Palin forensics, Day Two

While I'm not a fan, and I do think the media Palin pile-on was getting ridiculous, I seriously doubt that she's resigning as governor because Andrew Sullivan, David Letterman, Vanity Fair, et. al. were being mean to her. How hard would it have been for her to announce she's not running for President, and then quietly finish out her term as governor of Alaska, 3000 miles away from the "media grandees" that hate her so much? Something else is cooking, no doubt.

The media martyr excuse is weak, even if it is true.

Cry me a river. Nobody likes a whiner, and everybody hates a quitter. Sorry if that's just too tough for Mrs Barracuda.

" But nobody said it would mean a mainstream network comedy host doing statutory rape gags about your 14-year old daughter."

No one made a joke about anyone's 14-year-old daughter. And, Palin was the one responsible for that becoming an issue, with her grandstanding.

"it seems pretty clear that there won't be a President Palin, ever."

Of course not, and thank God! Besides, I don't think the American people want another "W." type in the White House.

Rod,
Long time viewer, first time poster. To say that you have bought into the media elite groupthink on Palin is an understatement. Bottom line on Sarah is that the people you are siding with despise her because she chose to have a special needs child and not abort. That's the reason they hate her. You have thrown in with the very people that look down their nose at us. I know, I know you ... you will tell me she's not ready, she is not a policy expert. All the Ivy Leaguers have ran this country down the drain. Character should and does matter and a woman who chose to bring a special needs child into the world has it. Come on Rod, pick a side in the culture war and don't throw in with Scarbourgh, Frum et al.

Not everyone can handle the pressures of national politics, and that's no judgment on the personal character of soon-to-be-former Governor Palin.

But that is a judgment of her political character. If she can't handle Katie Couric or David Lettermen or people just being mean, then I question her ability to handle real political problems.

Nixon was written off in a similar way. In 1962.

The true back story according to ‘insiders’ who know ‘outsiders’ who used to be insiders getting info from former insiders who are now ‘out’;

Sarah Palin’s backup hairdresser at Chateau Curly-Girlie, Joyce Saltwater-Brown, a bi-racial Eskimo/ African-American describing herself as a ‘former lesbian’ part-time carpenter who at one time worked with Palin’s husband as a fisherperson intern during the seasonal ‘salmon sweeps’ roundup reputedly is “talking up a storm that makes the Exxon Valdez look like something we could clean up with a moist towelette”. Saltwater-Brown reports that; while getting a ‘bang trim’, “the Governor became agitated reading a back issue of Field & Stream.” Below are the sketchy details still being pieced together by

Upon leaving, she ‘announced to my stunned salon’ ….so loudly that those ‘under the dryers became alarmed’… that she (Plain) could not only see Russia, she could see the future where she told the world leaders that ‘you listen or I will cut off all foreign aid to whoever is getting it’.

When the ‘nail girl’ Arctica’ (not her real name) seemed confused, Ms. Palin allegedly ‘backhanded the woman as she ‘buffed a callous cuticle’ of a ‘once religious partisan supporter’… at which point said customer ‘overturned the table causing ‘assorted Revlon nail enamel bottles to flood the floor’ while a ‘hair-pulling and arm-wrestling free-for-all’ lead to the police coming, paddy wagon in tow.

‘It was a nightmare’, Ms. Saltwater-Brown…..a popular Alaska native former beauty queen who worked her way through college ‘dancing’ in a ‘gentleman’s club’ under the name ‘Baba Lou’. “Governor Palin is a love”, she added in her unexplained ‘Cockney-hybrid drawl’, “but she thinks she is special while bragging that she is ordinary. As my niece Mangolina says, “Whatever!”. Adding: “I’m selling my story to the Alaska Gossip Girl Twitter feed and Sad Sarah will be toast!”

The rest, apparently, is history…or history denied. Happy Fourth of July American Birthday and a warm hug to all veterans.

Silver,
The people I speak about our the vast amount of public opinion makers and those in the halls of power. You say opinions run the gamut. I would respectively disagree. When is the last time you saw a favorable story on the MSM re:Sarah. I think it is unfair to call her a "simpleton". I don't want to be too combative but that's what the Left does. Call people names who disagree with their worldview. They call people who go to the tea parties racists. We should celebrate people who are pro-life, pro-family... not tear them down.

Don't forget the $$$$ she can earn selling books and giving lectures. Ethics rules can put a crimp in that. Leaving the governor's office takes away her only real hope to be President--showing she can rule.

She can give a great speech, but she can only rally people who already support her. She has shown no ability to go beyond the base of politically conservative, mostly rural Christians.

She shot up too high too fast. She wasn't ready and got singed. A record of competent governance might have given her a shot at the presidency. Probably not in 2012, but maybe 2016 or 2020. But now she's blown that.

So she'll just have to content herself with making millions selling books and giving speeches. Not exactly a hard life.

You can usually tell the type of person you're dealing with by the way they reference her.

Sarah is the preferred term of sychophants.
Palin is the preferred term of those that offer criticism.

It is pretty easy to tell who is enthralled in emotion.

She's a joke. All buzz and no substance. Do you really want her to run this country? Seriously? She should read more.

I've read there's an impending indictment. I can't wait for the other shoe to drop.

The GOP family values in action: Ensign, Sanford and now, Palin. I can't wait for this party to be irrelevant.

Steve,
Was Reagan the most knowledgeable technocrat no. Has Joe Biden split an atom lately. I think Huckabee graduated from Bible school and hey Mitt how's that health plan in Mass working out. Give me core convictions something that Sarah has and many others lack.

The GOP is so screwed. And no Vaseline either.

Jasper: "Even if you give Letterman the benefit of the doubt, he was making a crude sex joke about an 18-year-old. Nice.

People like Denton will countenance any insult, no matter how coarse, if it is directed against the right person."

I do give Letterman the benefit of the doubt, because that coarse joke (yes, it was coarse, and no it wasn't really funny) isn't representative of Letterman, or his brand of humor. But, the only reason you heard of it is because Palin saw it as an opportunity to play politics. Besides, the 18 year old in question is an adult, and has made herself a public figure. Public figures are completely vulnerable to this stuff, by their choice and by their own making.

It's not that the joke was directed against the "right" people, Jasper, it's that is was a FREAKING JOKE! Nothing more.

Time for a little Dr. Phil here. If a black female politician had a high school drop out son that joined the military and had a daughter that got knocked up in high school, we wouldn't be fed the line that she was the uber mother. That her oldest daughter is a flousy is something that offends people because they don't want it to be true.

I agree that the "Media Martyr" take is a load of hogwash. If she is a "normal" person, as Steyn argues, why wouldn't she just put her national ambitions aside and focus on governing Alaska, where all the "normal" people like her reside.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_accuse_veterans_of_selfishness_and.html

Obama talking about veterans' "selfishness" is a flat out lie. It's a lie, and you're cutting and pasting from a chain email. Given the sub-literate nature of the rest of your response, this is not a shock.

