection and to be the Democratic nominee. I’m not going to go into all the possibilities if he isn’t.

That means the 2012 election will essentially be a referendum on Obama. If the economy remains in the toilet along with Obama’s approval ratings then he’s toast just like Carter was in 1980. If the economy has rebounded and there hasn’t been a major crisis or scandal, Obama will probably be reelected, much like his hero Ronnie Raygun was in 1984.

The misogynist frat boys of Obamanation seem to think the key to defeating Sarah Palin is mockery:

We must never stop mocking her unbelievable lack of smarts, veracity and substance.
[…]
When we stop mocking her, when the press and the netroots and the Democrats begin to say, “Enough with the Palin is stupid remarks,” that’s when she begins to be taken seriously. That must not happen.

The angry chihuahuas of Obamanation are completely clueless about the fact that their actions are not just ineffective but are counter-productive. When Joe and Jane Bagodonuts see a wankfest like the one over Sarah’s hand-writing they might say “That is so stupid” but if they do they aren’t referring to Sarah.

Most people outside the political blogosphere are not paying close attention right now to what Sarah Palin says in her speeches and interviews or to who she endorses. The people that are paying attention already have pretty firm opinions about her.

By the time most people are paying attention she will either be the GOP nominee or will be out of the race. If she is the nominee she will not sound like a religious fanatic or a radical reactionary and by then she will have lots more practice at doing interviews and debates.

When Obama began running in 2007 he was egregiously bad in the debates and his policy positions were mostly copied from Hillary’s. His only real skill was at reading speeches from a teleprompter. Despite massive financial support from Wall Street and media favoritism he lost the popular vote in the primaries and only became the nominee because the Democratic leadership rigged the outcome.

The 2008 general election was mostly a referendum on George W. Bush and pretty much all of the people who voted for Obama that November would have voted for any of the Democratic contenders except maybe Vilsack and Gravel. There were even polls that showed that Hillary would have likely beaten McCain by a larger margin.

The Democratic party has a long history of nominating smart guys who lose to genial buffoons and charming mental light-weights. In 1952 and 1956, the intellectual Adlai Stevenson lost to “I like Ike.” Al Gore is one of the smartest politicians of our generation but thanks to SCOTUS he lost to a guy that people wanted to have a beer with.

In 1966 Pat Brown was running for a third term as governor of California. He was fairly popular, the economy was doing well and his two terms were generally considered successful, so he didn’t take his GOP opponent (a former “B” movie and television actor who had never held political office before) seriously. Brown lost, 42%-58% and Ronald Reagan became governor.

In 1980 Jimmy Carter tried to portray Reagan as a dangerous reactionary and got his ass handed to him by the Electoral College. In 1984 Walter Mondale’s campaign tried to suggest that Reagan was senile and Mondale got beat like he stole something.

Sarah Palin is a mainstream conservative Republican politician. She may not be a rocket scientist but she’s not a brainless airhead either. She’s got charisma, magnetism and the ability to connect with people.

She’s also got something else going for her – she’s a woman. Women make-up about 52% of our population and tend to vote Democratic. In 2008 the Democratic party forgot that fact and tossed women under the bus.

Will 2012 be the year they find out how big a mistake they made?


Advertisements

215 Responses

  1. Here is proof serious treatment and PDS can coexist:

    Fox News has been making a serious charge about mainstream political reporters: They hate Sarah Palin.

    This is not just wrong, it’s absurd. The reality is exactly the opposite: We love Palin.

    And if Palin does not exactly love us, she’s smart enough to recognize how quickly reporters devour every provocative remark she utters. She knows how to exploit our weakness to guarantee herself exposure far out of proportion to her actual influence in Republican politics.

    It’s a tangled, symbiotic affair — built on mutual dependency and mutual enabling.

    • That’s funny. Both hating her and saying they don’t hate her, previously saying how stupid she is and now saying she’s smart. Someone should tell Jim there’s medication for that.

    • MSM sound rattled today.

      @jaketapper: neither Fox News’ Bill Sammon nor Politico speak for my feelings on any subject Not on @SarahPalinUSA, not on anything at all. as in <0

      @jaketapper: i tweet that bc sammon recently said the MSM hates Palin + Tea Parties, + Politico today responded that MSM loves Palin.

  2. The frat boys do not realize or understand the anger about their treatment of women. The last election brought it to the front of the room and showed just how ugly it is.
    Hillary Clinton
    Geraldine Ferraro
    Sarah Palin
    Women from both parties are angry. Will Sarah Palin be elected president? I doubt it, but she could be a factor on who is elected.. She has made her mark and people do connect with her. Yes she should be taken seriously.

    WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

  3. There were even polls that showed that Hillary would have likely beaten McCain by a larger margin.

    Well yeah..

  4. 1. Sarah Palin
    2. some white guy
    3. some white guy
    4. some white guy
    5. some white guy

    LOL. To be fair. Jindal’s probably on that list, and he’s brown.

    But if it’s Palin vs Obama I would vote for Palin again, with pleasure.

    My 2012 motto:
    Only Hillary can stop me from voting for Sarah!

    • Jindal may be running but after his big break responding to Obama’s speech he’s fallen off the chart.

      • Jindal’s Debutante ball flop was a bit painful to watch as even he couldn’t believe how bad it went and how shocked everyone was. After that he was placed on the seat warmer for another couple of years.

        Say what ever they say about Sarah but people want to keep seeing her, even I look once in a while and our politics are miles apart.

        • I could. He talks a mile a minute and frequently incoherently. He’s had to hire speech coaches for years. He’s a disaster down here too. Although out state his numbers are still pretty high because he tells them what they want to hear.

          • I must admit, I thought he was some real clever intellectual until he did several fopas and then looked like a political fish out of water.

          • Did he have charisma bypass surgery?

          • No, he was being talked up, by the party and so many high expectations were abound. And FLOPPO!

          • Just from a horserace standpoint, Jindal comes across as slimy and awkward on TV. If there is a GOP man that’s more of a threat, it’s Pawlenty. I can’t stand him, but if the economy remains an issue he’s a big threat. He got rid of the deficit and balanced the budget in Minnesota without raising taxes. That’s a big deal in this climate, and he could run on that, easily, and he’s more personable in front of a camera than Jindal.

          • Pawlenty can’t get any media attention. Neither can the others.

            It’s 24/7 Sarah

          • I agree, myiq, and that is another way that the Left is empowering Sarah, like the idiots they are. Even if she does not run, or even if she runs and loses the primary, they are setting her up to be the Kingmaker by making her so important.

            If Sarah doesn’t win, she will be positioned to choose who will. She’ll either be the next GOP nominee, or whoever it is will require her blessing.

          • Now, if she was really trying to go for it, she would fly in to make her announcement. Hiya boyz, am I running, you BETCHA!

          • I guess you can tell, I am a watcher cuz I can’t even get the ‘BETCHA’ right (spelling).

          • I’m going to agree with WMCB that Pawlenty could be a threat to Palin, but if he got rid of a budget deficit in Minnesota, then somebody else has created a whole new one, because we are really in a big mess here. We are looking at another round of dramatic cuts to social services and public education. Washington can have Pawlenty.

  5. Unless there is a radical shift, she could easily win against BO, imo. But three years is a long time in politics.

    • I think the wild card for Obama is whether there is a successful terrorist attack in the U. S. before the 2012 election. If so he couldn’t win anything more than javelin catcher at the local high school track meet. If not ACORN and the rest could game the system so that Obama would win against ANYONE!

      My opinion is that there will be at least one successful terrorist attack, and probably before the 2010 election. It won’t have to be as big, either in casualties or visual impact as 9/11/2001, it just has to happen. Like it or not the Republicans would run on the meme that GWB and the Republicans prevented any attacks after 9/11. BHO has only been in office one year and we’ve had two successful, though small, terrorist attacks. The shooting at the recruiting station in the south and the shooting at Ft. Hood. Anything much bigger and the only person who will be glad BHO was President would be Jimmy Carter so people would stop claiming he was the worst President, ever.

  6. Funny thing is they keep saying what a total light weight she is on policy issues. But what they fail to understand is, that was exactly Obama and Reagan and lots of others as well when they ran. Some of us are spoiled with policy wonks like the Clinton’s, but many candidates are nothing like that.

    Here’s some free advice for Obama and his failbot followers: take her seriously, treat her like a serious candidate, and deal with real policy issues instead of assuming belittling her and hating her and being frankly completely insane about her will work. Then when dealing at a policy and non PDS level, you can win even in bad times.

