Sarah Palin's epitaph, by Peggy Noonan

I'm sure that I'm not alone in not missing Sarah Palin. That said, Peggy Noonan should shut up. Whatever credibility she had evaporated during the "W" years when the tone of her columns were much like a high school girl writing a love letter to a Teen Beat pop star.

Feh!

Got to agree. Peggy Noonan, in the article, defines George W. Bush as "a careless sower of discord (within the Republican Party.) Sarah Palin and Peggy Noonan- Pots and Kettles.

Noonan is a New Yorker. That's all she is. She cannot understand Americans any more than Wolf Blitzer can understand Americans.

Here's what I said before the election about New Yorkers attempting to analyze Palin:

http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2008/09/yankees.html

This doesn't mean that Palin is necessarily a good candidate, but it means that I can't listen to Noonan's "analysis" with a straight face.

I particularly love this line and I'm surprised Rod didn't include it:

Actually, it's arguable that membership in the self-esteem generation harmed her. For 30 years the self-esteem movement told the young they're perfect in every way. It's yielding something new in history: an entire generation with no proper sense of inadequacy.

My goodness is THAT ever true.

polistra

Noonan is a New Yorker. That's all she is. She cannot understand Americans any more than Wolf Blitzer can understand Americans.

And here's the proof that Palin's supporters really haven't got a clue. Let's fill in some gaps, shall we?

1) Contrary to what the Palinistas seem to think, there are more states in the union than the old Confederacy, the Great Plains and Alaska. You may be surprised to learn that New York was actually one of the original thirteen colonies.

2) Americans, contrary to what the Palinistas seem to believe, do not live in the countryside. In fact, if we look strictly at demographics, we find that an overwheleming majority of Americans, even the white ones, even the religious ones, (who presumably are more "real" than everyone else) live in the cities and suburbs.

As a matter of fact, more Americans happen to live in New York City alone (and this is city itself, mind you, not its suburbs and not the entire state of New York) than live in Alaska, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho and Nebraska combined. So let's get off our high horse about who's an American and who isn't, shall we?

I have often found that most polticians are pretty intelligent. Even if I disagree with them Heck Biden is a gaffe machine but I know he is brilliant. Peole that rise to these positions are usually the cream of the crop in many ways.

What Noonan is concerned about is the same thing she was about Huckabee. A little unseemly populism.

Ouch.
This is way too "all or nothing". It paints a picture of a complete failure on Palin's part. That just isn't the truth.

Certainly we all agree Palin was not ready or right for the VP nomination. But she also is not a failure. We have seen a drop in her approval rating here, but generally most us us Alaskans are shocked and sad to see her go. She ran the state well while she was here. She was a WHOLE LOT better than some other Alaskan governors I can think of.

I hope after the dust settles over her resignation, she can go quietly into the white night of an Alaskan summer and start living a more peaceful life.

"The elites made her. It was the elites of the party, the McCain campaign and the conservative media that picked her and pushed her. The base barely knew who she was."

I'm sorry, but everything in this excerpt is a lie. And so easy to disprove. With the internet making it so easy to do fact checking, why would she write such falsehoods, why would her editors allow it to be published, and why would Mr. Dreher pass it on as if it were gospel truth? Ms. Noonan's obviously extremely bitter that she disliked Gov. Palin from the get-go (I won't try to psychoanalyze her to speculate why), got attacked for voicing her dislike to the point where she backtracked (completely unconvincingly, of course), and so seems to just want to say "See, I hated her before anyone else did, and I was right you ooga-booga know-nothings!" (Yes, I know the ooga-booga thing was from a certain other prominent writer, but it's the same exact thing attitude going on.)

That "your name" was me. Captcha, I luv ya.

Ten months ago she was embraced with friendliness by her party. The left and the media immediately overplayed their hand, with attacks on her children.

I know this has become conventional wisdom on the right, but can anyone name or cite, specifically, an actual “attack on her children,” especially during the fall campaign? I recall Palin herself being criticized for using her children as political props, but that’s not an attack on the children -- arguably, it’s a defense of them. Andrew Sullivan and a few others raised a lot of questions about the strange story of her pregnancy, which includes many details that don’t add up, but again, that’s implicitly an attack on Palin herself for (possibly) lying, not on the children.

The world is a dangerous place. It has never been more so, or more complicated, more straining of the reasoning powers of those with actual genius and true judgment.

Again, conventional wisdom, but really -- “never more so”? Does Noonan know anything at all about the history of the twentieth century?

Other than that, anyway, it's not her worst column.

trotsky, Noonan is taking a shot there at people like Ross Douthat, the columnist who recently argued that Palin represents the possibility that you don't need an Ivy League education to rise to the top in American politics, and that her downfall would therefore throw that idea into doubt. Noonan is saying that Palin's career is irrelevant to that question for various reasons, including the fact that there are plenty of examples already of people who rose to the top from non-Ivy backgrounds -- including Abe Lincoln, whom she jokingly recalls as having had top educational advantages before "remembering" that he was didn't and was actually self-educated in the backwoods.

Andrew Sullivan has a couple of interesting posts about the damage done by (or to) "the self-esteem generation" up on his blog.

I thought Noonan's column was good, and particularly liked her conclusion:

"Here's why all this matters. The world is a dangerous place. It has never been more so, or more complicated, more straining of the reasoning powers of those with actual genius and true judgment. This is a time for conservative leaders who know how to think."

I find myself wanting to like Sarah Palin - as another blogger said, she is attractive and personable. But every time she opens her mouth, she convinces me that she is not ready for prime time, not sensible, not serious, and also petty and vindictive. And as someone said, her political instincts appear to run to division. I'd like to see an intelligent conservative woman politician present an opposing view to the Democrats. Sarah Palin is not that woman.

Those who back Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber and others in the same ilk will see nothing but defeat in upcoming elections.
No matter how wrong Noonan may have been about W, and she appears to admit as much here, she's right on Palin.

Davis: Noonan doesn't care for religious conservatives, especially those simple bible-beating Evangelicals.

And you know this how? When we lived in New York, we were friends with and neighbors of Peggy Noonan's. Went to mass with her. I've had many conversations with her about religion and conservatism. She's a religious conservative. But she is a Catholic for one, and Catholics do not always line up with Evangelicals; and for another, being a religious conservative doesn't oblige you to agree with what most people who call themselves religious conservatives say.