I suspect she wants to make some money and her star power might be at its peak right now. Regardless it is fun watching the despicable Sodomite Sully meltdown over this. From her down syndrome baby really being her daughters Sodomite Sully has distinguished himself to be one of the lowest of the low lifeforms. He has no no redeeming qualities!!

The # 1 reason she quit: The Monarch Butterfly shotgun season's been extended..heck, time's a wastin'

"Steve,
Was Reagan the most knowledgeable technocrat no"

It is kind of sad that even his supporters buy into the ignorant buffoon image. Reagan was well read. He had written extensively and given many speeches on foreign and domestic policy. You might disagree with him, but he had done his homework. If Reagan had just shown up and said, "vote for me because I am a conservative" he would have gone down in flames. He did the hard work, so he was prepared to both campaign and govern. His biography is pretty interesting if you ever have time to look into it.

Steve

Sarah has been crucified by the media.

"Crucified?" Now which side has a Jesus complex about their leader? She was a talented local politician who got thrust into the top level of the national spotlight before she was ready. She mobilized her base, but appeared to be intentionally ticking off everyone except her base.

Steve,
Respectfully, you missed my point. I do not buy into the buffoon image of Reagan. But you must admit he was not a technocrat. He had core beliefs and he governed from them (for the most part). You are doing to Palin what you accuse me of doing to Reagan. I believe that you and others are buying into the story line that the media creates for every Conservative. That is that she is ignorant. She maybe was unprepared in some ways for the national spotlight but was Obama prepared? Community organizer, State Senator, US Senator for a few months before he started his perpetual campaign. You must understand that the media and establishment types in the GOP need to destroy her. The media because does not jive with their paradigm of a feminist and the GOP because she took on the GOP in her home state and they are scared she would do the same on a National level.

I think she found quite quickly that she was really in over her head, but that after a while, she realized that it didn't matter, because nobody in government really knows what they are doing. They are like actors in a Hollywood movie (re: Reagan) who sometimes actually do live their roles, but most of the time, they are just going through motions set by the corporations.
Everything was still fine as long as nobody pushed Gov. Palin too hard, but I don't know about anyone else, but I felt she was sensibly going to quit the game a long time ago. It takes more than smiling and shooting to be a public figure, and let's face it, "governor of Alaska" wasn't exactly a public figure position until this hiccup in GOP behavior.
I am barely even interested in her reasons why, just relieved to see her take the right step. There's a shootin' revolution on the way for the whole corporatized world and I don't think we really know why or who is going to stand for what. The corporations have created so many little empires that overlap that we really don't have any honorable mores to stand for or any significant size groups of righteous-enough people to stand WITH for any particular issue. "Divide and market" has been the mantra for so long, we don't know who we really ARE in order to stand up and fight those who we know aren't US....
Unless you want to stand side by side with the "generic church of God" or some such to fight the roaming cannibalistic zombies. I'm not sure yet which side of that would include Sarah Palin, actually.

Yet another opportunity for the so-victimized religious right whiners to revisit straw man about "the left" attacking SP for having a Down's syndrome baby. Other than vicious whackos who post anonymously on the net, and those folks come in all flavors of political persuasion, no one cares about Palin choosing to have her baby or how many children she has (another straw man that Rod himself used in his first month of Palin-infatuation).

That Huff-Po blog post, since removed, was skewering Palin for hiding behind her children in her bizarre announcement the other day. It is the right that uses Baby Trig for political purposes.

Jasper: "Denton, would you give that comic 'the benefit of the doubt'?"

It would depend. But, it wouldn't make the joke any less crass or uncalled for.

"By Denton's way of thinking (2:32), it would be within bounds for a TV comic to make a crude sex joke about Michelle Obama"

That's not what I said, Jasper. You are a liar...

"people like Denton will countenance any insult, no matter how coarse, if it is directed against the right person."

...and a twit. When you stop speaking for others, and start using your brain, let me know.

BTW, for all you who so love to repeat lies about Palin... There's a letter here for you to read...

http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/07/statement-from-gov-palins-legal-counsel.html

Oh, and for those of you who said she could not govern, nor "do the job", she proved you ALL entirely wrong. Her time in office was one of great success for both Alaska and our nation. She left Alaska and our nation much better off for having been there. The goal of holding office is not "to hold office" for term after term after term until you've milked all there is to get, or have so spoiled things you can't get elected again. The real reason to hold office is to serve. And if people intend to obstruct you serving in one position... you leave and go elsewhere. Leaving office voluntarily means only one thing... That you're not in it for the sake of holding office.

I hold up Ted Kennedy for you as the example of total shame. And Obama, who has never "served", but "grasped opportunity" to empower himself. Both hold office to hold office, for the power and thrill of it.

Sanford, and others, who have personal failings do not exhibit anywhere near the shame as one who holds office, merely to hold office. And there's lots of those - regardless of initials after their name.

You are so used to seeing people leave office ONLY when they can no longer retain it, and actively cheering for those people to retain it, that when someone comes along who views "holding office" of little importance, certainly less important than the better interests of the people they are supposed to serve, that you consider it a flaw.

I see it as a virtue.

A history lesson. The "bad acts" for which Nixon resigned were thought to be "bad" in that day. Obama has already committed all of them and worse. Even Nixon's party would not countenance his actions. Yet, today, you speak no ill of Obama, who has acted repeatedly now to obstruct justice, clearly and with obvious intent. And yet people scream bloody murder that Sarah Palin is unfit for office for wearing her husband's jacket on a day when he started a deadly dangerous sporting event.

Most of you would have been a blubbering ball of nerves in her/his situation. Yet, she faced it with calm and smiles and cheer. This means either she is a stone hearted brick... Or at peace with herself. There is no evidence in the Palin's lives that they are stones or amoral or unfeeling, so one must conclude the other. Tests of character reveal much. Whether it's the Iron Dog race, or Obama's inability to do anything but pander to get elected and then persue power with reckless abandon. Todd and Sara passed, Obama failed.

If there were not politics involved, not a one of you would ever notice the Palins. They're just ordinary working people. No political dynasty, no wealth, no fame, no fortune. If they lived next to you, they'd just be the nice folks that lived next door.

The fact that they engender such massive hate and venom among people who do not know them is proof of only one thing... the poison that politics has become. The self centered nature of our leftism driven politics, where politics has not become about "what's best for the nation and next generations", but "what gratification is in it for me?" It's all about "free" stuff you don't have to work for, and promises of having those who don't have get others haves get 'redistributed' to you.