    I only give that free advice because I know they’re too stupid to follow it. 🙂

    • Sarah comes off way smarter than this guy George Bush and he got elected TWICE! 😯

      • Yup, good point. When they keep saying stuff about her and not taking her seriously, always come back to dubya and say, yea, she will probably fail at it just like dubya did. Oh wait…

        • 😆 Isn’t that the truth…and then the press will be saying, ta, ta, ta, here comes President ‘You Betcha’! 😯 How’d that happen… ?

      • Well, that’s true, but Dubya has one Very Important Piece of Equipment that Sarah doesn’t.

        • Ah, but Sarah has some thing that Dubya didn’t have, working folk parents. Her father is a teacher and she is connecting and the folks are very upset with the elite and the thrashing they got.

          I am just sitting back, checking it all out, as if she did pull it off, gosh, she would look smarter than Dubya, and if she got some reform passed and took on the deficit she may well be declared a genius.

          • That is actually one of the things that I really LIKE about SP. When was the last time that somebody who was truly self-made and *not* a product of the Ivy League rose to real power? Hillary is still my gal, but the little poor girl I was who actually *believed* the BS about being able to become anything? It might be a different story. I so wish they were *both* on our side.

          • I agree. It is a big deal that she’s self-made.

  7. http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Moderate-Republicans-Crash-Tea/2010/02/11/id/349643

    Depending on where she positions herself she could make a difference in the republican party pick. If she backs winners in the midterms she will have credibility

    WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

  8. My favorite is when they make fun of her saying: “how’s that hopey changy thing working for ya.” And while they’re laughing at her saying that, they look a little upset as if, oh, I don’t know, the hopey changy thing isn’t working out. Oh snap.

    • Obama does speeches and Sarah posts Facebook notes.

      I thought that “death panels” thing was D-U-M-B but she just about torpedoed Obamacare all by herself.

      • “If it is stupid but it works, it is not so stupid.”

      • It is just GOP projection all over again: accuse the administration and Democratic Party of the very thing you are already doing, myiq.

        Of course, it was not in the health care bills under consideration in DC. But there are “death panels” in Texas — the law was introduced by and pushed through by the Republican Party and the “pro-lifers,” who gave it their stamp of approval.

        If you have a deadly disease and your doctors at your hospital deem you not curable, and you are not paying them (run out of health insurance, maybe?), they can dump you out of your hospital bed and/or shut off your machines, even if you are conscious and object. There were a couple of high profile cases which made the news in Texas — one of whom, I seem to recall, was a young, conscious African-American child, who was alive on life support, whose mother was appalled. Another patient was an adult man who objected to being turned off. The objections of patients or their families did not matter.

        In at least one case, another hospital was found for the patient. I don’t think any of this made the national news. So far as I know, despite the embarrassment caused by the local news articles, the law has not been repealed.

        Of course, Gov. Palin was wrong about the Democratic Party’s health care bills (any of them) containing such provisions, but I wonder what she would say if she knew that her good buddy Gov. Perry signed off on this law. I also have to wonder if someone (like Perry?) fed her details about these death panels — and lied saying it was in the Democratic plans, rather than telling her it is already in effect in Texas, courtesy of the GOP.

        If I have time this weekend, I will see if I can find the statute for you or links to the news articles.

        djmm

        • I am a lawyer who does a fair amount of elder care work. Did any of these cases get to the state Appeals Court? If you find the statue, I’d love to have a look at it.
          Thanks,

          • Here is a summary of the Texas “Futile Care” law:

            http://www.law.uh.edu/healthlaw/perspectives/2007/%28CM%29TXFutileCare.pdf

            Here is the law: scroll down to see Sec. 166.046:

            http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/DocViewer.aspx?K2DocKey=odbc%3a%2f%2fSOTW%2fASUPUBLIC.dbo.vwSOTW%2fHS%2fS%2fHS.166%40SOTW&QueryText=advance%3COR%3Edirective&HighlightType=1

            Specifically, a doctor refuses life-sustaining treatment that a patient has chosen as “inappropriate,” and a medical or ethics committee reviews the decision. Then “[t]he physician and the health care facility are not obligated to provide life-sustaining treatment after the 10th day after the written decision required under Subsection (b) is provided to the patient or the person responsible for the health care decisions of the patient unless ordered to do so [by a court temporarily] under Subsection (g).”

            The doctor and the committee decide life sustaining treatment is inappropriate and you have 10 days to get to another facility, if one will take you, unless a court gives you a little more time to find a place to take you. These are death panels in my view: the health care bills (bad as they are) do not have these — Texas does.

            Yes, teresainpa, I read the other posts — I read this site regularly and I am well informed on the health care bills. They are terrible in their current forms — a giveaway to the insurance providers. I am a single payer fan myself, though I supported then Presidential Candidate Clinton’s excellent plan.

            And I am impressed with Gov. Palin and believe she is very intelligent. I don’t agree with all her positions, but I like her record in Alaska. I am appalled by the misogynistic treatment she has gotten from so-called Democrats and “progressives.” That does not mean she has all her facts straight all the time, and it does not mean she can’t be steered wrong by someone she trusts (and for some reason, she seems to trust Perry). That can happen to anyone, even the best politicians.

            As Fran points out below, there are some provisions in the stimulus package directed towards cost control. But what were being criticized as “death panels” were the provisions in the health care bill requiring doctors to talk to their patients, giving them info of their options when treatment is likely to be risky, painful and futile. These were not death panels because unlike the Texas law, in the health care plan the final decision belongs (as it should) to the patient. (Doctors are wrong, quite regularly.)

            Some of the cost measures of the stimulus plan Fran mentions seem to be directed to the problems of doctors who do unnecessary procedures — with no better results for the patients, but which just happen to run up their fees– quite a bit in some cases. Good article in the NYT last year about such practices in McAllen, Texas. (The mammogram recommendation is something else entirely.)

            None of the current health care plans, bad as they are, are as bad as the Texas statute, imo.

            djmm

          • I agree with you that the TX law is terrible. However, I will say this. If it came down to either/or, I’d trust my local physicians in my hospital to make the determination whether continued measures were “inappropriate” a lot more than I’d trust a panel in DC who had never laid eyes on me.

            JMO, and I’d rather neither.

          • WMCB, I could not nest under your comment. But note that the Texas law specifically applies when the doctor is going against the express directive of the patient (either conscious or by advance directive) or their family (if there is no directive). In other words, you say, keep the machines on and your doctor says no. This law lets the doctor’s ruling get blessed by an ethics panel so he/she can turn off the machines.

            As they might, if your insurance money has run out.

            Again, bad as they are, nothing in the current bills is this bad. And I think this is exactly what Gov. Palin would call “death panels” if she knew about them.

            djmm

        • Of course, Gov. Palin was wrong about the Democratic Party’s health care bills (any of them) containing such provisions, but I wonder what she would say if she knew that her good buddy Gov. Perry signed off on this law. I also have to wonder if someone (like Perry?) fed her details about these death panels — and lied saying it was in the Democratic plans, rather than telling her it is already in effect in Texas, courtesy of the GOP.

          Oh come on, did you really come here to tell us Palin is dumb enough to fall for something like that? Did you read any of the other posts before you made that comment.

          Indeed, “death panel” might be hyperbolic, but right after she said it along comes the information about a board which will decide best practices and part of that is cutting down on costly treatment that is deemed not cost effective. Yup, it exists, Rham’s brother is one of the big wigs in charge of it and they pissed off women royally by saying women under 50 don’t need regular mammograms. Do you really think it is such a long distance between that proclamation and insurance companies no longer covering those exams?
          Palin really was not that far off.

          • The ‘provisions’ to set up a board and to develop the statistics, the data, to be used in determinations, was in the stimulus package, which provides funding for it. Thus, it does exist, but it is not in the healthcare bill.

          • Fran, the provision was in at least the first version of the bill. I read it.

      • Krugman’s going to run out of words or oxygen if he keeps up this pace. ..breathtaking act of staggering hypocrisy..

      • We already have death panels, MYIQ. They’re called nurrsing homes. After all, we have to have some way to get rid of those awful Boomers who are going to bankrupt social security if we are allowed decent medical care, right?

    • She’s the only national pol with the chutzpah to call out Obama directly. No one else has the balls.

      • And I love her for that. She takes the stage and says, You know this guy in the White House? Has anyone else noticed that he’s an obnoxious blowhard? Do you have as strong an urge to give him a wedgie as I do?