That's the dirty secret of the conservative movement: the pundit class who write opinions for a living hate the oogedy-boogedy Evangelicals as much as anyone. They want their religion proper and civilized.

That's sort of true, and worth pondering. I think many leaders of the conservative movement see Evangelicals as useful idiots. Which is repulsive. Peggy Noonan and I are no longer friends, so I don't have any personal stake in defending her here. But I can tell you from extensive personal knowledge that she is not one of those cynical haters you describe.

Rod,

Peggy is also the person who wrote if only Pres Obama would adopt language similar to Bill Clinton with regards to abortion ("safe, legal and rare") that this somehow would be a step forward. This is either incredibly naive, almost inviting your political opponents to deceive you and the country. Or it is the thinking of someone who believes conservative ideas are nice sentiments but not enlightened enough to be policy.

At her core is she really a conservative? Does she believe in natural law or does she believe that perception is reality?

magoo, you made a good point. I, for one, am dismayed that TV News journalism has basically become "infotainment" as evidenced by the fact that MSNBC spent all day Tuesday covering the Michael Jackson memorial service. (I grew up dancing to "ABC" and other Jackson 5 hits, so this isn't a slap at MJ.)

Sarah Palin is a perfect, substance-free addition to celebrity culture, which is why the news media (especially TV news) appear to love her so much. Where is Tim Russert when we need him? He would have demolished her, instead of sucking up to her as current TV journalists seem to be unable to avoid doing.

I was born in New York and raised in the suburbs of New York, and it’s still my favorite city. It’s full of all sorts of bad and unpleasant elements, yes, but just as many good people, and find the comments about New Yorkers not being able to understand Sarah Palin quite laughable. My parents, who still live there, both voted for Palin/McClain. There’s a highly conservative, populist element in New York, especially the outer boroughs and suburbs (see Rep. Peter King’s remarks on Michael Jackson, see also Rudy Giuliani on the dung depiction of the Virgin Mary) and they often vote Republican. This element does not miraculously melt away once you cross the bridge into Manhattan.

I read Polistra’s blog entry. Her (his?) view here seems to be that people on the East Coast just can’t get a “Western” woman. All East Coast women are the Woody Allen stereotype (especially “Hannah and Her Sisters”). And Sarah Palin is, in Polistra’s view, a typical Western woman. In Polistra’s view, Western woman “do”, while East Coast women “whine.”

When I think of the ideal stereotype of the “can-do” Western woman, Justice Sandra-Day O’Connor is who immediately comes to my mind—the strong, silent type who can rope a steer or something (sorry if that sounds silly; I’m too sheltered to have ever done any ranching, thus perhaps proving some point of Polistra’s;)) And while Sarah Palin may have impressive wilderness skills, this doesn’t necessarily translate into virtuous, principled leadership.

Nor did it prevent whining.

A much better piece on Palin was published by John Fund. Its balanced and contains, you know, actual reporting. http://lonesomemongoose.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/john-fund-why-palin-quit/ It appears he picked up the phone and called Alaska to get the scoop on why she resigned. The reason for her decision was that the constant legal attacks on her, and no doubt some political errors also, made her an liability to the state when compared to someone with less baggage like Lt. Governor Parnell (also a Republican) Finally, why is it that it is okay to quit your job as Senator -- de facto a year plus before you stop taking the check -- and run for president? Why is it that you can quit as Senator to become Secretary of State -- don't you "owe the voters who elected you" to be their representation? I can just about see the president thing -- after all you should be able to help your state *if* you are successful. But Secretary of State? Or how about ambassador to China, as former Utah governor Huntsman now is? No doubt the latter is an important job, but it certainly isn't even remotely like the job he was elected to in his supposedly sacrosanct deal with Utahns.

Now, I was dissappointed when Palin resigned, but if Fund's info is correct -- and it's info, not emotion -- then Palin did the correct thing. Moreover, she is leaving in an orderly fashion with a set succession into her office. Can't really say that about when Obama decided to 'abandon' his Illinois Senate seat, can we?

Oh gosh, the comments here pretty much fall into two categories: (1) comments about Noonan; (2) comments about Palin.

Noonan has been a terrific asset to the conservative movement because from the early 1980s forward she has been something of a rarity: a political conservative with working-class, Catholic roots and an instinctive feel for both poetry and film. A female alter-ego of The Gipper.

It's far too early to know what will become of Palin. She's still young and has the capacity to grow and "remake" herself. It's up to her. Right now, she's in a similar position as Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton were four years ago: riding relatively high in polls among registered party members. That comparision doesn't bode well for her, let alone any other factor cited by Noonan and others.

All this is a distraction from the real work of rebuilding our culture and taking back our government. The right has so many young and capable leaders (Jindal and Cantor come immediately to mind) and the left under Obama has so many chances to betray the hollowness of their approach ... that I can't but feel optimistic about the future.

Just one more little slice of the proof that the "elites" have no clue. They have so isolated themselves from every day life they now don't even understand it. They're so busy ingratiating themselves with other "elites" by proving they can shred the commoner and split hairs they have no idea how to do anything or be anything.

Noonan has a wonderful grasp of the language and her writing skills are superb. Her thinking often falls into the same shallow trap that has engulfed even Rod.

I was watching "The Goode Family" a couple days online and suddenly, I recognized the "elite". It doesn't matter which side of the aisle you're on, the problem is that their "eliteness" has become inbred. They all talk in code to each other, telegraph their superiority to each other by suddenly seizing on some meme and elevating it to a supposed "height" of intellectual acuity, and instead, have totally lost contact with what's going on.

The old canard about "how many angels dance on the head of a pin" is an relevant illustration. Theologians can and did lose their Christianity over the debate. Yet, it matters not a whit. To the person in a crisis of faith, it is negative, not positive.

Today, we see the Beltway crowd talking as if Palin needs to learn to policy wonk to succeed. No, she doesn't. In fact, if we immediately banished all policy wonks to the far corners of the earth and cut all communications to them, we'd be so far better off. And that's a problem.

It's a problem for two reasons.

1. There's a whole lot of very bright and capable minds within the bunch.

2. It means that the very bright and capable are not in any way foscusing on issues that are relevant.

It means the leaders have forgotten to lead, or forgotten how to lead.

The pundits talk about how Palin's unfit for her lack of policy statements. That's odd. I know of NO organization that is highly successful that exists by elevating policy wonks to be in control. Instead, you put people in charge who have the ability to make decisions and to then implement them. Those people often hire policy wonks to generate stuff to provide motion to the thought processes.