Palin represents the success of the opposite of modern liberalism. In her life, her politics, and even her political success. And that's why so many here cannot resist, and in fact, wallow in the bitterness, spite, venom, and outright hatred - and do not care if all it is untrue. One needs only to justify one's own behavior, if the goal is nothing more than self gratification.

Once liberalism was all about equal justice and racial blindness, and liberty under just law, with maximum liberty for all. Now it's all about divisions and greed. The most venomous and intolerant people in the world are now "liberals". And I have to quote that, because the idea of "liberal" hasn't changed, just the incarnation, or perhaps evolution of, the political genre that holds the name.

I was once one. Funny thing, I have never changed any of my core beliefs, and now I'm considered a "radical right winger". Maybe it was those movies I watched and the books I read and the impassioned pleas of those who suffered in Nazi death camps and behind the Iron Curtain, and who shed blood for preservation of liberty all over the globe that "affected" me. Perhaps it was the words and deeds of those who formed this nation I live in, and I'm so naive as to think they knew something worth holding onto and defending.

But when I see the lilliputian minds defining "rights" as having someone give them all their wants, I see a blindless, ignorance, and a self centeredness I am unable to condone. I have no interest in "understanding" or "dialoging" with it. I can only condemn it, for it is evil. I have seen the virtue and good in history and I have also seen the evil in history. And it's getting more obvious every day.

Well, according to Governor Palin's rather addled reasoning articulated yesterday, once someone's a lame duck, they should get out of the way and resign, else they be perceived as "milking" it. Which means she should never vote for anyone to a term that is subject to a term limit, because such a person would be a lame duck from the beginning of their term-limited term. This eventually leads by implication to a reductio ad absurdam. As with so many things she says, it doesn't add up. Looks like she's getting out of governing Alaska when the going is getting tough. If she's going genuinely to get out of politics, then all power to her and her family. But if this turns out to be a stunt to transform her political options, it's deeply cynical. We'll see, won't we.

The GOP would be wise to avoid the temptation of Romney. Romney is a consultant - which means he sells things well but does not necessarily feel responsible to be the implementer over long, arduous tasks. He is not corrupt, but his boundless faith in his own business acumen will actually deepen problems in Washington, because he has zero appreciation and understanding of the a-rational workings and culture of people outside of business, so he would become the GOP's version of Jimmy Carter (who was a physicist by training before he became a farmer and politician): a virtuous technocrat without the ability to do the most effective work of politics. He left Massachusetts worse than unchanged; he left the Massachusetts GOP weakened. Romney or Palin would be a gift to the Democrats.

Right now, the GOP is feeling the ghosts of its amputated limbs of power. It's not in its right frame of mind, shall we say.

"Oh, and for those of you who said she could not govern, nor "do the job", she proved you ALL entirely wrong. Her time in office was one of great success for both Alaska and our nation. She left Alaska and our nation much better off for having been there."

oh what wonderful bunk. Please tell me, Arrgh, how "our nation" benefited from Sarah's 1/2-term in office. How? In any way, seriously. I mean, I understand her benefits for Alaska, as she managed to squeeze the oil companies for some more money to give, dole-style, to Alaskans who had utterly no reason to receive oil money, but how about the rest of the nation? How did she leave the United States better off? I'm truly serious. Tell us.

As far as the Trig "joke" goes, I believe it was a reference to AK blogger, Celtic Diva, who posted a photoshopped picture in which a local radio host's head replaced baby Trig.

From the left-leaning AK Mudflats blog:

There’s a bit of sage advice that most politicians take to heart: Rise above the fray. President Obama is a great example of how this works. Sarah Palin and spokeswoman Meg Stapleton are a great example of why the advice exists in the first place, and as we have seen before, they are main characters in yet another cautionary tale.

After the now infamous “Divagate” incident, Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton issued the following ill-conceived screed:

Recently we learned of a malicious desecration of a photo of the Governor and baby Trig that has become an iconic representation of a mother’s love for a special needs child.

The mere idea of someone doctoring the photo of a special needs baby is appalling. To learn that two Alaskans did it is absolutely sickening. Linda Kellen Biegel, the official Democrat Party blogger for Alaska, should be ashamed of herself and the Democratic National Committee should be ashamed for promoting this website and encouraging this atrocious behavior.

Babies and children are off limits. It is past time to restore decency in politics and real tolerance for all Americans. The Obama Administration sets the moral compass for its party. We ask that special needs children be loved, respected and accepted and that this type of degeneracy be condemned.

Just in the interest of entering the weekend with a clean slate, I thought it would be appropriate to clear up a few things. Contrary to what you may have heard from the rumor mill, I am not being paid by the Republican Party to clean up their mistakes. I do it out of the goodness of my heart.
1) desecration (noun) -

An act of disrespect or impiety toward something regarded as sacred: blasphemy, profanation, sacrilege, violation. See sacred/profane.
“Malicious desecration?” “Iconic representation?” Does the spokeswoman or the governor herself believe that a picture of she and Trig is literally a sacred object? Might be time to find that knob that says “rhetoric” and turn it down a notch…or three. I mean, if you’re worried about offending people and all.

2) Linda Kellen Biegel is not the official Democrat Partyblogger for Alaska. This requires a two part debunking, so bear with me.

a) As we all know, there is no “Democrat” Party. That’s just a made up name courtesy of Frank Luntz and Newt Gingrich, used because it ends in “rat“. Get it? It’s sort of a juvenile insult. It’s actually called the Democratic Party, and when anyone says “Democrat” party, members of the DemocratIC party instantly know they are being insulted, and they tune your message out, or think they should believe exactly the opposite. So, is she really trying to insult the 70 million Americans who are members of the Democratic Party, while simultaneously stating that she is advocating for children with disabilities? Is she only really concerned about Republican families with special needs children? Is this issue a partisan smack down? Or did she just not learn the correct name of the largest political party in the nation while she attended Georgetown University? It’s a head scratcher.

b) All that aside, the Democratic Party in Alaska does not have an official blogger. Nor does Linda Kellen Biegel have an official connection to the Democratic National Committee, which also does not have an Alaskan blogger.

Here’s the story. Linda Kellen Biegel won a contest. The Democratic National Convention Committee (the folks who planned and put together the convention last August) had a contest, and they picked a blogger from each state to attend. Linda won, and she went. That’s it. She’s not affiliated with the party in any way. Former Voice of the Times editor turned conservative talk show host Paul Jenkins talked about that today. How did he know? Simple. He asked….Linda Kellen Biegel. Clever lad.

If they have enough money, I think SarahPAC needs to bust open the piggybank and hire a fact checker. Or they should pay Stapleton 10 or 12 minutes of overtime pay so she can Google this stuff herself, or make a phone call.