        And a bunch of us out here in TV land say, Yeah, as a matter of fact, I did and I do.

  9. When Joe and Jane Bagodonuts see a wankfest like the one over Sarah’s hand-writing they might say “That is so stupid” but if they do they aren’t referring to Sarah.

    I’m a shameless elitist from the opposite end of the social and political scale . . . and I’m so sick of the stupid I see myself voting for Sarah if she runs.

    Don’t forget that if anyone actually looks at her record (I’m not holding my breath), she was a pretty reasonable Governor, didn’t impose fundie views, and as Governor, she’s had waaay more executive experience than the Current Occupant when he ran.

    • As myiq says, she is running right for the GOP primary (or for conservative candidates, if not herself.) In Alaska, she had HIGH approval ratings among Democrats for an R governor, before the press trashed her.

      An R governor does not get those kinds of high ratings among Dems unless she is doing something right, and is behaving fairly moderately. To try to repaint her later as “batshit crazy extreme right fundie” is ridiculous. There is zero evidence she governed that way.

  10. The Obama Permanent Campaign seems eager to run against Palin and are treating her like she’s already his opponent in the 2012 general election.

    By focusing on her they bring her to his level (or him to hers)

  11. […] Myiq has a good post about this over at TC. Go check it out. […]

    • Wow Isis, you did take over that name. Good for you, and good for John W. Smart.

      • I’m confused — what happened with that? I have Liberal Rapture on my RSS and it stopped working recently. New name/fabulous new writer, different URL?

        • John, from liberal rapture, changed his blog domain because there was a problem with the other one. It’s called Johnwsmart now. So I took the name liberal rapture for my blog- with his permission of course. :p

  12. Jamison Foser:

    And VandeHei and Martin downplay a screamingly obvious point: The problem isn’t just that media outlets like Politico give Palin too much attention, it’s that the coverage they give her too rarely notes her massive shortcomings, including the poor poll numbers VandeHei and Martin lay out. It’s one thing to constantly cover someone who doesn’t merit the attention; it’s something else altogether to dishonestly constantly cover someone who doesn’t merit the attention, portraying her as a popular phenomenon when she is wildly unpopular, and glossing over her stunning lack of honesty.

    Yeah, people bought her book and stood in line for hours in the cold to get her autograph BECAUSE THEY HATE HER.

    • Last time I checked, her popularity was right up there with Obama’s.

    • Where was Media Matters during the Dem primaries Obama media love-in.

    • Great post, myiq! Here is another commenter making similar, excellent points:

      http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/02/11/navarrette.palin.politics/index.html?hpt=T2

      djmm

      • Ruben Navarrette could not be more correct. Sarah Palin connects with people like no one I’ve seen since Bill Clinton. You’re born with that.

        That’s what Palin has that makes her stand out. People who run for president should know about politics and policy, but they can be taught that. What can’t be taught is the ability to connect with people. Bill Clinton had it, Al Gore didn’t. Barack Obama has it, John Kerry didn’t. Mike Huckabee seems to have some of it, but Mitt Romney sure doesn’t.

        Sarah Palin has it. She connects.

        So here’s a warning to the Democratic Party and other supporters of Barack Obama who love to criticize Palin. They can have their fun. But they do so at their peril. Whether they realize it or not, every time they attack her, they attack the kind of voter to whom she appeals.

        These people aren’t part of the elite establishment. They may have not have gone to Ivy League schools. They’re just everyday folks who go to work and support families. They go to church. They love their country. They’re the kind of people the Democratic Party used to represent. And, at the moment, they’re enjoying a breath of fresh air blowing in from Alaska.

        • I have to say, Navarrette really hits it out of the park on that one. SP’s fans don’t love her because they think she’s the smartest wonk in the room. It’s because she connects on a “one of us” level (as a person who is self-made, a working mother, lived in a small town, etc.) that a thousand nattering chattering pundits can’t replicate, and so choose to insult everybody who sees her life experience as reflecting in some part their own.

          That was totally written like a bloodless chattering natterer, wasn’t it? My point is, the Sarah Palin Rorscharch test ain’t about policy, it is about the Democratic party’s abandonment and ridicule of the “little people” who used to be their constituency. If the Democrats could get that through their thick f*cking heads, they might be able to do something about the coming pasting they’re going to get in the midterms and the next presidential election.

  13. All I can say is if she wins the nom, I’m voting for her.

    Obama has proven there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Repubs and Dems anymore. Dems are just sneakier about being corporate driven jacka*ss trickle down morons. The only way to get women recognized at the presidential level is if the Republicans do it first and shame the phoney feminist Democrats into doing it too.

    At this point the politics doesn’t matter because there’s no difference, so I’m focusing on the vagina ;-). LOL.

    • I would prefer to vote for a liberal Democrat but I doubt there will be one on the ballot.

      • Me too. But I take myself and my vote seriously, and shop it to whomever best represents my interests, both as a woman and a liberal. And since the Democratic party raped and murdered women’s political aspirations two years ago, I may have no place to go but right 😦

      • A liberal Democrat would not be ALLOWED on the ballot.

    • ITA.
      And women’s voting power is on the line if she runs, imo. If she runs and women DON’T vote for her, the neither party will pay attention to women’s votes again.

      • That does seem possible, and is, I think, a concern.

        Why is it that those conservative Republican women are more willing to support a woman, than those liberal Democrat women are willing to support a woman?

        • I’m going to speculate because I am not a sociologist. Perhaps women’s authority arising from being mothers runs deeper in those circles than many effete urban liberals realize.

          • You forgot pious…pious effete urban liberals. 🙂

          • Many effete urban liberals get the entire dynamic of male/female relationships in rural or southern societies wrong. They get the overt sexism that still exists, but they fail to appreciate the strong undercurrent of real respect for the female that simultaneously exists. The two things are contradictory, and should not be able to exist at the same time but they DO, and those born and reared in those societies can tell you so. Garden variety sexism and misogyny are different things in my book, and I’ve felt more of the first in conservative and rural enclaves, but much more of the second in urban and liberal centers.

            I’ve told people for years that southern society is extremely matriarchal, in deep-rooted ways that are hard to describe, but that I do not feel in other locales. Women (especially Mama) wield tremendous power and are in an indefinable way almost revered in the South. I see a lot of that “southern Mama’s boy” deep respect for the female in Bill Clinton, except he kept that instinct but coupled it with a true Liberal egalitarianism in practice.

          • You kind of see that in many working class families (in all regions) as well. This may be an unpopular opinion, but I think having a j-o-b outside the home can often earn women more respect inside the home.

          • Jadzia, some have speculated that the South became deeply matriarchal after the Civil War, because the younger, stronger men were dead in astounding numbers, and the society and infrastructure was pretty much destroyed. The women ran the farms, took over the businesses, and pretty much held everything together.

            Frontier states have a similar strong-woman dynamic in many ways. The women plowed the fields and carried a rifle alongside the men, and were tough as nails because they HAD to be. That had an effect on the consciousness of the entire culture.

          • That is *really* interesting — all I know about that particular subject I learned at a matinee of “Cold Mountain.” But it makes sense. I wonder if the same holds true for other societies/cultures in the aftermath of war?

          • I wonder if the same holds true for other societies/cultures in the aftermath of war?

            Yes. A lot of ground was gained by women in Europe during and after WW1 when they “filled in” for men fighting the war. Women proved they could do “men’s work”, and after the war many continued doing these jobs. Of course after the war men tried to convince women to go back to the kitchen, but I think it’s kind of 3 steps forward, 2 steps back thing.
            Same with WW2. (Remember Rosie the Riveter)?

          • Garden variety sexism and misogyny are different things in my book, and I’ve felt more of the first in conservative and rural enclaves, but much more of the second in urban and liberal centers.

            Wonder if some of that has to do with community versus competition. Big cities are not great for communities, at least in my experience.

          • Actually, that’s really interesting. I’ve met women who visited the south and came back talking about how much respect they were given by the men and how much more polite they were than up here. A couple of them said they wouldn’t have minded coming back.

          • I’m from a northern effete pious liberal background all the way, so I only got my first tiny glimpse into this dynamic when I read Florence King’s book ‘Southern Ladies and Gentlemen.” It was a humorous poke at South, but I was fascinated by the distinction she drew between the Bad Good Old Boy and the Good Good Old boy. The former she described as an ‘evil viper,’ whereas the latter she cherished as having a plainspoken appreciation of women.

            Her example of the Good Good Old Boy was a boyfriend named Earl, who once picked up a can of ‘feminine deodorant spray’ in the store and asked, “What’s wrong with pussy?”