What good are policy statements? Well, they're extensively argued and passed around in the Beltway. Ignored wholesale everywhere else. Policy speeches are soundly ignored outside of DC.

And in our world of chaotic republican government, policy is the last resort. "What you can get done" is what matters. What politician has a set of policy guidelines on the wall of his office and he refers to them constantly to make sure all he says and does is in compliance? Not a one.

Instead, they choose what they do based on the motivation of the day, which is usually "what will benefit me politically?". And measure that in terms of whatever thier internal makeup is and then act. All the policy speeches made yesterday are irrelvant to today. Sadly.

So, the question is "how would Palin react to (insert situation here) and the answer is "with common sense". How does Obama react to (insert situation here) and the answer is "applying radical ideology".

Which is why Palin has appeal. People do not and will not waste their time studying myriad policy papers just to determine who has the most well written. There's lots of think tanks in Washington who do that. Then, they hire people to write common sense words on the topic. Why? Because that's the only communication that matters.

You can bet that Palin's response to Iran's crisis would have been to side with the people and to vocally support them. Common sense tells you to act with caution and rationality. Not a position paper in the world would have "guided" you. Not a single pundit or policy wonk would have the "answer" until long after it was irrelevant.

That's why Obama's real slow to even speak on some topics. He has to wait for some kind of common meme to show in his circle and for him to then adopt it. And, in others, he speaks and acts with total disdain for the facts. And, his behavior is reflected by at least 90% of the elected members of our federal government.

Why?

It's not becuase they're not "elites". It's a far more fundamental problem. If you can't see it by now, you cannot, and it cannot be explained to you.

For the record Palin's actual quote was: "They're our next-door neighbours and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.”

Rod, if Palin does get the nomination in 2012, I have a business proposition for you. Let's get a booth at the convention center and sell Kool-Aid. You know that if Palin gets the nod, there's going to be LOTS of demand for it.

And even more for the record, here's that part of the interview:
-----
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

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

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.
-----
Boy, she sure is dumb! Just standing there at a podium saying "I can see Russia from my house!" What a dumb Caribou Barbie! She sure is dumb!

These people define hard work. The kind that leaves you with bloody hands, sunburn, windburn, and strained muscles and joints.

She was a TV reporter and a newspaper reporter. She handled the accounting for the business, then went into political life as a city council members, mayor, state board official, and governor. The only bloody hands she getting is from paper cuts. Her parents were college educated teachers. She has a college education.

That's not working class. Because of her husband's union job and her white (and pink) collar work, they are decidedly middle-class, allowing them to fund his snowmobile racing hobby.

When Todd and Sarah got married, they had to basically elope, because they had no money for a fancy wedding.

That, and it was a shotgun marriage because he had gotten Sarah pregnant.

From the Washington Times on the Palins financial situation:

“Their combined income of nearly a quarter-million dollars last year was five times the median household income for Wasilla's 7,000 residents. They own a single-engine plane, two boats, two personal watercraft and a half-million-dollar, custom-built home on a lake that is worth three times the average of other homes in town”.

For the future, they also have a 401(k) retirement account compliments of Todd Palin's years as an engineer with oil giant BP”.

I think it is great that they have been financially successful—and hope all Alaskans have similar advantages. But, I still don't think Sarah is working class.

I think Sarah Palin is doing the right thing by returning to private life. She's going to have far more lucrative opportunities in the private sector than she'd ever have in public office, and her ability to draw a crowd has not abated as of yet.

That said, the whole Palin episode is illustrative of a few things about American politics that Noonan doesn't appear to have mentioned:

1. There are no pro-life female politicians in America at a higher level than the United States Congress. There are 17 female US Senators currently, and not one of them is unambiguously pro-life; the closest to that is arguably Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who started out more openly pro-abortion but has tempered her views and presently gets about a 50% pro-abortion rating. Most of the others vote in favor of abortion between 80 and 100 per cent of the time. There will most likely never be a pro-life female Vice President or President; a female politician is seen as a traitor to her gender if she is pro-life.

2. While it's true that not all presidents have had Ivy-league creds, it is all but impossible today to be elected to this office without one of the following: Ivy-league degree (or at least, attendance at an Ivy-league school), law school degree, masters or doctorate (whether from an Ivy or not), significant military service, or some combination of the above. Four of our last eight presidents had law degrees: Nixon, Ford, Clinton and Obama. Because of this alone the McCain camp should never have selected Palin to be the VP nominee--she was clearly a cynical last-ditch effort to appeal to those members of the base not already too disgusted with McCain to consider voting for him.

3. The exact number will, of course, vary based on inflation etc., but I doubt very much any person will be elected to the presidency or vice presidency from this point out who has a net worth of significantly less than a million dollars at the time he/she runs for office. It is especially important that the nominee is comfortable in the same social sphere as most of the high-end MSM reporters with whom he/she must mingle during the campaign. Any whiff of social inferiority will be taken as proof that the candidate is not serious; in fact, failing to amass a personal net worth of at least a million dollars before running for national office is pretty much proof that one lacks "gravitas."

"She makes the party look stupid, a party of the easily manipulated."

Yes, and yes. But what if this is what the GOP truly is?

@Erin Manning 4:58 p.m.: The exact number will, of course, vary based on inflation etc., but I doubt very much any person will be elected to the presidency or vice presidency from this point out who has a net worth of significantly less than a million dollars at the time he/she runs for office. ... in fact, failing to amass a personal net worth of at least a million dollars before running for national office is pretty much proof that one lacks "gravitas."

I think it has always been that way, and not without reason. If an American spends most of his or her adult life pursuing a line of work other than those professions that pay below-market wages -- academia, journalism, government work, ministry -- and you don't have a million dollars by the time you reach your 50s, you are unlikely to be the sort of unusually accomplished individual who runs for the presidency.

For what it's worth, Biden is said to have a net worth of about $277K, although he has a congressional pension that probably has a real value in excess of a million dollars.

Erin,

Palin grew up middle-class and she and Todd have a very tidy nest egg. Despite bouncing around and getting distracted during college, she still got a degree, something that someone without the middle class background would likely not have achieved. She may get paid a lot to have a book (as long as the publishers agree on her ghost, er, collaborator) and may get paid well for speaking, but I doubt that Exxon is going to hire her for a cushy job unless it is totally PR.