3) (This is my favorite) Meg Stapleton wants the President of the United States to speak out and condemn “degeneracy” found on a local blog in Anchorage Alaska in the form of a Photoshopped image of Sarah Palin holding a baby featuring the head of a local degenerate talk show host.

http://www.themudflats.net/2009/06/26/welcome-to-the-fray/

Interesting article by Jonah Goldberg over at National Review here. I think he's right to say that if Palin can remain a national figure and if she learns how to manage the press and if she does her homework over the next couple of years and shows up in the primaries and blows everyone away with her command of the issues, then she's got a shot. Some of those are pretty big "ifs" though.

As for the resignation, let me float one more possibility that I haven't really seen mentioned much:

Palin's approval ratings in her home state have dropped but are still relatively high. But there's a decent chance that those ratings may continue to drop. Why? In 2007 and 2008, Alaska enjoyed record revenues thanks to the high oil prices that we were all paying. It's true that gas and oil prices affect Alaskans at least as hard if not harder than the rest of us down in the lower 48, but most voters didn't blame government for the run-up in prices, but speculators and oil companies instead.

But there was a huge payoff for Palin: those record revenues meant that Alaska's famous negative income tax could be bigger than ever. No wonder she had those sky high approval ratings!

But here's the problem. Oil prices have come back down to earth, at least for the time being. So while state revenues are still in decent shape by historical standards (and compared to most other states), they're nowhere near what Palin was enjoying for much of her governorship. Which means that her other, more negative qualities might start coming to the fore.

Depending on how the recession goes, she (along with many other governors) may well start collecting more baggage. If the worldwide economy remains in the toilet and oil prices drop again in the fall, then Alaska could be in for some tougher times, which might seriously damage her credentials as a successful governor.

So perhaps this is a calculated bet that either the recession will be "L" shaped or the recovery will be slow and anemic, either of which could depress oil prices and hence state revenues. By getting out now, she's quitting while she's on top. She'll also have lots of time to work on building up her organization in the lower 48, polishing her communications skills and boning up on policy.

The more I think about it, the less likely it seems to me that there's some scandal brewing. She's proven to be pretty shameless in the past. Even if it were something truly massive, her instinct would probably be to dig in and hang on until the bitter end. She doesn't strike me as the type who would go gentle into that good night.

More likely than a scandal (and I think less likely than the political calculation—as Rod points out, she is ambitious) is the possibility that this really is for her family. Trig's now over a year old and some of the consequences of his Down's syndrome may be becoming a bit more apparent. He'll need a lot of attentive care in the years to come, so perhaps that decision reflects the need to prepare for that. I hope that's the case, but I doubt it.

Ed,

I'm not surprised that some people do not think it is a good idea to have a child with Down's at an advanced age. That does not mean that those who oppose Palin generally are opposed to her decision. The generalization from a few examples is the vile lie.

"I can provide more links but you just might want to Google them yourself. Do you honestly believe that most doctors encourage women to give birth to a child known to have Downs?"

That wasn't the accusation. Let me remind you what the accusation was.

The accsation was "Bottom line on Sarah is that the people you are siding with despise her because she chose to have a special needs child and not abort."

Most doctors' advice to most women does not translate into "liberal hate for Sarah Palin." Most women can and do ignore doctors' advice when they so desire.

I have heard liberals mildly quesitoning Palin's judgment in not aborting, and I have heard liberal and conservative mothers of special needs children condemn her for running for VP. I have alos heard intelligent and fair minded people across the political spectrum questioning her judgment and integrity on a number of other more valid points-- but you can't get to "liberals hate Palin becasue she had a down's syndrome baby from those facts.

Why would they care,really? It doesn't make sense.

I'm not surprised that some people do not think it is a good idea to have a child with Down's at an advanced age.

I cannot figure out what this statement means.

Now, having a baby is always a choice in the sense that you're unlikely to get pregnant if you don't have intercourse (!), and since one's chances of having a Down's baby increase with age, the "at an advanced age" comment is nonsensical. It's like asking, is it a good idea to learn to walk at 12 months? Isn't that sort of the normal course?

I doubt that anyone "at an advanced age" or otherwise, before intercourse, says, "I know! Let's have a baby with Down's!"

But no, I think what freelunch really suggests is that Palin should have murdered the child before he managed to get born and become so inconvenient.

I can't stand Sarah Palin, but let us give credit where it is due. She didn't murder her baby. A low standard? You might be surprised.

" I believe that you and others are buying into the story line that the media creates for every Conservative."

Ummm, no. I think Jindal is bright and well informed. Romney knows his economics very well. Huckabee can speak knowledgeably on national domestic issues (still weak on foreign policy IMO). McCAin is very good on foreign affairs, though weak on domestic issues. Heck, Ron Paul is actually very bright, just odd. There are any number of other Senators/Governors and some Congress people who have an adequate knowledge base. One need not be an expert, but you need to understand the basic issues well enough to sound credible. Palin could not do that. If you were an independent listening to her, it was very clear she was in over her head. They clearly kept her away from interviews as much as possible. When she did interview, her answers were vague and showed no depth of understanding. If you were not predisposed to hate her or love her, you had to make judgments based on what you heard. If she had national aspirations, she should have been studying.

On the technocrat thing, Reagan knew the issues very well. He chose to speak in such a way that he did not sound overly wonkish. That is easier to do if you actually have studied the issues.

Steve

You can't say Rod left to enjoy the 4th of July holiday weekend without beforehand tossing some red meat on the grill for the hungry partisans to devour.

She was attacked before she said anything. I don't think her having Trig was the reason. I think it's more

She was "rural" or perceived as such.
She was Evangelical Christian or perceived as such.
She screwed up the media narrative they'd been planning. ("This election is about Obama, his strengths and weaknesses" or "It's Black Man vs White Guys")
She had never been in Congress or the Senate and was relatively new as a Governor.

I was in awe of what she accomplished while having four kids, even though yes, she had a nanny. Running for president while having five, whoa---I couldn't even imagine. I 'get' Sarah Palin. I like her--she's a real girl; not some political phoney. We need more like her.

Are any of the Palin supporters here something other than a politically conservative Christian? No? That's why she is not (at least for now) a viable national candidate. Her appeal is about as broad as Jesse Jackson's was.

And as to the daughters. I agree Sullivan was over the top (kind of like Dreher when he speaks of Nazis or Jim Crow when talking about abortion or giving the children of gay parents the protection of marriage), but if she can't deal with the likes of Sullivan, she's not going to make it.

I agree that Letterman told a tasteless joke that should never have been told, but I think he was trying to make fun of the men mentioned in the joke. He still shouldn't have mentioned a particular teenage girl, but he was not making fun of the Palin daughter.