            That’s a good question to ask effete Palin hating Democrats, now that I think of it.

          • littleisis, I can’t say I’ve had that experience in my personal life, but I’ve had a couple of cases down south (Georgia and Texas) and was always treated with MUCH more respect from the (always male) lawyers on the other side than I was in “liberal-and-tolerant” LA!

          • “I wonder if the same holds true for other societies/cultures in the aftermath of war?”

            Yes, in Rwanda too. As with the Civil War and WWI, an entire generation of men is incapacitated–either dead, or awaiting trial.

            Rwandan women now hold a central place in that country’s politics. The new post-genocide constitution reserves 24 National Assembly seats out of 80 for women, and they have won many more than that. In 2004 women held 48.8% of seats.

            http://content.undp.org/go/newsroom/choices-rwandas-parliament-now-leads-world-in-gender-parity-2004-12.en?categoryID=349431&lang=en

          • I think I might have sounded slightly more ignorant than I actually am by asking that question. What I was thinking about specifically was Russia/USSR, which suffered horrific losses of pretty much a whole generation of young men, but which remained fairly patriarchal in the following years.

          • WMCB I agree with you about the south and treatment of women. It’s rather complex and interesting. There are strange subtle things that are sexist, but have some roots in women on a pedestal, for example you don’t shake hands with a women unless she raises her hand to shake first, whereas with a man you can reach out to shake his hand first. there is a lot of sexist stuff to be sure. But less hate somehow.

            From family stories I’ve heard, I’m not sure things changed that much in this regard because of the civil war (and great loss of the men folk). My reading is that it was already like that.

            I do declare Miss WMCB, you should sit down a spell. You’ve been talking so much you must be just plain tuckered. Let me fetch you a mint julep.

          • A lot of the South was settled by refugees or deportees of the Jacobite uprisings of 1715 and 1745. They were people who arrived with a deficit of young men and a lot of women who had already had to hold it all together when their men were killed, deported earlier, or “taken to the heather”–ie., gone outlaw. Many of the women who stepped in to take over farms and businesses during and after the Civil War were great-great-graddaughters of women who had done the same 115 years ealier. There was a social memory at work there.

            They also had contact with Native American groups that were largely gender-egalitarian if not outright matriarchal, and there was a considerable amount of intermarriage.

        • I’m supposed to vote for her because she’s a woman?? Doesn’t that sound like how blacks were supposed to vote for Obama because he was black??

          She’s a conservative Republican who is pandering to the right as usual. “Maverick” my ass. She quit her job midstream as gov., “wrote” a campaign book, is parked at FOX like Wes Clark, and doesn’t have the experience has Clark OR Hillary.

          She reminds me more of John Edwards and Obama…quit (Obama spent very little time in the Senate doing much, mostly getting that book deal before he got there and then running for President), ran, and rely heavily on image and charisma.

          Do we need ANOTHER fabricated “pied-piper” especially one who will fool people into thinking she’s one thing then will turn around and screw the very women who vote for her??

          UGH! And I at one time liked her and hoped she WOULD run as an independent…but she is NOT and is an wolf in sheep’s clothing….

          I’ll stay home…I won’t enable this stuff anymore…

  14. Awesome! I love this article! Thanks myiq. 🙂

  15. In ’07 nobody knew who Obama was, so it’s amusing to see PDS sufferers saying she has no chance because of a single poll.

    How quickly they forget what Obama’s chances looked like.

  16. myiq, thank you for the most even-handed treatment of the Palin phenomenon I’ve read so far. I think she’s most fascinating political Rorschach blot today. One learns so much about people (usually things you didn’t want to know) by how they react to her.

  17. Agree that the Obama camp keep acting as though he is running against Sarah – and he never actually was!

    Also, my thought on the hand notes was that if that is the worst they can come up – and it seems to be because there was so much space given to a nothing topic – then they are really out of ammunition. Except of course the fact that a pretty woman cannot also be capable (snark).

  18. I’m staying put in Scenic Undisclosed for work/family reasons (especially related to work stability and health care). I only would have inconvenienced myself in Nov/2010 for real progress.

    But not for this fan boiz shit. To paraphrase Katha Politt’s early pre-’08 position when the shrieking could cut glass, HRC wasn’t her first choice but if the misogyny kept up that reason alone would be why she’d vote for HRC.

    This SPDS makes me want to take a sabbatical and work on her campaign.

  19. The angry chihuahuas of Obamanation

    heh. I like that.

  20. OK, I am off…to work again. It would be nice if someone put up some video of the ‘First Dude’ 😉

  21. if i can’t have Hillary then Sarah will do..
    come on ladies it,s our turn up at bat

    • That is exactly the attitude that makes Sarah Palin a uniquely dangerous opponent for Obama in 2012 and why using misogyny against her will backfire.

      • myiq, saw this interesting comment on a blog that reinforces your point – that they are badly underestimating her:

        If you can get it through Netflix, library, friends or whatever…watch the Saturday Night Live Season 1 set Weekend Updates. It was the 1975 ramp up and 1976 primary cycle and I think Chevy Chase did as many (and meaner) shots at Reagan than he did at Ford. As far as the East Coast hipsters were concerned Reagan was a joke, they couldn’t believe someone like him could’ve been elected Governor of a state and there’s no way he could seriously be considered as a viable Presidential candidate.

        • I keep hearing Tom Lehrer’s song, “George Murphy” :
          Hollywood’s often tried to mix
          Show business with politics,
          From Helen Gahagan
          To Ronald Reagan…?
          (Audience laughter)

          That was in the 60s.

        • I keep thinking of Tom Lehrer’s song, “George Murphy:”

          Hollywood’s often tried to mix
          Show business with politics,
          From Helen Gahagan
          To Ronald Reagan,…?

          (Audience laughter)
          That was in the 60s.

      • I’m still waiting for misogyny to backfire. Not holding my breath on that one. Women who were pissed off at Hill’s treatment didn’t unite behind Sarah, and the cretins of Obotia barely paused for breath before launching into the exact same routine, showing pretty clearly what they were about. Why will this time be any different?

  22. I’ve had very pleasant dreams about a Hillary/Palin matchup in 2012, similar to dreams about my dad finding out my step mom cheated on him in their euphoria. But who knows if that’s going to happen? I think if Obama is on the ballot in 2012 against a white Republican, I might just leave the ballot box next to presidential candidates empty and just vote for local candidates.
    It wouldn’t be much better if it was Obama vs. Palin. I do like Palin and I agree with Myiq’s assesment that she is going to the right to secure the Republican nomination. If elected I’m sure she would go back to being the “maverick” she was in Alaska, and would probably be more to the left of Obama. but I’m still uncomfortable with the fact that she doesn’t seem to have much firmer of a grasp on policy than Obama or Bush. I’m really sick over how much our standards have lowered for presidential candidates over the past few years, but maybe what someone said up above is right: we were just spoiled with the Clintons. They weren’t just policy wonks, they managed to look cute while they governed effectively.

    • My pet fantasy is the ultimate unity ticket – Hillary/Sarah. Women’s Party.

    • I think that my decision in 2012 on whether to vote third party, leave it blank, or go with the R as a protest is not going to be made until like the day before.

      Unless Hillary by some miracle challenged O for the nomination and won (when pigs fly), there aren’t going to be any good choices. It will be a strategic vote for me all the way. What message I’ll need to send remains to be seen. Sarah would be both a blow for women, and a rejection of the top-down elitist machines of both parties, so she has that going for her. But I have no illusions that she’s prepared be a great president, or is anything approaching a Democrat. But then, neither are the Democrats.

      • Hillary can challenge Obama if his poll numbers are very low or she can step in if he decides not to run for reelection, which isn’t improbable. But that would be her decision, and like myiq says, we cant always count on her to swoop in and save us or put all of our eggs in her basket.
        Regardless of whether Palin wins the white house in ’12, we have to work on getting our party back from the “New Coalition.” That’s the only way we start to put real liberals in congress and the white house.

        • If Palin looks to be the GOP nominee (and maybe anyway) Obama will try to dump Biden and make Hillary VP. She may or may not take the job.

          But that would still be Obama vs Palin.

          Or more like Obama/Hillary vs Palin/some white guy

          • I hope if that scenario happens (Biden dumped in favor of Hillary) that she tells the big 0 to go fork himself and sits back and lets this conservative Republican in (increasingly see-through) liberal Democratic clothes go down in flames as he so richly deserves.