Men dominate the anti-abortion movement and the rest of conservative enterprises. Sure, there are some fairly visible women in it, but it isn't a surprise that more women who are drawn to politics are pro-choice any more than it's a surprise that more women vote for Democrats.

Unlike a century ago when working class folks weren't likely to get an education no matter how smart they are, the smart kids of today tend to go to as good of a school as they can because the schools make a big effort to find poor kids and kids from small towns to come to their highly respected schools. Not everyone who goes to an Ivy League or other superior school will be the best in the future any more than the ones who bounce through five colleges before finally graduating are going to be automatic mediocrities, but that's the way to bet on it. Aside from the rare exception like George W Bush, it has long been that highly motivated people become president. Those are the people who get to go to Ivy League schools and get excellent jobs before they get into politics. It's no surprise at all that they have a good amount of money by the time they run for President.

While I don't agree with everything that Peggy Noonan and Olivia St. John (at WND) wrote, I do think that the label 'social conservatve' for Sarah Palin was a bit off---especially the pro-life/family stuff.

Yes, she had a baby with Downs Syndrome. (Three cheers for not killing your baby!) She also promised in her governor campaign not to propose new pro-life legislation. She also made it pretty clear in the Gibson and Kouric interviews that her pro-life views were her own and did not reflect the McCain-Palin ticket. Just because the media labeled her abortion position "extreme", that didn't make it so.

As far as the other 'family values' thing goes. Come on. First, she vetoed a ban on benefits for same-sex partners. Two, Palin allowed her teenage daughter to pose for People Magazine with her illegitimate grandson for money. (Sorry Palinistas, it was wrong when Jamie Lynn Spears did it, it was wrong when Bristol Palin did it. Don't give me some excuse about Bristol being of legal age. She's still a dependent of her parents in more ways than one). Three, what is this business of leaving your high-pressure job as a state governor for an even hotter pressure-cooker job of vice presidential nominee and/or possibly vice president?

I think that Noonan et al are a little quick in writing her political future off. But just the same: Sarah Palin remains a flawed choice for the GOP---especially for the so-called "base". Just because the only other options on the table may be worse, that doesn't make Sarah Palin any less troublesome.

I do not see Palin as the typical working person - the idea of her doing all this tough manual labor - silly. I saw her doing interviews in her kitchen - it was huge - big island - nice new looking cabinets with lots of windows with a view to a lake - that was no working class kitchen or a modest home. Owning planes, two boats, water skis, sorry but that is expensive toys and not working class. It is nuts that she could be seen as a working class heroine.

Erin - a million is nothing nowadays - you factor in the value of people's pensions and their homes - bet we have a lot of millionaires based on that alone. Certainly by that standard - Palin is a millionaire - consider all she owns (TWO PLANES?) and her home.

Common sense is not enough - one's common sense has to be applied to an issue - and ya need to know about all the ins and outs of that issue. Temperment matters too - and Palin seems to not have the sort of temperment that lends itself to a dispassionate consideration of an issue. Finally, one thing I learned from the Bush years is that management style matters a lot - Bush was such a delegator and that clearly was a huge problem. Palin seems to have a management style which is not very inclusive and generates conflict. Not to my mind a good managerial style for a president (or a governor). Plus Palin seems incapable of a sentence - it is as if all she can manage is this stream of consciousness speak. Not a great communicator.

The whole Palin discussion reminds me of how Europeans see the US as being a very adolescent society. The whole "hero" thing and "we can identify with her", "she's just like us" is all about adolescent hero worship. Time for us to grow up and recognize that we don't need hero's in public office, we sure can't pick leaders cause they seem like us or what we wish we were. We need leaders, who know what the problems are, who can build consensus around solutions and bring ALL Americans together around those solutions.

Consider the Presidents who are perceived as being great - FDR was no common working guy - he was an aristocrat - but he understood and was able to empathize with the plight of working people.

Hey Squishy Con,

Peggy Noonan has had a crush on Obama for a while. She must go for the Ivy Leaguers.

How come nobody points a finger at John McCain for his DOA campaign? Sarah Palin was the only life that campaign had.

Geoff G. “said I particularly love this line and I'm surprised Rod didn't include it:

Actually, it's arguable that membership in the self-esteem generation harmed her. For 30 years the self-esteem movement told the young they're perfect in every way. It's yielding something new in history: an entire generation with no proper sense of inadequacy.

My goodness is THAT ever true.”

I second that thought. Palin is indeed emblematic of the problem of the self-esteem B.S. invading and infecting our schools. Ironically, Palin had reason to be proud of her athletic abilities; she just had no reason to be proud of her intellectual abilities—nor has she any now. Interestingly, I don’t think that Generation X is as bad in this regard as many Baby Boomers, and certainly not as bad as many, if not most, Millenials.

This issue of self-esteem is not a peripheral one, because it ties directly into the notion that Palin somehow represents the “real” Republican Party, the “real” conservatism. Ask yourself: who, other than Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln, is most representative of the Republican Party? The answer is, of course, Theodore Roosevelt.
TR was from an elite family, a graduate of Harvard when the average man had only about a sixth grade education. He was a voracious reader, capable, under the right circumstances, of literally reading a book a day. He wrote at least 10 books (I want to say it was 25-30, but I would need to do the research.). One of those books, written when he was in his early 20’s, is “The Naval War of 1812,” which, to my knowledge, is still required reading at the Royal Naval College—and one hopes also at Annapolis.

Yet, he was also a man of action. He not only could shoot and dress a moose, but he also shot lions and elephants on safari. He won the Congressional Medal of Honor at age 40, and, in his mid-fifties, traced the River of Doubt in South America.

I was about to write that he would cringe with embarrassment at Sarah Palin, but I don’t think he would. He would instead, in a gentlemanly way, tell her she was unfit for office. If she were a male, it would be something less than gentlemanly.

My points are two. First, TR didn’t get to be where he was by any self-esteem bulls###. His father was kind, but stern and told TR: “You have the mind, but not the body.” His father then pushed TR in creative and constructive ways, as did his mother and teachers. TR also battled asthma, extreme nearsightedness, and personal heartbreak, not to mention corruption in his own party. TR’s self-esteem was hard earned.

My second point is that I see a lot of commenters on this site—and conservatives in general—who seem to think there is a choice to be made between people with strong intellects and grasp of policy on the one hand, and people of action and courage on the other hand. There is no contradiction; it is quite possible to be both. TR is the shining example, but Reagan was no slouch. Palin isn’t even on the horizon.