And if you think the media was at fault for her downfall, she still needs to figure out how to deal with the media the next time around. And crying "I'm a victim" isn't dealing with it. No one wants a victim-in-chief as President

Scandals are to a politician what fleas are to a dog. Scandals are so normal that nobody cares. That's why these clowns keep being returned to office election after election. I suspect Palin said, f-k it and f-k you a$$hats. The lady has a temper. I like that.

Anyway, relax, she's history.

Jason, there are about 16,000 reasons Palin was unqualified to be VP and doesn't deserve respect as a politician or more than highly qualified respect a person. Why do you presume the media attacked her for being pro-life?

Because that makes it easier to turn Palin into a saint/martyr destroyed by the evil MSM. It's silly and insulting to pro-life critics of "saint" Sarah. But I don't think anything you'll write will persuade him to give up his chosen narrative.

I'll also note that it's interesting that the victim-obsessed Right (funny isn't it that those who love to talk about pulling oneself up by one's bootstraps have watched Oprah just as much as everyone else and loves nothing more than to be victims) talks about Maureen Dowd, etc. "destroyed" Palin but conveniently ignore how Maureen Dowd practically lost her head for Bush back in 2000. The MSM is pretty fickle and back in 2000 they though "cowboy" Bush was more 'fun' than boring old technocrat Gore...and hence we're in the trouble we're in today. But don't expect people like Jason to admit that.

Palin bears the responsibility for her negative image.

She could have gone to the convention and given a positive, uplifting, joyous, rousing, inclusive, America-celebrating speech.

Instead, at the convention she chose to give an ugly speech. She claimed to be a pit-bull and a barracuda. She made it perfectly clear, from the very beginning, that this would be nasty.

She could have given positive, uplifting speeches at her rallies.

She chose instead to give almost entirely negative, hateful speeches, and I don't remember her ever objecting to any of the hateful remarks shouted by the crowd at some of her appearances.

She also could have said "no" when asked to run. She is not qualified, and it is her responsibilty to know this.

Sorry for the cliche, but: Palin made the bed.

Sarah Palin's new Communications Director, David Murrow, is the author of two books about Christian men and the church. He's being paid a salary reported to be $103,000.

The soon to be ex-governor is also working with another Evangelical Christian author/ghost writer on her memoirs.

I think Palin's going to be taking the country by storm. A kind of "Culture Warrior" on steroids, free of the Steve Schmidts of the world. She'll be an advocate of progressing this "great nation" from one red state to the next.

The GOP divisions will be even more strained in the future as a result.

I think Alaska reporter/blogger, Shannyn Moore, said it best when describing Palin's decision to resign...

“I have said Sarah Palin’s political ambition combined with her intellect is like putting a jet engine on a golf cart; lots of horse power and no steering capabilities. Today she proved it.”

Team Palin has threatened Moore, by the way, for writing about rumors of a Federal investigation.

Interestingly enough, I think I remember reading a post by Rod about David Murrow's take on the feminization of the church, though it could have been elsewhere.

In any case, here's some more on David Murrow...

[You may purchase an autographed copy of either of these works at the website Church for Men. Murrow owns the site. Here are some snips:

How did Christianity, founded by a man and his 12 male disciples, become the province of women? There is a pattern of feminization in Christianity going back at least 700 years, according to Dr. Leon Podles, author of The Church Impotent: the Feminization of Christianity. But the ball really got rolling in the 1800s. With the dawning of the industrial revolution, large numbers of men sought work in mines, mills and factories, far from home and familiar parish. Women stayed behind, and began remaking the church in their image. The Victorian era saw the rise of church nurseries, Sunday schools, lay choirs, quilting circles, ladies’ teas, soup kitchens, girls’ societies, potluck dinners, etc.

Soon, the very definition of a good Christian had changed: boldness and aggression were out; passivity and receptivity were in. Christians were to be gentle, sensitive and nurturing, focused on home and family rather than accomplishment and career…

Some of you don’t know what I’m talking about. A feminized church? Some guys are happy with church just as it is, and see no need for change. Others are the sensitive type and actually like the macho-deficit…

Think of the pictures of Jesus you saw as a child. Didn’t they suggest a tender, sweet man in a shining white dress? As our boys grow up, whom will they choose as a role model: gentle Jesus, meek and mild, or Arnold Schwarzenegger, the action hero? The irony here is that the real Jesus is the ultimate hero, bold and courageous as any man alive, but we’ve turned him into a wimp…]

http://www.themudflats.net/2009/06/29/what-we-have-hereis-a-failure-to-communicate/

Jason,

You are the one who is choosing to attack those who aren't as conservative as you by bringing in a claim that you cannot support about the reaction to children who were born with Down's. If you had an ethical compass, you would feel shame for trying to say anything to insult those who disagree with you.

Let me make this very clear. I am perfectly happy that Sarah Palin chose to have Trig. It is not my business to tell her what to do and it is nobody else's business either. You, on the other hand, I am not happy with because you have insulted people by ascribing opinions to them that they do not have and you are so arrogant that you refuse to apologize for your false assertion.

Analysis of Palin's actions. I read and heard her speech on the topic, and a couple small items she's written.

I think most of you are completely not grasping at all what's gone on or how or why she's doing what she's doing. Oddly enough, I've been in a microcosm of her larger dilemma... One where external people became dedicated, for wholly selfish and political reasons, to obstruct carrying out the duties of the office in question. This was a small item, a volunteer position. Not the same as being governor, no, but the same principles involved.

I chose to step down in the middle, because people with the ability to hamper me were doing so. It wasn't fair to anyone involved, to be sure, but the greater good, was that someone unrelated was able to take my place and continue onward. And I helped them outside the reach of the people who were obstructing.

I'm thinking that you are all so politically brainwashed, that you've forgotten that there's still people who get into office who are NOT in the political game, and do not play it. Taking her and a number of people who have had no dog in this hunt's word, she really was just a public servant. And when it became clear that the Soros funded smear and obstruct with false charges campaign wouldn't end, the logical and responsible thing is to hand it over to someone else.

Everyone is talking like "getting and holding office" has to be the greatest ambition of a person's life. I don't see that in Palin. To take her at her word, it was just as simple as "will Alaska be better off without the distraction of the politically motivated attacks on me as Governor?" Her answer to that question was "yes" and so quietly set about to make that happen.

Everyone's comments here, including Rod's, are that it is impossible for a person to be selfless, and that Palin would never leave, clinging bitterly to power, to the end.

Really?

There's nothing in her life, anywhere, that suggests that. We all assume that politicians must have massive egos, and a fanatical lust for power. What if one didn't have those? They would do precisely what Palin did. Every thing she said boiled down to this: 'I was elected to serve. I put Alaska first in all things. When the campaign of hate towards me has become a distraction, I still put Alaska first.'

In that light, it all fits perfectly.