            SP’s Alaska governance appears to me to be as a moderate Republican who listened to ALL her constituents and governed according to their wishes, and her personal beliefs about abortion etc. were just that–personal. I see no evidence whatsoever that she ever tried to impose those beliefs on anyone else, or that she ever would.

            I’m a lifelong liberal Democrat and I voted for the most liberal ticket in 2008 (as a certain liberal blogger whose initials are JC claimed he did at the time. then revealed recently that he’d lied about doing. JC, the next time you come to “Appleturkey” I will personally–and enthusiastically– upend a steaming Frito pie on your lyin’ noggin, so there.)

            But I digress. What I want to say is that I voted for Sarah in 2008, and I’ll vote for her in 2012 unless I can vote for Hillary instead. Or Wes Clark…

          • Time for the shorthand: “some white guy” = SWiG. As in, take a swig because you don’t want to be sober for this.

    • That’s my plan. See below for my take on Palin…
      More “pied-piper” media created candidate crap with very little real experience or substance….Parroting the same GOP junk and “liberal” would vote for her?? And women….she won’t be any more a friend to you than Obama is to anybody!!

  23. Myiq is right … Palin is effectively cultivating herself to be the GOP frontrunner. She does an excellent job at ignoring criticism while she does this. I suspect she has this well-developed ability because she worked her way up from the PTA, and I’m sure encountered much treatment of the “she’s just a stupid girl, what does she know” type. And, it’s not like she didn’t go to college, just the elitist types Obama and most of his cronies went to. So she does value higher education.

    And really, WHO can’t get behind this comment SP said (except for the big govt part).

    “And then I do want to be a voice for some common-sense solutions. I’m never going to pretend like I know more than the next person. I’m not going to pretend to be an elitist. In fact, I’m going to fight the elitist, because for too often and for too long now, I think the elitists have tried to make people like me and people in the heartland of America feel like we just don’t get it, and big government’s just going to have to take care of us.” [emphasis mine].

    I feel that America is increasingly getting sick of the ELITIST attitude that is telling them to shut up about the fact they are out of work, starving, and can barely fend for their kids and will look toward common-sense parenting-like approaches. Just look at how we reacted to the Obamas’ seeming-elitist attitudes in the “Fat is the new dirty” piece. Who likes to be *insulted* into accepting something? Isn’t this how we all felt when the DNC told us to just shut and take the inevitable? We were insulted daily with our choice and our mere questioning of Obama.

    • Obviously Palin does value higher education and is a self made woman. So is Hillary. Hillary came from a working class family (her dad owned a drapery fabric business) and she went to public schools. Back then I think it was easier for people who went to public schools to go to ivy league colleges because the public schools were better.
      But Sarah went to college in the 1980s and she also explained in her autobiography that having been raised in rural Alaska, where you had to do everything without the help of the lower forty eight, she was brought up to value fierce independence, and paid for college entirely herself with beauty pageant scholarship money and working summers serving tables and in the commercial fishing business with Todd.
      Both of them are highly contrary to Bush, who only got into ivy league schools because of his daddy, and Obama who was raised by his upper middle class grandparents and went to prestigious prep schools in Hawaii.

    • I actually even agree with the part about big government. I was always a liberal before 2008. I bought the party rhetoric hook, line, and sinker, which of course wasn’t hard to do with the Clinton’s in charge. I always heard conservative complaining about the liberal nanny state, but I didn’t get it because I hadn’t actually critically thought about anything.

      I used to be a welfare recipient. I got an education with the help of all sorts of welfare assistance, and then I got off of it when I got a job. It took me about a year to process the effects of welfare on me, but I came to the conclusion that it had adversely affected my world view and my view of myself. I was amazed at how much better I felt after I got a job and left all that behind. Even though I had processed this information, I still didn’t understand the claim about the nanny state liberals.

      Now, after 2008, after the rose-colored glasses came off, and after I saw liberals like Michelle Obama target fat kids, and saw a congress full of liberals try to stick all Americans with higher health care costs, I fully understand the concept of the nanny state liberal.

      I still maintain that Republicans are generally extremists whose policies are bad for the little guys, but now I understand how liberal waves of abusive power (from Tammany Hall to FDR to the hippified 60s) have forced these people generation after generation into this sort of rhetoric and world view (conservatives have done the same; they’re like two barking-mad dogs trying to run each other off the yard endlessly). It’s not conservatives’ objections that are the problems; it’s the solutions they offer. Liberals are well meaning, and it’s not their reasoning that is the problem; it’s also their solutions.

      • Thanks for a healthy dose of good old common sense.

        • “Common sense?” Yah sure.

          And Lovelalola, feel free to refund my tax dollars (prorated of course) that allowed you to eat & keep a roof over your head while getting the education that got you the job that allowed you the time to mull over the toxic effects of that “liberal nanny state” that–you know–allowed you to eat and keep a roof over your head while getting the education that…. etc. etc.

          Gawd (or whoever) help us all…

          • This attack on another poster, Lovelalola is entirely unwarranted and belongs in the spam filter. Welfare is intended to help people when they need assistance and in her case, it WORKED. She went to school and now is able to support herself. I have no problem with my tax dollars going towards that cause. It’s called helping others and making the community better, from which we all benefit.

          • Outis, your reading comprehension ain’t so good. I agree with you about welfare and the public good, but it would seem Lovelalola does not.

            Therefore what I was attacking was the hypocrisy of someone who apparently was fine with those awwwful “nanny state liberals” as long as their terrible socialist state was keeping a roof over her head, food on her table, and providing her with the education she (or maybe he?) needed to get a job and get off welfare.

            Now that she’s successfully made the break, however, she’s decided that the nanny/welfare state was an awful, abusive thing that negatively affected her worldview and her view of herself. Presumably she now wishes she’d done without it. because as everyone knows, sleeping on park benches and dumpster diving for food is so much better for one’s self esteem than is accepting “liberal nanny state” handouts.

            So yeah, I want my money back. She can damn well do her Republican* “I got mine but you shouldn’t get yours because welfare is baaad for you” on somebody else’s dime.

            *Anyone who thinks the Obamas are liberals and that Obamacare is even close to being a liberal plan is a Republican who gets her talking points straight from the likes of Limbaugh and Beck. It’s just that simple.

          • That’s not what said. I never said I didn’t want others to get help. But I do understand because of my experience that the vast majority of people do not have the skills or the help to navigate that complicated system, and thus they are stuck in that system for a long time. Those good folks suffer from what I suffered from for years, and they don’t know there’s another way because they aren’t told or shown how to get out. I had to fight to get out.

            However, I will point out in closing that you demonstrate the remarkable problem that a lot of self-identified liberals have. You’re approach is to slam and berate, and that is why you will never have any real credibility or power to affect the change you want to see.

          • I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how you can expect to come on a liberal blog and bash “nanny state liberals” and their “waves of abusive power” without expecting some blowback, especially when you do us real liberals the ultimate insult by characterizing Barack Walker Bush Obama (and his ghastly HCR) as liberal. At least you didn’t call him a radical Socialist… 😉

            Trust me, no one who calls Social Security an “entitlement” as Obama and his minions do is anything remotely like a liberal. Obama is a Republican, and a conservative Republican at that, as his continuation and even expansion of Dubya’s policies (and wars) makes that obvious to anyone who ignores what he says and watches what he does instead.

            And instead of biting the hand that seems to have fed, housed and educated you, why don’t you share what you’ve learned about navigating the welfare system with those coming up after you? Write a book, or at least a pamphlet? hold some seminars?

            Or if you still want to see the end of the “nanny state,” what do you propose to put in its place?

  24. An astute post as always

    The biggest obstacle for Sarah is the GOP establishment who will favor someone like Romney. The last thing they want is a nominee that’s a real maverick reformer. If Sarah convinces them to support her (or at least not oppose her) then she has an excellent shot at winning the nomination.

    That is absolutely her biggest problem. Once they are on board, the David Lettermen’s will sit down….and the MSM will give Palin the McCain love train treatment. That’s all she’s lacking . But it might suit the upper crust nicely to follow a black POTUS with a woman…and nothing changes. Sweet.

  25. This is an interesting turn of events:

    Virginia Senate bills say no to requiring health insurance

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020103674.html

  26. “Could Sarah win? Oh you betcha!”


    W ruined the country.

    Obama ratified all that was ruined and added to it …

    so Prez Palin most likely will ratify Obama’s mess and add to it some more …

    ….. As the story goes, citizen deserve the leader they have.The last 10 years have certainly shown us that that is so.