Noonan is absolutely right; Palin is a fraud and the best weapon the Democrats have. I can only hope some more conservatives show Noonan’s common sense and intellectual integrity.

Quoting:

Erin - a million is nothing nowadays - you factor in the value of people's pensions and their homes - bet we have a lot of millionaires based on that alone. Certainly by that standard - Palin is a millionaire - consider all she owns (TWO PLANES?) and her home.

=======================

This is why nobody should listen to the ignorant.

One of Todd's two planes is an old (50's) one that he inherited, and him and family have spent a gazillion hours rebuilding. The other is a small bush plane on floats with a maximum value of less than an average new car.

Yeah, they have TWO airplanes. Some people have TWO cars. Whee. It's how you get somewhere when there's no roads. Duhhh.

OH, and yeah, they did have a combined income of just under a quarter mil. Did you not notice that was BEFORE taxes? That was all THREE sources of income together. Todd's income (pays decently well), the governor (a little under 100K), and fishing. Must have been a really good year fishing. A good friend of mine is near Dillingham fishing. His first $30,000 goes to expenses, and he made that at the 3/4 point through the season.

It might seem like a lot to some folks, but considering that they likely pay about 4 bucks for gas, 4 bucks a gallon for milk, electricity costs on Anchorage are about double the average here. The average food item costs about 50% more in Anchorage than here, and fuel in Dillingham where they fish is closer ot $6 a gallon for diesel. By the time you pay the idiotic income tax and then account for the high cost of living, the Palins only live reasonably well.

It is extremely expensive to live in Alaska. Stuff there costs more than ANY OTHER STATE in the US, often by as much as 3 times.

Milk in Dillingham was $7 a gallon. Bread was $3 a loaf. Gasoline was 6.75 when I was there last. An apple was almost $2 in the grocery store, and it was mushy, to boot.

You want a coat? They start in the off season in Dillingham at near $90 for what you'd pay $35 for here in the lower 48. I bought a Panini for dinner in Fairbanks, at the airport, almost $10. You'd expect to pay about 6 elsehwere for it.

BTW, the Palins bought the land on the lake before it escalated in value. There was no other development there and no real infrastrsucture. They then had to wait for some time to build their house, which they mostly did themselves.

Which is why Palin has appeal. People do not and will not waste their time studying myriad policy papers just to determine who has the most well written. There's lots of think tanks in Washington who do that. Then, they hire people to write common sense words on the topic. Why? Because that's the only communication that matters.

You can bet that Palin's response to Iran's crisis would have been to side with the people and to vocally support them. Common sense tells you to act with caution and rationality. Not a position paper in the world would have "guided" you. Not a single pundit or policy wonk would have the "answer" until long after it was irrelevant. >>

We should all pause to recognize the moment when the GOP became a kamikaze organization. This passage just about captures it. It's not about experience or intellect or smarts. It's not about deeply understanding issues or considering consequences of rash decision-making. It's all about identity politics and anger and resentment. Strap yourselves into the plane, folks, 'cause we're going out in a blaze of glory with Sarah in the cockpit.

There is no possible way that Palin could have explained

You could type pretty much anything after that intro and it would be true.

PNWCC:

Thank you for your informative posts here.

Ronald Reagan had no military service or law degree and went to the thoroughly non-Ivy Eureka College. I think the current electorate would still vote for someone like him. Certainly he had a more amiable persona than La Palin. Can you imagine, say, 1978-vintage Reagan getting into a snippy battle with David Letterman and losing? Conversely, without legacy connections or an all-male-mostly-white student body it's unlikely George W. Bush could have gotten into Yale or Harvard Business School, let alone the Texas governor's mansion or the White House. (Of course, without the legacy connections he might have had more impressive military service on his resume.)

I would hope this piece was read by those who need to hear this most. But no. Despite Noonan, of whom I have tired, diagramming deliberately each step rebuttal to the various Palin myths that have lured and cheered those who have issues all their own, it will be out of hand dismissed who need to believe the shallow and narcissistic Sarah Palin is a breath of fresh air rather than a sulfuric emission.

GOD what a Rorschach test she has been. The initial squealing joy that she was ‘from a small town’. Remember the convulsions when it was first suggested that she had never traveled? The heroism attributed to her for standing by and spotlighting at the convention her unwed teen daughter and her sorta maybe teen heartthrob hockey playing semi fiancée? The way she ignored Gwen Ifill and just doggonit launched into a one-dimensional bouquet of verbal clichés? The catalog has is as deep as she is not.

Noonan is correct. The ‘MSM would love to see the Republicans squander their future on an attractive hoax. I, however, would like to see the Republicans reinvent themselves and come out slugging without fake steroids explaining their transformation. Until soon-to-be-ex Governor Sarah Palin is regarded as a crossword puzzle answer, she is destined to be the proof positive that the serious party of ideas is content to place house instead of build one. The choice is yours. Suit yourselves.

Forget Sarah Palin; here's someone who we should WISH had a 'political' epitaph of his own: John Holdren, Obama's "Science Czar". Michelle Malkin alerts us to a 1977 book he authored which advocates the following:

Forced abortions
Mass sterilization
A "Planetary Regime" with the power of life & death over americans
Single and teen mothers having their babies confiscated from them for no justifiable cause
A Margaret Sanger (a hero of liberals everywhere)-esque worldview of getting rid of "undesirables"

People, this is the man Obama trusts to be "Director of the Whitehouse Office of Science and Technology" "Co-chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology" (aka "Science Czar"
Check this out from Mr. Holdren: "Indeed it has been concluded that compulsory population control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Somehow with Obama's record, we should not be surprised about his choice of someone with such a cold-blooded worldview or human life.

I'll take 100 life-affirming Sarah Palins over this goober and his boss any day. Heaven help us from more death advocacy from the Left. As George Costanza used to angstishly say, "Make it stop!"

I think that Sarah Palin is really the Cobra Baroness in disguise. Remember the Baroness is the sworn enemy of G.I. Joe, a real American hero.

"The attraction of Sarah Palin is that she is a normal person who is not part of the political circus that has crashed our country in the past 50 years with their social, moral, and political revolutions."

We understand the appeal of Sarah Palin. Of course someone who is small town and looks like Shania Twain is going to appeal on the stump. But her critics are looking beyond that to what kind of president would she be? That's one of the reasons why we object to her.