It's just that most of you are unable to comprehend it, it seems.

Is she right or wrong? Is her leadership so much better than her successor would be? It appears she doesn't think so.

compare that to Obama: "I won, I get all the marbles."

Really? YOu're supposed to be MY servant. Take into account MY judgement and better welfare, and instead, it's all about him. Entirely about him, and nothing but him.

Reagan never made it about himself. Neither has Palin. Obama is purely about self, and it shows in his rank dishonesty, and his slavish obesiance to radicalism. That is where character shows.

Rod's used the the judgement of the "political game" to measure Palin. Wrong yardstick. It's her character that we all admire, and not a one of you can honestly find fault. It's always about implied motives, ascribed thoughts, even completely fictional nonsense.

Ken
July 5, 2009 1:36 PM
Great posts, Socrates. Yes, Palin's disgraceful convention speech made her character clear. I particularly remember how she credited herself with "a servant's heart" (i.e for being a humble Christian)and then mocked Obama for his service as a community organizer.
====================

Service? What service? His job was to foment and drive radicalism.

He's still at it. He should not only be mocked for it, but condemned.

Today’s somewhat shocking update on this Palin turn of events is that the Alaskan governor was allegedly meeting ‘south of Nome’ with Donald Trump about a new proposed change to the (Trump owned) Miss Universe pageant. Described by outsiders who were once described as ‘inside the Palin camp’, the two were discussing ways to integrate a ‘more Christian perspective on global beauty initiatives’ into universal world pageantry in general with the ‘standard of Christian excellence’ being Miss Universe.

Former Miss USA Carrie Prejean was quoted as saying that Trump dumped a California girl for an Alaskan woman but at least the were both ‘intellectual heavyweights who keep a slender torso’ and knew how ‘to tackle tough questions in an adversarial arena’. Leaked internal memos allegedly state that Palin was proposing a replacement to the Q & A portion of the pageant in the guise of “Biblical passage quotation-a-thons” that were “sketchy in concept but earnestly conceived and carried to term and delivered via witnessing emissaries.” Trump’s people were not returning calls.

Cecelia said:

"Better still - the "I can see Russia from my front porch" so therefore I have foreign policy experience remark. Besdies the fact that she could NOT see Russia from her front porch - how on earth could one extrapolate that to "I have foreign policy experience"? Defend that sort of nonsense - of course you can't."

In all fairness, Sarah Palin said no such thing. Tina Fey said that.

Palin, in the ABC News interview with Charlie Gibson, said this:

“They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.”

Not much in the way of foreign policy cred, but that's what she really said.

I see, "Arrrghhh": Onama was fomenting and driving radicalism, not serving the poor and needy, as Christ commanded. And Sarah Palin, who demanded to speak on the night John McCain lost the election, has no lust for power. As you say, "it all fits perfectly."

Your Name
July 5, 2009 3:15 PM
Again, Arrggh got anything to back up your criticism of Obama? I think you've been asked this several times and you've yet to provide any examples of what makes Barack Obama "evil."

Of course we all suspect that you don't have any facts to add outside of what you heard on Rush Limbaugh.
==============

The forum always eats the posts. If you provide links and proof, it will eat you, as it did.

But, then, if you paid ANY attention whatsoever to what's going on, you'd know exactly what I know. So, please don't demand I enlighten you. After all, you'll only argue sources. You dont' want to know truth.

Arrgh admits that he doesn't have any proof to back up his accusations. Good. I'm glad we've settled that. Not that any of us had any doubt though.

Maybe it's "eating" the criticisms of Obama because the democrats at in control of Beliefnet? The conspiracy goes deeper than we originally thought. :)

Free Lunch and Your Name,
I need not apologize to you or anyone for defending Palin or my voicing opinions. Congrats to you both and your ilk ... Sullivan, Scarbourgh, Frum, Powell, C. Matthews. You tore down a woman who dared to join the Men's club. See you in Iowa and NH in 2011 when Sarah eviscerates the primary field of so called Conservatives. Oh wait, you'll both be behind your keyboards calling Conservative/Republican primary voters stupid for voting for her. Have you ever looked at NYT, LA Times editorials with regard to abortion. I suggest you google it and educate yourself on their thoughts on the issue. If you don't think this pervades the newsrooms of the MSM then both of you are either naive or something else.

“Are you seriously saying that the two writers there (one of whom became President, the other presumably desires that office) are both equally worthy of the same dignity?”

Geoff, considering that only one of the two actually owned slaves, not to mention slept with one of them and fathered children by that slave does distinguish the two. (Let’s hope this doesn’t give Andrew Sullivan new ideas about rumors about Sarah Palin to publish...). Not to mention Jefferson as a abolitionist knew without any doubt that slavery was morally wrong, yet still kept his slaves as slaves. Perhaps you’ve forgotten that Jefferson was a confirmed sexist and totally opposed to women’s suffrage”? "The appointment of a woman to office is an innovation for which the public is not prepared, nor am I.”
That’s all before you get to the issue of ‘Indian Removal’, a concept Jefferson pioneered.

“Like I said: once you're no longer choosing your leaders on the basis of personal excellence, you might as well just hold a lottery and let anyone be President.

Personal excellence, it should be needless to say, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with wealth, birth, social class or any like characteristic. It has everything to do with one's character and integrity, one's abilities and how one has chosen to develop them, and one's experiences and performance under difficult conditions.”

No candidate for higher office, let alone President is going to satisfy everyone’s definition of ‘personal excellence’. While Obama may have superior educational credentials over Gov. Palin, neither Occidental, nor Columbia, nor Harvard appeared to improve his character based upon the people surrounding him like Raila Odinga, Ayers, Dorhn, Khalid Al-Mansour, the Chandoo Brothers, Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi, numerous members of the Nation of Islam, ISNA, CAIR, not to mention working and thriving in the capital of ethical political behavior, Chicago.

Personally, I like Gov. Palin, because she's a self-made woman, and working class one at that. I also like Carla Sarkozy, who at least made a career for herself and didn't pray on racial and ethnic identity guilt to build a career...

Unconfirmed and controversial reported Tweet updates later today allegedly suggest that Governor Palin is allegedly forming an experimental ‘new church-based non-profit center’ in Guam that will study overall feasibility and ‘sacred quality of life’ impacts re: 'the Governor's dream for Alaska and our great nation of common people'; importing Bering Strait icebergs “to tropical ports and beyond” to “cool the average hardworking lower 48 All-American Jack and Jill.”

Arrghhh, what about all the people who supported Palin with time and money? She kinda took their money and ran, don't you think? She's got her big book contract, but they don't have the governor they worked for. Golly, such selfless determination.