    Maybe it takes Prez Palin for the folk to Wake Up because right now they are in deep sleep. Thinking they are safe.

    Losing their civil rights and the distruction of the constitution doesn’t seem to bother Americans NOW. Or the death of thousands of people in foreign lands. Anyone scared about the new laws? American citizen can be killed at home and abroad without any rights … just like the people in Gitmo type prisons).

    Liberals (incl. former Obamafans) who are so disappointed with Prez O and Dem have already said they wont vote for Dems. Even if the revenge vote puts someone like Palin – who is a disaster, -will march into the WH.

  27. […] Even if this hypothesis were to be proven true, are you fucking kidding me?  We’re supposed to be impressed by this supposition that playground level gamesmanship proves political acumen?  Hello?  Anybody on any of the planets represented here home?  Can she win?  Should she win?  Who the fuck cares?  Why? […]

    • I am not kidding anybody.

      Unfortunately I con’t understand your post – so I can’t respond.

      Sorry!

    • Cinie, the question isn’t really about Palin’s qualification. The nation already took that test on qualification with Hillary and failed. It’s about whether she’s electable. As to whether she’s tough enough, yeah, she’s probably tougher than BO. I’m personally not able to support her, but myiq has laid out the potential scenario pretty clearly imo.

  28. I will NEVER vote for Palin! She is a REPUBLICAN…not an indepenent. She’s doing the usual GOP messaging.
    Furthermore, she seems to be another “pied-piper” candidate…charisma heavy, but she quit her job as gov. just as things got tough, is doing the Fox circuit as a commentator, and really has any experience other than running Alaska for 2 years during the good times. She’s a politician, but no better than John Edwards or Obama. Both quit their jobs (I say Obama quit as Senator as soon as he got to D.C. so he could campaing), complete with the campaign book hitting the shelves.

    When Palin quit midstream in Alaska and started revealing all her conservative crap on abortion etc. etc. it make me sick.

    I am totally turned off to her…and NO, I’m not a sexist!! I just am not in the mood for a media-created “pied-piper” candidate being shoved at me!! 2008 was quite enough for me!!

    • PS…the FOX stint is what Wes Clark did, remember? Seems to be the latest trend…

    • I never said she should win or endorsed her or her policies.

      I said she could win.

      • myiq2xu,

        Same here.

        And yes, as of now, I would say she COULD win.

      • I know that, I’m responding to those who say they’ll vote for her just because she’s a woman or whatever.
        Your article is fine!

        It’s the Democratic Party who has gotten into this mess!

        As for Biden being dumped…why the hell would Hillary want to run as Obama’s VP??? Why sully her reputation? She shoud run on her own! I wish she’d help us put the present pretennd Democratic Parfty out of its misery!!

        • I agree with that. I really hope Hillary doesn’t fall for that crap. Being SoS is great and pretty independent of the WH in many ways. Which is why she has not been pulled down in ratings from the WH.

          I rather believe her when she says she will be mostly retired after this term. I think she and Bill should write books and run foundations and take it a bit easy.

        • I didn’t say I’d vote for her just because she’s a woman (although her gender is certainly a big plus).

          I said I’d vote for her as the more liberal and experienced of the candidates if she runs against Obama in 2012, just as I voted for her (and for John McCain–who wanted to reinstate the HOLC,* if anyone but me remembers) in 2008.

          And I’d go easy on the multiple ??? !!!!! if I were you–it’s a dead giveaway that you still have soapsuds behind your ears, know what I mean?

          Finally, as Harry Truman famously said,

          “Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican every time.”

          Something like that, anyway… 😉
          *********

          *FDR’s Home Owners’ Loan Corporation

        • oh yes, I would vote for her just because she is a woman. Black people voted for Obama just because he was black. Men vote for men just because they aren’t women. they have been doing it for hundreds of years.. So why the hell, given the republican, anti woman anti liberal and incompetent nature of Obama and crew, why the hell shouldn’t I vote for someone just because she is a woman?

    • Same here. That “death panel” rant was really over the top. Somehow her Apr. 16, 2008, declaration of “Healthcare Decisions Day” as gov. to “encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to … increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives” was scrubbed.

    • You’re shitting me. She’s a REPUBLICAN! I would have never guessed that the GOP VP candidate was a Republican.

      Oh the horrors, quick to the fainting couch.

    • Before Palin hit the national stage she had an 89% approval rating because she took on the good old boy network in AK, within her own party and gained true bi-partisan support in the legislature and with voters.

      After the election the Obama-DNC went after her in AK. You complain that she didn’t stay and go bankrupt defending herself against Obama and lame complaints? A damn jacket set off an investigation, and we saw how Obama and his supporters thought it was funny Hillary was burning through cash to defend herself against him.

      So frankly, it was smart to quit the AK Gov office. How much does she and AK have to pay because she was planted firmly in Obama’s noodle since Aug 08? He damned near ran against her. A Prez candidate obsessed with the VP ticket of the opponent. He expected her to stay and take the beating and basically you are saying she should have stayed and taken it too. Why stay and let the Obama machine frame who she was? She quit, turned the tables, and from Facebook started framing HIM. Brilliant move and a much different reason to quit.

      John Edwards or Obama didn’t have the WH, the MSM, the RNC, and their opposition legislators focused against them when they quit. While I understand the frustration you feel…..the context simply isn’t the same.

      And truly a lot of your complaint seems to resemble the MSM smears and to be blunt they were lying bastards in all things Clinton so why does MSM shorthand hold sway over you with Palin? There are plenty of other policy reasons you can site I am sure, but why bother with the MSM stuff?

      Anyway, I would vote for her over Obama because I think he is a corporate wh*** and I refuse to ever reward that man for stealing the primaries. I think it is a subversion of democracy what he and the DNC did. They can no longer count on my vote because at this point the Rep candidate is the lesser of two evils. And it still upsets this Dem to say that all these months later.

      As far as abortion….well we’ve seen how much the Dems care about that woman folk stuff. 😉 And Palin trumps them on the gay rights front as well with that veto. She has shown more spine for gay rights as a Rep then Dems have.

    • she gave very good reasons for resigning as the Governor of Alaska and none of them were “the going is getting rough”.
      the Obama campaign continued to harass her with nonsense ethic charges each of which got thrown out of court but not before they cost her personally 500,000 bucks. She is not rich, they are middle class. Who the hell can afford that. In addition, she felt that her job as governor was being sent off track with all the law suits.
      That Obama bunch is a rancid set. I won’t ever vote for them.

      • Before she resigned the Obots described her job as the equivalent of being mayor of a medium sized city. After she resigned she was “abandoning the people of her state”

        I think she did it for two reasons. The first was money. She was making something like $150K a year and was strictly limited in what she could accept as outside income. By the time she finished her term her market value would have likely dropped significantly.

        Now she can collect $100K just for giving a speech, with no limits. Between her book and giving speeches she will have financial security for the rest of her life.

        But her primary reason was she wants to run for POTUS and that’s hard to do when you have a full time job a couple time zones away from the rest of the country.

  29. Totally Puerile Mush:

    Man Charged With Stockpiling Weapons Was Tea Partier, Palin Fan

    John Hinckley Jr. was a Jodie Foster fan. Does that make shooting Reagan her fault?

  30. Few Want Congress Re-elected

    Feb. 12 (Bloomberg) — Just 8 percent of Americans want the members of Congress re-elected, according to a CBS News-New York Times poll taken nine months before roughly one-third of the Senate and the entire House face voters.

    The Feb. 5-10 survey found 81 percent of respondents saying the lawmakers shouldn’t receive another term.

    By 80 percent to 13 percent, Americans said members of Congress are more interested in serving special interests than the people they represent.

    I don’t think we should ever again say people don’t understand their government and the people in it.

  31. Nailed it perfectly – excellent read myiq2xu, take a well deserved bow.

  32. Don’t forget that Bush was a “reformed” alcoholic, so you couldn’t share beers with him. He might have a Gatorade or Coke with you.

    Would have been a damn boring exchange for me, but I have to say that I’ve known successful, intelligent people who specialize in the Shrub bullshit (they made it big on fraternity/sorority row, too).

  33. Let’s start calling Emanuel, Axelrod, Jarrett, Gibbs the Gang of Four. Obama is a fascist not a communist but their corruption and power-mongering still apply:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_Four

    The Gang of Four was the name given to a leftist political faction composed of four Chinese Communist Party officials. They came to prominence during the Cultural Revolution and were subsequently charged with a series of treasonous crimes. The members consisted of Jiang Qing, Mao Zedong’s last wife and the leading figure of the group, and her close associates Zhang Chunqiao, Yao Wenyuan, and Wang Hongwen.