She is very normal. Unfortunately for Palin, normal isn't good enough. Presidents need to be exceptional. She is not.

“The best proof that Sarah Palin would be good for our country is the near universal loathing of her by the media commentariat and all their "smart-set" hanger's on“.

Excellent point. Sarah's enduring appeal is that she has disdain for all the right people (darn those educated elites!) and that they don't like her either. But, logically is that really enough for someone to be an effective Vice President?

I remember when William F. Buckley (R.I.P.) represented the Conservative movement and he was certainly an elitist in the best sense of the word. He was smart, urbane, and articulate. He wasn't a working class hero but he could parse a sentence. Of course he probably could never have been elected to public office.

“There is no possible way that Palin could have explained the daily level of international interaction that is part of normal Alaskan events within the confines of her interview. And so, she simply stated the obvious... that we need a working relationship with Russia”.

If she can't explain that then how would she be effective in the highest political office in the land?

Looselycult, you have missed the point. You refuse to see real leftist ghoulishness where it exists right here and now in our government; it's easier to cover your eyes and ignore it and instead criticize someone who would never advocate the creepy Sanger-esque eugenics agenda held by Obama's appointed Science Czar.

Andrew: That you publicize this steeming pile of "Pferdapfeln" on your blog and then go about defending it tells us more about what a hypocrite you are, Rod, than anything about Peggy or Sarah. I'm personally very disappointed in you.

You know, normally I delete posts that have ad hominem attacks against me or others who post here, but I'm going to leave your long comment up as an example of how completely and utterly beyond rationality some Palin diehards are. This kind of identity politics is not even appalling at this point; it's just fascinating, in the same way that the Jerry Springer Show is.

PNWCC -

You've managed a number of claims without either explanation or example. You dismiss presidents as so much day old bread, with a particularly virulent dismissal of our current president, even though you haven't explained at all why you feel that way.

FDR and Ike were accomplished men by any reasonable view of the world. Nixon and Clinton were the two who best understood politics, but failed to understand themselves. The others, other than George W Bush, were competent enough that they deserved more than your dismissal of them without any evidence to back it up. Even Hebert Hoover, disastrous as his presidency was, deserves better treatment than you offer. When you make such sweeping claims and offer nothing to back them up, there's really no reason for anyone to accept anything you say.

Y'know, earlier this year I had to take my mom in for cataract surgery. The ophthalmologist we went to was a very nice man, very folksy, young, handsome fellow. Made her feel right at home and comfortable with the idea of the surgery that would be necessary to restore her eyesight. He went out of his way to come across as "regular folks," as she'd say.

Well, the operation on the left eye went fine, and a few weeks later she went back in to have the right one done. But, aw shucks, he kinda screwed that one up--ruptured the lens capsule while removing it, which caused fragments of the lens to remain floating around in the ocular jelly. So he referred us to a second doctor who specializes in correcting that sort of thing.

Now, the second doctor was a no-nonsense sort of guy: Older, cranky, interned at Parkland Memorial, used to be a military flight surgeon whose clientele was Naval aviators. Damn good surgeon, but remote and unsociable--I suspect having an ailing civilian patient base whose average age is 70 is quite different from treating young, healthy, cocky guys who don't want to ever show even a hint of discomfort when the doc is examining 'em.

Anyway, my mom didn't like this guy much, and truth to tell neither did I. But he was good, damned good, and he spent several hours in surgery fixing what Doctor #1 had messed up. We've had to go in for several follow-up visits, and I'll be the first one to say that his bedside manner sucks and he's pretty indifferent to her discomfort while he's poking around and half-blinding her with his scopes and whatnot. But he has knowledge and skill and experience and asks all the questions he has to to find out what he needs to know to help my mom progress.

To Sarah Palin cultists, the first doctor would be the one they'd recommend. Sure, he's not quite that competent and he doesn't have much experience or skill, but gosh-darn it, he's one of "us"! That second doc is just too elitist--too much education, always acting like he knows better than we do what's best, doesn't seem to care about our personal lives, too focused on the arcane details of his work to pay attention to me, me, me...

National politics is, not unlike medicine, an incredibly complicated and detailed profession. It may not require an advanced degree to be get elected, but it does require not just a quality education but a slavish devotion to detail in order to produce concrete results. The Palin cultists seem to be in complete denial of these facts and are actually quite happy to devalue and degrade the very idea that an advanced education is a positive thing, referring to "elites" and "intellectuals" in the worse possible terms while elevating Palin and Joe the Plumber as fonts of foreign-policy sagacity.

Sorry, but when it comes to governing, give me an intelligent, dedicated SOB with a proven depth of knowledge and ability over a profoundly ignorant but engaging and cute "authentic average American" anyday.

PNWCC says:
1. Finally, someone not desperate for power.

Really, how do you figure. It has been one non-stop grab from the beginning and she has trounced on her mentors, her friends and those who helped get her where she is. Though she may not be that sophisticated...it could just be a desperation for attention.

2. Finally, someone who actually serves.
Until the going gets rough or you're a lame duck or whatever...then you quit. She hasn't served anything. She's grabbed onto the rung above where she's standing and left the one behind.

3. Finally, someone who actually has LIVED A NORMAL LIFE and can actually govern based on reality. Whoa, that's right. All those elites in DC are doing so incredibly badly, because they know nothing about the real world, and live in a fantasy land of their own imaginary constructs.

She's lived no normal life, if you are going to define normal in the typical America sense. Most Americans live in cities. Most Americans don't own planes...
Please, do try to make just one post without the phrase "Washington elites." I betcha can't...
4. Finally, someone who just does the right thing without being pressured to do it, who just does it because that's who they are.

What right thing? Let's have some examples (and you can't use the baby.) Lots of people, even politicians do the right things and sometimes they're not even pressured. It's called duty. And responsibility. And it is often demonstrated by a refusal to quit doing what is right when a.) the opportunity presents itself to make more money, b.) the opportunity presents itself to get more attention, c.) you don't like what people are saying about you.

Try again, PNWCC.

It has been one non-stop grab from the beginning and she has trounced on her mentors, her friends and those who helped get her where she is. Though she may not be that sophisticated...it could just be a desperation for attention.

This is what I love about Palin haters. In one sentence she is an idiot who can't think her way out of a paper bag, the next she is this evil Machiavellian schemer who has some how managed to best her old mentors and all the Alaskan Republican elite (and no, Peggy, the Murkowski clan et al did not create Palin, they loathed and feared her).