Look, she's a nasty narcissist. She's lazy, she's meanspirited and vindicative, she's thinskinned and refuses to take advice, she has little knowledge of American history or or foreign policy, and she can't even get along with her ideological and political friends. And she lies like crazy. THe press can see all this.

Obama's not perfect (who is?), but he's a decent guy. And the press can see that. Sure her politics would guarantee her a somewhat rougher ride than a Democrat would get, but there are many conservative politicians who engender basic respect and affection. People don't respect Palin because she doesn't deserve respect. And her defenders' ranting and raving and her whining about what a victim she is won't obscure that fact.

"She completely invalidates the left's world view. She demonstrates daily that the left is... completely and utterly invalid."

I wonder what the comments of ARRRGHHH and similar folks would sound like if you substituted the word "jew" or "the N-word" every time they referenced "liberals" or "the left"?

Mike

"Oh wait, you'll both be behind your keyboards calling Conservative/Republican primary voters stupid for voting for her. Have you ever looked at NYT, LA Times editorials with regard to abortion"

Not everything is about abortion. I have had many conversations with people about Palin. The topic of her having a Down's kid just does not come up unless I am talking with her fans. I suspect there is that 2% of the population that is nuts and cares, just as there are the nutty 2% who want to turn our country into a theocracy. TBH, I do not know how many kids McCain has. I do not remember how many Palin has. I do not care about her kids at all. I never look to see how many kids any politician has. I care about her policy expertise, her level of knowledge about foreign policy. She ought to have an broad knowledge of recent, say the last 50 years, of American history. She should have a solid background in economics. In a word, she needs competence.

If all you care about is abortion, just say so. In that case, I can understand your support for Palin.

Steve

Does anybody else read the comments here and feel you're stumbling around in dense fog with people shouting at each other from all directions?

Unconfirmed PR releases leaked late today by former ‘Palin cronies’ allege that the Governor is ‘in talks’ with ‘Hollywood heavyweights’ about a possible re-make of the 1970s classic Sally Fields movie, ‘Norma Rae’. The twist will allegedly be that this takes place in Alaska and ‘addresses seal clubbing’ rather than the original which dealt with non-union factory workers. Inexplicably, producers are holding out for an native Alaskan Eskimo teen to play Governor Palin’s on-screen child.

"Palin had success in Alaska with Energy, returned windfall profits to txpayers. Did you ever hear that from MSM?"

Sure did.

Now Palin is threatening to sue blogger and radio host Shannyn Moore for stating as fact that Palin is resigning because she's under federal investigation. In fact, Moore merely reported that as a rumor.

This kind of behavior, not her pro-life walk and talk, is what makes liberals and many conservatives dislike her. She's nasty and she's unhinged.

Further unconfirmed PR releases leaked late today allegedly by former ‘Palin cronies’ allege that the Governor is allegedly ‘in talks’ with Revlon about allegedly re-launching the once iconic fragrance ‘Charlie’. According to unconfirmed anonymous ‘insiders’ at Revlon, Governor Palin allegedly would do a state-of-the-art video duet of the Charlie theme song in a reproduction of the 1970s ads allegedly with spliced clips of ‘a Farah Fawcett montage’. All proceeds would allegedly go to ‘support the feasible exportation of Alaskan ice to third world countries, replacing foreign aid'.

I asked this question on another board, but without much success (which isn't surprising, given that very few folks with a legal background frequent that board). To our lawyerly contingent here: Does it seem likely that Sarah Palin resigned as part of an agreement with the Feds? it would hardly be the first time that a prosecutor offered to decline filing charges if a corrupt public official stepped down.

The next question is, will we ever know?

The existence of such a deal would certainly go far in explaining Palin's attorney's over-the-top attempts to wave off further press investigations of his client. After all, if the details of this (hypothetical) arrangement were to be made public, Palin's reputatition would be forever trashed and her future earning potential would go down the tubes.

Then again, maybe I'm being overly optimistic about America's ability to discard a proven fraud and criminal. (Witness the successes of Oliver North and G. Gordon Liddy, for example.) Judging from the number of Sarah cultists on this board, I'm starting to think Palin could drown her own kids tomorrow and still find a host of sycophants to not just defend her but buy her book about it afterwards.

Jason. My nuts refers to those who think having a Down's child is reason to not vote for her. I counterpoint it with the religious nuts who think we should be a theocracy. Rereading, I think I worded it poorly and can se how you would construe it that way. My apology.

Romney is very knowledgeable on economics. Just listen to him. His background supports it. His health program in Massachusetts may or may not work out. He should get some recognition for being one of the few Republicans in office who realized that health care is approaching a crisis and actually trying to do something. We would be much better off if other states had engaged programs of their own so we could sort out what really works and does not. TARP? The Lehman crash shook up a lot of people, especially with the near crash of commercial paper. After that huge near bank run, most people supported TARP. It was Paulson after all on his knees begging. Pretty easy to snipe about it after the markets have settled.

Palin? She was governor of a commodities based state while oil was over $100 a barrel. I could have run the state then. I oppose windfall profits taxes, which she enacted. I was not aware that conservatives favor those. The taxes that she returned to the people of Alaska? What did she do to cause the increase in revenue? Do you think she made oil prices go up? I read quite a bit about Energy in Alaska during the election. Which success are you talking about? Is the pipeline deal still going to go through? It was on hold last I read. I looked extensively when she was nominated and could not find a single statement or any writing by her on foreign policy. Abortion is not in my top ten issues for Presidential elections. I look for competence and understanding of issues. The president usually has less influence on domestic economics than most people belive, IMHO, so I especially look for foreign policy views.

Steve

Betty Carter said “Does anybody else read the comments here and feel you're stumbling around in dense fog with people shouting at each other from all directions?”
Yes, I do—quite often.

MARI said “The presidency? Karl, Mike and company, you think too small and are constrained by your political prisms. Sarah has bigger plans than the mere presidency. Stay tuned.....”

Could you be more specific? Perhaps she wants to be the first President of the independent nation of Alaska, something I speculated on recently.

I thought the reason I disliked Sarah Palin was that, as a fairly liberal person (by national standards), she scared me. Remember that one? Now I come to find out the reason I disliked Sarah Palin all along is because she didn't abort her Downs Syndrome baby. Wow, you finally got me on that one!!

How about this: I disliked Sarah Palin not only because she was grating and offensive to anyone who fell outside her definition of "real Americans", but because she also failed to even understand or suspect she lacked the basic requirements of the job. She had no right to be asked to be the VP but once offered, she also had no right to accept. She'd have done herself, her family and her party a lot more good if she got off the call to McCain after saying, "you know, I am truly honored and will do all I can to get you elected, Mr. Senator, but I'm afraid my skill set on national and international issues need more development before I can be on the national stage."

For anyone who was not a paid Republican schill or FOX News watcher, it was obvious that Sarah Palin was woefully inadequate as a candidate. Sure, some people in Dubuque loved her down-hominess and found her an exciting candidate, but there were also plenty of people in Peoria who saw her as not competent to be commander in chief. She lacked an understanding of her own limitations. The last politician on a national ticket with that same defect was W. It had nothing to do with abortion for me. It was all about her lack of interest in the job, which was evident by her inability to be conversant on basic issues on the campaign trail.

Allegedly overheard at a Palin household gathering shortly after the Governor’s press conference resignation (going forward referred to as ‘the lame duck speech’): When Bristol allegedly asked her mother if she would ‘now feel free’, Palin’s immediate response was, “Free? No, Honey….I’ll now charge more than Ann Coulter and save the money instead of spending like that broad does on touch-ups and buy Todd a new boat and get you a nanny.”

Jason writes: " Facts are stubborn."

That's why you refuse to acknowledge them.

Jason, I've asked you several times to address the reasons Palin's opponents say they actually oppose her, and I've posted reasons why I think poorly of her. You've ducked every one of those posts. I'm pro-life and I have an evangelical background; I'm predisposed to empathize with and respect if not always agree with conservatives, but there is abundant evidence that the woman is a self-centered, narcissistic phony. Again I challenge to read and respond to The New Republic :

www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=8c130fe3-adab-4cb3-8443-c363f085cf13

When you and the rest of your friends on the religious right refuse to acknowledge her obvious character flaws, you compromise your witness to the point of negating it.

Wait a second the Reps had Rudy key note (pro-abortion) in 08. Pataki, Whitman, etc. speak at their conventions. Facts are stubborn.

Yes, the are. Which is why you don't seem to grasp them. Rudy, Pataki, and Whitman were not allowed to utter the word "abortion" or voice pro-choice views. Which is in contrast to Democrats who have discussed pro-life issues at three successive conventions.

But thanks for playing.

"That's not true." (about her being attacked before she said anything) Socrates

TR: Yes it is true, unless you count the day she was chosen as I'll concede she did say something that day. She was certainly attacked before her speech at the convention.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/susan_nielsen/index.ssf/2008/08/palin_as_vp_pandering_at_its_b.html

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html (Some of these date from before her speech)

Arrrrghhh, I don't mean that Palin literally pocketed any money. I mean that people who donated to her campaign (and it doesn't matter how few or how many they were, a promise is a promise) expected her to serve out her term. That's the implicit deal politicians make (although it's understood that running for higher office is an exception). The fact that in her mind she accomplished more than most governors do in two terms is no excuse. She wasn't elected to meet some subjective standard of accomplishment in her own mind, and then to quit.

As for what I said about her character, it's no secret that she has a hard time getting along with political allies and enemies alike. All those reports of her turning on people, lying straight-faced, being too lazy to study for debates and interviews, being unwilling to take advice . . . that hardly just comes from liberals. Most of it comes from former insiders.

"She is the mother of five children and is married to a husband who appears to still be in love with her. That alone is enough to drive the upper west side liberals into apoplexy."

So, liberals can't stand it when married people are in love and have children?

"She is the mother of five children and is married to a husband who appears to still be in love with her. That alone is enough to drive the upper west side liberals into apoplexy."

So, liberals can't stand it when married people are in love and have children?

This is one of the weirdest criticisms of liberals that often comes from Palin-loving conservatives, and you hear it often: that liberals are somehow put off by her desirability and fecundity. While there was some debate about whether she should run for VP with a very young special-needs child and a pregnant teenage daughter, this mutated into a whole bizarre tangent about how liberals dislike or are afraid of large families and this had something to do with the Democratic party's pro-choice leanings... I couldn't follow it myself, quite frankly. It didn't make any more sense than any other defenses put forth by pro-Palin people.

By and large "liberals" I think are often uncomfortable with people having more than three children. At least I know of liberals who deem it environmentally irresponsible to have that many kids. I think this, coupled with her hunting and pro-oil attitude, would offend many liberal environmentalists.

Um, having five children is a very different sort of thing from promoting petroleum use. And hunting is off in another direction altogether.

I often have trouble on this site figuring out just who exactly "conservatives" are. The term "liberals" presents similar difficulties. To be a "liberal" according to the embedded definition here, you have to be someone who disapproves of families bigger than three children, doesn't hunt (or probably, go outdoors at all, except to some high-end ski resort) and who is concerned about our over-use of fossil fuels. (It probably wouldn't hurt if you lived in New York City for purposes of this "definition.")

No one can disapprove of Sarah Palin as a potential presidential candidate just because she seems to be an airhead, apparently. Oh no. Disapproving of her has to mean that you're a city-dwelling non-hunter environmentalist misanthrope.

I think the "five children" part is important in what Jim said. By and large "liberals" I think are often uncomfortable with people having more than three children. At least I know of liberals who deem it environmentally irresponsible to have that many kids.

My guess is you don't really know many liberals. If you read here for a few days, you'd gather that some conservatives believe people should have lots of kids to outbreed the Muslims and other brown people. But I don't believe that reflects a general conservative belief or even represents a significant minority of conservatives belief.

I've heard almost no criticism of the Palin's having five kids. I've heard criticisms that she used they as political props and questioned her parenting priorities and outcomes, but this idea that liberals are sitting around on the Upper East Side shaming her for having too many kids is ridiculous.

What we've seen here from Palin's defenders is the same odious, slash and burn political style that she employed and which so annoyed the rest of us sensible people. The attitude is that if you don't like Palin, you hate big families, you wanted her to murder her Downs Syndrome baby, you don't like seeing happily married couples... It's insane. It's the same old "we're the real Americans" BS which landed her in so much trouble during the election. What's so deeply offensive about this tactic is that I honestly believe that this isn't a political tactic for them, that they believe they're the real Americans and the rest of us are all abortion-loving/gay loving/America hating "liberals."

Obviously this isn't the way to win elections so the rest of us shouldn't have to worry too much about President Palin but it breeds what I see as a dangerous opposition. This is the mindset that leads to murdering abortion doctors and security guards, i.e. the everyone's against me, blah blah blah.

We now have a very disaffected minority in this country that believes that every word out of our president is a lie (we're even seen it here amongst people who appear to be literate), that the MSM is out to get them or whatever. Rush and Fox stir this stuff up so they can make more money. I guess that's capitalism for you.

Maybe there won't be a President Sarah Palin, but I wouldn't go so far as to say there won't be any President Palin ever.

I've said before and I'll say again that in fifty years we may look back on the 2008 prseidential race as our first glimpse of those gifted natural politicians, Sasha Obama and Piper Palin.

Your Name, your question has no bearing on whether or not Palin was qualified for higher office. If you think she's qualified, you ought to be able to say why. Show, don't tell.