    The Gang of Four effectively controlled the power organs of the Communist Party of China through the latter stages of the Cultural Revolution, although it remains unclear which major decisions were made through Mao Zedong and carried out by the Gang, and which were the result of the Gang of Four’s own planning. The Gang of Four, together with disgraced Communist general Lin Biao, were labeled the two major “counter-revolutionary forces” of the Cultural Revolution and officially blamed for the worst excesses of the societal chaos that ensued during the ten years of turmoil. Their downfall in a coup d’état on October 6, 1976, a mere month after Mao’s death, brought about major celebrations on the streets of Beijing and marked the end of a turbulent political era in China.

      • That’s about right, describes Obama fans:

        Damaged Goods

        The change will do you good
        I always knew it would
        Sometimes I’m thinking that I love you
        But I know it’s only lust
        Your kiss so sweet
        Your sweat so sour

        Your kiss so sweet
        Your sweat so sour
        Sometimes I’m thinking that I love you
        But I know it’s only lust
        The sins of the flesh
        Are simply sins of lust
        Sweat’s running down your neck
        Heated couplings in the sun
        (Or is that untrue?)
        Colder couplings in the night
        (Never saw your body)
        Your kiss so sweet
        Your sweat so sour
        Sometimes I’m thinking that I love you
        But I know it’s only lust
        The change will do you good
        I always knew it would
        You know the change will do you good

        Damaged goods
        Send them back
        I can’t work
        I can’t achieve
        Send me back
        Open the till
        Give me the change
        You said would do me good
        Refund the cost
        You said you’re cheap but you’re too much
        Your kiss so sweet
        Your sweat so sour
        Sometimes I’m thinking that I love you
        But I know it’s only lust
        The change will do you good
        I always knew it would
        You know the change will do you good

        I’m kissing you goodbye
        (Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye, goodbye, goodbye)

  34. We must never stop mocking her unbelievable lack of smarts, veracity and substance.

    The left continues to ensure that Palin will be President in 2012 with their sexist double standards (calling women dumb, liars and airheads).

    • Yes, I’m going to need a lot of reminding of how desperately the left hates women to keep up my resolve to throw the bastards out of power.

  35. Excellent work myiq. I saw oprah interview Sarah (flipping channels, caught my attention). Oprah was rather brusque and patronizing (oprah, really?); seemed to want to pick on Sarah; by the end oprah called Sarah governor palin– palin softened her through her communication skills. I Aldo think it is stupid strategy for dens to keep beating the “she’s dumb” drum. The only way to defeat her (actually what am I saying she’s a woman in America– duh. But if there was consistency in political melodrama..) the only way to defeat her would be to go after the policy positions… As many here have pointed out– she can connect with people.
    She connected some with oprah and that should scare all obamatrons.

  36. What does a politician have to do before even their staunchest supporters finally have to admit that they are not up to the task of leading a church prayer, much less the United States? The answer eludes many people in the Republican Party and, especially, the Tea Party movement. It seems that some politicians are given a free-pass when it comes to even the most basic knowledge. Take Sarah Palin. If you look at the list of statements that this woman has made over the last 18 months, it is mind boggling that anybody would ever want her as the leader of the free world and chief executive in charge of our highly complex government. Let’s review her history here:

    This is the same woman who told Charlie Gibson of ABC in a nationally televised interview that her foreign policy expertise included the fact that Russia could be seen from an island off the coast of Alaska. This, I might add, is an island that Palin had never once set foot upon. “You never know when ole Mr. Putin is gonna come flyin’ over here…”.

    When asked which periodicals and publications she has been reading to keep up on national and world affairs, Palin told Katie Couric that she reads “them all”. Whenever Palin is baffled by a question she uses her standard “I like ‘em all” answer, and that’s what she did. To this day, we still do not know what Palin reads to keep informed about national issues. Until four years ago, she never even had a passport and had never left the United States.

    Sarah Palin has stated publicly and with great pride that she does not accept the theory of evolution, and that she believes in a literal translation of the Bible. This means that Palin believes mankind walked alongside living dinosaurs and that the world is only 6,000 years old. Of course, when asked which book of the Bible she likes most, she would no doubt say, “I like ‘em all.” Now, certainly, people are free to believe whatever they like, but Palin’s utter rejection of the scientific method and anti-intellectual attitude hardly makes her the ideal leader of a nation of 300 million people.

    When asked by Glenn Beck who her favorite Founding Father was, Palin stumbled with the question, then said– you guessed it– “I like ‘em all.” When pressed by Beck, Palin said she liked George Washington the most, not knowing that Washington was a general and not one of the Founding Fathers. Furthermore, in her stone ignorance, she chose a man who actually favored a strong central government as well as the formation of a national bank. In other words, George Washington stood for everything that Palin says she is against.

    Probably one of Ms. Palin’s most hysterical misstatements occurred during the campaign when she referred to “the great country of Africa”. More recently, she didn’t seem to know why there was a North and South Korea. One has to wonder if she thinks the Berlin Wall is still standing or if she can’t figure out who’s buried in Grant’s Tomb.

    When Palin resigned her position as governor of Alaska 18 months before her term was up, she said in a televised statement that she did it because “most lame duck governors just go on junkets and cost the tax-payers money. I didn’t want to put the good people of Alaska through that.” So she quit. Later, she said that she quit because of all the lawsuits concerning her ethics violations and abuses of power. More recently, she has said she quit because she couldn’t help the American people unless she was freed from the responsibilities of that job. Now. she’s giving speeches for $100,000 a pop.

    During the Tea Party convention, Palin made several insulting remarks about President Obama, one of which accused him of being “a law professor lecturing the American people behind a lecturn using a teleprompter.” Of course, she failed to realize that she was doing precisely the same thing, only she was using the palm of her hand instead of a teleprompter. I suppose she expects the President to memorize all of his speeches, including his State of the Union addresses. In any case, Palin clearly doesn’t think that knowing the law and the Constitution is an asset for a president, nor does she believe that the President of the United States deserves even a modicum of respect. Perhaps a plumber would be better. Or a sportscaster. Or a beauty contestant. Doesn’t matter. Palin likes ‘em all.

    What Palin is most known for is her bald-faced lie about “death panels” in the health care reform bills. Despite the fact that every fact checking organization had debunked that outrageous lie, Palin stuck to her guns. Of course, she would never admit that private insurance companies already utilize de facto death panels by denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and canceling the policies of people who become ill. According to Sarah Palin, the insurance companies are more interested in providing decent medical care to their customers than just increasing their profits.

    Palin has referred to President Obama on numerous occasions as a socialist and even a communist, even though the two philosophies are quite different. She refuses to define what she means by “socialist”, no doubt because she doesn’t have the definition written on the palm of her hand. If she did, she would know that none of Obama’s policies are socialistic because Obama has nationalized no businesses and, even in the various rescues of failing corporations, he hasn’t put any government employees into the boardrooms. Those companies needed to be bailed out in order to avoid a greater economic catastrophe. Of course, Palin believes that Obama should have just let the auto companies fail, even though doing so would have caused hundreds of thousands of Americans to lose their jobs and essentially turned over that industry to foreign manufacturers.

    While Palin attacks Obama’s economic policies, leave us not forget that this is the same woman who asked the government for a $230 million earmark to construct a bridge to nowhere. When the press picked up on this chunk of Palin pork, the request was immediately withdrawn.

    Palin and her husband, Todd, were both members of the Alaskan Independence Party, which has favored that state’s secession from the Union. Recently, in Texas to stump for Governor Perry, Palin threw out the “secession” word again to great applause. In any other country, this would be called sedition. In Palin’s case, it’s just gross ignorance and political opportunism.

    In a closed session at the White House, Rahm Emanuel told a group of liberal activists that their idea to air attack ads targeting conservative Democrats who were against the health care reform bill was “f’ing retarded”. Palin, who has inserted her special needs child into the political arena before, got ahold of this remark and demanded that Emanuel immediately resign. Then, when Rush Limbaugh said on national radio that all Democrats are retards, Palin went on FOX News and said Rush was using “satire” to make a point. She defended Limbaugh’s use of the word and his characterization of all Democrats. Actually, both men were saying quite similar things. But, according to Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh should get a pass. This could be called hypocrisy, but I don’t think it is. I think Palin actually believes what she’s saying and is just too dim to understand that there was no difference between what Emanuel and Limbaugh said.