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.

Got some cases? Nixon doesn't count. Oh, that's right, they are all being covered up.

And they call us Palin 'die hards' irrational.

"You know, normally I delete posts that have ad hominem attacks against me or others who post here, but I'm going to leave your long comment up as an example of how completely and utterly beyond rationality some Palin diehards are."

Rod, you invited the point being made by claiming to be a Christian and then posting an article that is simple a shrill screed of misrepresentation, lies, and misdirection aimed at tearing down a public figure who has done you or the author no wrong. What's more its from an author who has been openly shown to have been lying and playing the Janus two-face act concerning Sarah Palin last fall, starting with her little open-mike oopsie. By this point in time, we all know that Peggy Noonan doesn't like Sarah Palin. Why do we need another article full of insults to proove it.

"Thou shalt not bear false witness." Remember that one?

That's why I said I am dissapointed in you. You claim to be a Christian, but are actively participating in one of the most negative, driven and vicious tearing down of a sister (or brother) in the faith I and many others have ever seen. This article included various ad-hominem insults like "she was out of her depth in a shallow pool", "she is a ponder-free zone", "her mess and her rhetorical jabberwocky and her careless causing of division".

I really hope you will think about that. If you think what I have said is cutting to you, then you should examine your conscience. I say this out of concern for you as your brother in Christ, Rod, not as an insult or attack upon your person.

no irony intended:

"I remember when William F. Buckley (R.I.P.) represented the Conservative movement"

WFB was the self-proclaimed representative of conservatism, a hubris to which his friends in the NYC-DC-LA media readily acquiesced. But really, what has this "Conservative movement" under WFB's leadership accomplished? 50 years of slowly dragging us along to try to accept positions that would have made a liberal of 1960 gag?

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

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

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

There is no possible way that Palin could have explained the daily level of international interaction that is part of normal Alaskan events within the confines of her interview. And so, she simply stated the obvious... that we need a working relationship with Russia.

That's a joke, right?

The self-proclaimed "cool kids" are picking on somebody whom they have defined as a "geek" or a "freak." Whether that definintion has any merit or accuracy seems quite beyond the point; the only thing that matters is that the "cool kids" are doing it

You might want to have another go at some of the '80s high school movies to review who belongs in which clique. Gov. Palin is no more a geek or freak than Rachael Ray. She's always been one of the cool kids.

Spambayala, great post at 5:09. I hope Rod doesn’t delete the wrong post, because you did a good job of explaining the problem.

I also want someone who is competent. Yes, beside manner is important, But if we are talking about losing one’s vision, then I think I will take a highly competent jerk.

I think many of us have had the experience of asking someone to help us with our computer and they were sincere and well meaning, but they screwed things up completely. In other situations, we have taken it to a techie who was a jerk, who may even have sneered at us because we couldn’t solve it. But he (or she) pushed a few buttons, a quick click of the mouse and—presto—our computer was miraculously fixed. If I have three years worth of research on a computer, I don’t want a nice, “just like me” computer techie. I want someone who knows what they are doing and CAN SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

Sorry, I don’t think Palin is the solution to the problem.
Your Name at 6:33 said “That's why I said I am dissapointed in you. You claim to be a Christian, but are actively participating in one of the most negative, driven and vicious tearing down of a sister (or brother) in the faith I and many others have ever seen. This article included various ad-hominem insults like ‘she was out of her depth in a shallow pool’, ‘she is a ponder-free zone’, ‘her mess and her rhetorical jabberwocky and her careless causing of division’.

I really hope you will think about that. If you think what I have said is cutting to you, then you should examine your conscience. I say this out of concern for you as your brother in Christ, Rod, not as an insult or attack upon your person.”

Your Name at 6:33, I have quoted a rather large amount of your comment because I want to try and put this in context. I don’t think that Rod (or anyone) calling Sarah Palin “out of her depth in a shallow pool,” or some of the other comments is ad hominem or unchristian. He is simply making a judgment on her political skills and likelihood of success. His judgments in this regard are not only shared by Liberals, but also but also by large numbers of Conservatives.

Let me use an analogy which may help, though I am assuming you have some familiarity with the National Football League. There is a quarterback by the name of Jon Kitna, a very strong and outspoken Evangelical Christian. There is also a quarterback by the name of Kurt Warner, a very strong and outspoken Evangelical Christian. Kitna is a tough, courageous competitor, but has been consistently unable to lead a team to glory. Kurt Warner is a Super Bowl winning quarterback and came with two minutes of winning a second. Unless things change, Kitna will be out of the league in a few years; Warner has a fairly good chance of making it to the Hall of Fame.

So my question to you is: is it unchristian or ad hominem for people to discuss the quarterbacks in this regard? Do you really think that coaches and scouts and even players are not making the same judgments I am making here? Again, Kitna is a good guy, a leader, and from anything I can see, a pretty class act. If nothing else, I expect him to continue in football as a coach, making a positive impact in the lives of young men. Good for him. But, at this point in time, he is not a Super Bowl quarterback.

In politics as in football, Presidents need to be extraordinary. Palin does have lots of strengths. And I think she has been treated poorly by many in the media. But, at this point in time, Palin is not remotely Presidential material.

The opposition to Sarah Palin....is primarily that the people... are no longer fit for rule in this "complex" world, and that we must rely only on elites and those members of the multitude who manage to secure elite credentials.

The support for Sarah Palin is primarily that the huge numerical majority of Americans somehow don't count as "real Americans", and the Palinista elitists who hate that majority must for some reason be granted the right to rule them anyway, because being part of the 25% of Americans who don't live in urban areas and the 4% of Americans who hunt makes them just more special and better than everybody else.

PNWCC:

"So, I challenge you... Provide for me some evidence that these people you think are so smart... Are actually competent. Please."

The challenge is impossible. If they were competent, they would have a record of success, instead of a record of epic failure. The state of our country is unbelieveable to anyone with a shred of common sense. We are spending our days arguing over metaphysical impossibilities like homosexual "marriage" while busily slaughtering 1 million of our offspring every year, and ignoring a fiscal deficit which will near $2 trillion in a single year.

On the other hand, as Admiral Forrestal said, "if they were merely stupid, they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor"

the stupid Chris:

"Try reading any of Joseph John Ellis' books about our first generation of leaders. "Founding Brothers" or "American Creation" are great histories."

Yes, the old canonize our Founding Fathers hoorah. Didn't Parson Weems try this 200 years ago already?

People like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson I would call remarkable in their ambition and accomplishment on behalf of the country, and remarkable also in their blindness to their enormous fault of owning slaves. Jefferson also had exceptional hubris in his pretense to understand the nature of the French Revolution as something similar to America's, and to believe that he was qualified to edit the Bible.

I would reserve exceptional for possibly two men among that group - with obviously outstanding personal character, service, consistency, and learning - Benjamin Franklin and John Adams. Exceptional is a very strong word.

Okay, okay, I finally get it! Andrew and PNWCC are putting us on, and man, did we ever fall for it!

I mean, seriously, no one would try arguing with a straight face, as Andrew pretended to do, that the founding fathers were by and large just a bunch of unexceptional average joes who were basically the Sarah Palins of their day. The giveaway was when he reserved the "exceptional" label for John Adams, an avatar of thin-skinned defensiveness and limitless self-regard. Hilarious, Andrew! You rock!

And then PNWCC implies that, heck, the U.S. was bound to win World War II no matter what, since just about any G.I. fresh out of boot camp could have planned and executed the D-Day invasion of Normandy with just as much success as General Eisenhower. No exceptional judgment or military prowess was required there, just good old common sense, right? And any of us average unexceptional folks, being run-of-the-mill Americans, would have done just as well as Jack Kennedy at keeping the 10 surviving men under his command alive on a desert island in enemy territory. Nothing particularly extraordinary about taking the strap of an injured crewmate's life vest between your teeth and swimming more than three miles to shore towing him behind you. Heck, Sarah would've done it without a second thought. *wink wink*

And then we're hoodwinked into thinking that PNWCC's arch claim that he could do better at leadership than Ike or Jack Kennedy or Reagan or all the other occupants of the Oval Office over the last 80 years wasn't meant in jest. Silly us. Of course PNWCC isn't completely full of himself--no one could be that blindly arrogant and egotistical unless he were a complete fool. PNWCC, like Arrrggghie before him, is just a comsummate comedian. And here I am watching another lame SNL when the political satirists on this board are absolutely masterful. My bad!

I would reserve exceptional for possibly two men among that group - with obviously outstanding personal character, service, consistency, and learning - Benjamin Franklin and John Adams. Exceptional is a very strong word.

Clearly your definition is different from mine:

exceptional |ikˈsep sh ənəl| adjective unusual; not typical : crimes of exceptional callousness and cruelty. • unusually good; outstanding : a pepper offering exceptional flavor and juiciness.

And your use would not find home among the following synonyms:

exceptional adjective 1 the drought was exceptional: unusual, uncommon, abnormal, atypical, extraordinary, out of the ordinary, rare, unprecedented, unexpected, surprising; strange, odd, freakish, anomalous, peculiar, weird; informal freaky, something else. antonym normal, usual. 2 her exceptional ability: outstanding, extraordinary, remarkable, special, excellent, phenomenal, prodigious; unequaled, unparalleled, unsurpassed, peerless, matchless, nonpareil, first-rate, first-class; informal A1, top-notch. antonym average.

OJ Simpson was an exceptional football player, and the fact that he murdered his wife doesn't mean he was an ordinary player. George Washington was an exceptional leader and president, and the fact that he owned slaves doesn't mean he was an early Millard Fillmore.

Sarah Palin is a serial liar with no moral compass save the exercise of power and the betrayal of her supporters. She's a perfect Republican.

People who believe Sarah Palin is special need to believe they are.

If Sarah Palin was the waitress refilling my cup at the diner each morning, I would love her, tip her big, buy baby gifts for her and her daughter, give her Christmas gifts, show respect and appreciation for the qualities that made me love her; her humor, friendliness, family values love, outdoors loving camaraderie.

If Sarah Palin was a bar maid at my favorite watering hole, I’d be loyal and supportive and generous for all the reasons above.

If she worked in my local hardware store that she and her husband ran, I’d shop there always,,,, despite the higher prices.

In other words, she’s the kind of person you want to support in an every day role that interacts with your life’s daily rhythm. In other words, I agree she’s salt of the earth ‘normal’. But if one day she decided she was Martina Mc Bride…or Carrie Underwood…and I was expected to buy her CD instead of her kids’ girl scout cookies…. I’d probably head for Denny’s, change bars, and shop at Lowe’s.

Emilee, not everyone who thinks Governor Palin is a lighweight 'hates' her. She simply bores them. And with some certifiably good reason. As many GOP pundits...including our host here, Rod... have stated for months after their initial rapture.

That said:

Sarah Palin is treated the way she anyone should be, male or female, when they proudly see their inadequacies as a selling point to be regarded as special. I stand by my above post. And I do so with far more feminist credentials than most women in that I was (as I've said many times ad nauseum) raised by an activist feminist mother whose mother...my maternal grandmother...had been a suffragette.

Neither fought for woman to be treated with kid gloves when they are 'normal' and 'ordinary' thinkers ....with little intellectual curiosity and even less interest in acquiring some.....but see themselves as special and uniquely qualified. I doubt that you're pulling the poor woman/mean man game card. But I could bore you to tears with the things I have done in my lifetime to further the cause of smart and talented women...in business, etc. It was I who was able to get female issues like mammograms on my company’s health plan long before that was normal, etc. I have been a pro-woman activist of sorts myself throughout a thirty year span of three careers. But Sarah Palin is not what the woman I know and knew who fought and marched were supporting. Anymore than the women who raised me saw abortion as the prophylactic it sadly became. To them, abortion was supposed to be a last resort, not the default birth control for the irresponsible and lazy.

So yes. Sarah Palin deserves any criticism she has invited. And those who love her will continue to love her because it reinforces their own need to believe that 'normal' means 'special'. Whereas I believe 'normal' can, …and in this case I believe does mean…ordinary. So yes, I hope Sarah Palin opens up a winter retreat where people can hunt and fish and meet her and enjoy her demeanor. She is a uniquely northern frozen dish that cannot be safely thawed and served nationally.

Palin is a fine person. Is it wrong for her to seek public office? Must every politician be approved by the media elite? There is a tendency that never infected the conservatives before but now nearly constitutes a majority of conservatives that demands that our politicians be like Gods. Woe unto us when we learn that no man is! Support the humble, God-fearing woman instead of the demagogue, demi-God who laughs are your faith.