    Sarah Palin is an “empty vessel” and a demagogue. She doesn’t know enough about politics to even be called an ideologue. She never speaks in specifics about any issue and is always on the attack, never offering a single constructive alternative. Why? Because she doesn’t have any. It is far easier to make insinuations, use innuendo, and attack someone with empty-headed sarcasm than it is to develop your own well thought out ideas and articulate them in a comprehensible manner.

    We all get a good laugh about Sarah’s gaffes and absurd statements, but it’s about time to stop laughing. This is a person who is building a political movement on the cult of her personality alone. She is a classic fascist masquerading as a populist who has managed to win the hearts and minds of far too many Americans. Even if she never ran for president, her influence on our political process and election outcomes could do great damage to the country. Elia Kazan, the Academy Award-winning film director, said many years ago that the greatest danger to our democracy would be having person of no ability or intellect elected to high office based solely on their personality and appearance.

    • Elia Kazan, the Academy Award-winning film director, said many years ago that the greatest danger to our democracy would be having person of no ability or intellect elected to high office based solely on their personality and appearance.

      That didn’t stop Bush or Obama from entering the WH. The Village lowered the bar to let these two jump over it and now they are scrambling out of wild fear that some hockey mom in a skirt might write six words on her hand and jump over that bar too. I wouldn’t vote for Sarah Palin, but the same MSM that thought Bush and Obama were fit for the WH has some nerve to be suddenly so very afraid.

      • Oops the comment I responded to isn’t here anymore.

      • Yep. Obviously TPTB are running scared. They’ve got the spambots out in force and spreading their talking point lies.

        myiq, maybe you should post your comment from RL explaining the difference between an teleprompter and handwritten notes. It seems the spambots need a constant reminder.

        • You can lead a troll to water but you can’t make them take a bath.

        • This one?:

          A teleprompter screen displays the full text of a speech a few lines at time. The speaker merely reads the words aloud as they scroll past and need not have written the speech or even have the expertise to do so.

          Notes only contain reminders of key points – the speaker must either have memorized the bulk of the speech or be able to extemporize on each topic and subtopic.

          • Yes. Thanks! An excellent comparison that even koolaid-addled spambots should be able to understand (even as they pretend not to). We should probably sticky it cuz I think this one’s gonna keep popping up like one of those damn wack-a-moles.

          • Unfortunately the bots prefer style over substance…I would guess that some of them aren’t even pretending not to understand the difference, they really think the six words on Citizen Sarah’s hand is more embarrassing than this:

      • Oh, great, Kazan is the prog hero now? We should preserve democracy by informing on our colleagues. Once we eliminate the competition, they’ll pretty much have to fête us, there’s no one else left.

    • We all get a good laugh about Sarah’s gaffes and absurd statements, but it’s about time to stop laughing.

      What do you mean when you say “we?” You and your Kool-aid buddies?

      This is a person who is building a political movement on the cult of her personality alone.

      A movement? Like Obama for America?

      She is a classic fascist masquerading as a populist who has managed to win the hearts and minds of far too many Americans. Even if she never ran for president, her influence on our political process and election outcomes could do great damage to the country.

      I guess you want us to burn her at the stake before she bewitches anyone else.

      Elia Kazan, the Academy Award-winning film director, said many years ago that the greatest danger to our democracy would be having person of no ability or intellect elected to high office based solely on their personality and appearance.

      Once again, you describe Obama.

    • shut up, seriously, you have no idea what an sheep like obot a$$hole you sound like.

    • Even if she never ran for president, her influence on our political process and election outcomes yocould do great damage to the country.

      Gosh you’re so right, it might have taken Sarah Palin a year to figure out that JOBS thing was more than just a “three letter word.” Unlike that Obama-Bide…oh wait. Okay, so Biden can’t count and Obama has been learning on the job that people aren’t kidding about needing JOBS…

      So it’s not been a perfect first year… change isn’t easy!!

      And, who can forget Sarah Palin telling Katie Couric this:

      “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed.

      Gosh, doesn’t she know that Hoover was president when the stock market crashed? And, that tv sets weren’t widely available then? Didn’t she learn that in one of the four colleges she attended?

      Oh… wait.. Sarah Palin didn’t say that to Katie Couric. Joe Biden did.

      Yeah, good thing Katie Couric’s intrepid expose kept Palin away from a largely ceremonial position and Biden is there to help Obama instead!

      Obama’s pick of Timmeh Geithner as Treasury Secretary…what a relief. Imagine the Wall Street guy that Sarah Palin would have picked!

      Having Hillary Clinton carrying out Obama’s foreign policy instead of carrying out her own domestic policy. More relief. We really dodged a bullet there.

    • Reagan was a clueless, uninformed idiot who became President and hero of the Republican Party. She should at least be given the same respect as Ronald Reagan. The left’s sexist double standard will make her President in 2012. The writing’s on the wall.

      Isn’t it true one can see the Soviet Union from the furthest edge of Alaska. I’ve heard of the years this was true.

      What woman cares who the Founding Fathers now especially when they probably care more about Founding Mothers. I wouldn’t be able to tell you who my favorite Founding Father was because due to the times there is something repulsive about each of them.

      The left sexually harrassed Palin and Clinton out of office. She didn’t want frivolous, Democratic lawsuits to cost her taxpayers any longer. She owed hundreds of thousands in legal fees herself and wrote her book to recoup these fees. The Clintons left office in debt and it took two of Bill Clinton’s memoirs to recoup the loss.

      Obama needs a teleprompter for any speech he makes. This is a much bigger issue that Palin’s crib notes. She gave her half hour speech by memory which is something Obama cannot do.

      The RNC, Chuck Grassley, Betsy McCaughey and seven other Republicans spoke about the death panels before she posted about it on her Facebook. The fact she communicates well like Ronald Reagan is not her fault. Better to argue against Reaganite ideas than make ad hominem, false attacks based on sexist, double standards. Why don’t leftists call Chuck Grassley a “bald-faced liar” instead?

      Most Americans even liberals couldn’t tell you the difference between socialism and communism. I have to think hard myself before answering that one.

      Obama and his Gang of Four have done things much worse than the bridge to nowhere earmark and have been more hypocritical than saving insults for the other side.

      Reagan was an empty vessel and demagogue. If you can’t show the same respect for her you have for someone like Ronald Reagan, you are simply behaving in a sexist manner and this is exactly why Palin will be President. Obama is a fascist moreso than Bush. He was elected solely on his personality, appearance and speechifying (now we know it was bullshitting) abilities. If you can’t give Palin the same respect as Reagan and Obama for the same atrributes you are responsible for Palin’s Presidency.

      • Reagan was the precursor for Bush and Bush for Obama. Reagan had his California ranch, Bush had Crawford, and Obama had an infomercial with a fake Camp David.

    • Obama needs a teleprompter for any speech he makes. This is a much bigger issue that Palin’s crib notes. She gave her half hour speech by memory which is something Obama cannot do.

      Question and Answer sessions in which he lies he is liberal don’t count.

    • Palin is a fundamentalist in the vein of a Huckabee or Romney.

      Didn’t Huckabee make a ton of outlandish statements in the past few years? Wasn’t he the frontrunner until recently?

      The left’s sexism lost not only 2008 but 2012.

  37. >>The biggest obstacle for Sarah is the GOP establishment who will favor someone like Romney. The last thing they want is a nominee that’s a real maverick reformer.

    And that’s the last thing the Democrats wanted in 2008. Which is what should have sent up red flags about Obama. How stupid were the Palin bashers about him?

    Carolyn Kay
    MakeThemAccountable.com

    • It was more fun for Palin bashers to worry about what Palin would have done as President (even though she was running for VP) than it was (and still is) for them to worry the same about Obama. And, what did all that Palin bashing accomplish anyway? They kept her out of the vice presidency only to embolden Palin as an entity totally separate from the relatively more moderate Republicanism that she would have been somewhat co-opted by, or at least constrained by, if she had been McCain’s VP.

      The John Kerrys go on Larry King now and call Sarah Palin the merging of politics into entertainment… but it’s the Palin bashers who want to be “entertained” and distract with what Sarah Palin would do as president, or “the damage she would do even if she never ran for president.” Much easier to send out a DSCC e-mail invoking the fear of What Sarah Palin would have done or could still do, then it is for them to address the damage Obama-Biden are actually doing in the WH, as well as to the Democratic brand.

    • For the first time since I can remember a Democrat (or so he claims) was the “media darling” and nobody found that the least bit suspicious?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: